The annual finals system debate thread

[aussies1st]

I wont argue that. If not for the McIntyre system I would just want the good old knock out of:

1 v 8 - winner moves on
2 v 7 - winner moves on
3 v 6 - winner moves on
4 v 5 - winner moves on

winner of 1 v 8 vs winner of 2 v 7
winner of 3 v 6 vs winner of 4 v 5
Winner of 1, 8, 2, 7 vs winner of 3, 6, 4, 5 in Grand Final

That means the top 2 sides could clash in the semi. That isn't when it should happen.

 

[El Diablo]

You get a home final for a top 4 finish.

 

[Jono078]

That means the top 2 sides could clash in the semi. That isn't when it should happen.

Yeah, but I was saying if it wasnt for the McIntyre system I would want it like that, just a good old Knockout and noone gets a second chance.

 

[Razor]

Yeah, but I was saying if it wasnt for the McIntyre system I would want it like that, just a good old Knockout and noone gets a second chance.

But if you have a knockout wouldn't it be fairer to do a proper draw?

A standard seeded draw so instead of having 1v2 to meet in the semis, to meet in the final? Having a knockout where you have the top two playing before the final is ridiculous.

 

[El Diablo]

it's beyond ridiculous that you couldn't have a 1 v 2 GF.

 

[aussies1st]

Exactly the best 2 sides should meet in the finals or at least be given a chance to. If one of the 2 lose so be it but they deserve to be in the big one after all their hard work during the comp.

 

[Jono078]

But if you have a knockout wouldn't it be fairer to do a proper draw?

A standard seeded draw so instead of having 1v2 to meet in the semis, to meet in the final? Having a knockout where you have the top two playing before the final is ridiculous.

Lol, didnt know this would cause much of a stir...

You could just have

1 v 8 - match 1
3 v 6 - match 2
4 v 5 - match 3
2 v 7 - match 4

Winner of match 1 v Winner of match 2 - semi final 1
Winner of match 3 v Winner of match 4 - semi final 2
Winner of semi final 1 and 2 play in Grand Final.

Anyone happy now .

 

[Misty Bee]

It doesn't matter if you finish 3rd, 4th, 5th, or 6th

If you win, you can possibly get the week off.

If 1 and 2 both lose, then whoever wins the 3v6 and 4v5 matches will get the week off.

There's an incetive to get into the top 2, but no incentive to get into the top 4.

I disagree. Not only the home semi, as El D. pointed out, but using this year (results pending)...

3: Brisbane 4: Wests 5: Storm 6: NQ

you'd have in Week 1:

under Mac system:

Brisbane v NQ at Suncorp - broncos have to be favorites

Wests v Melbourne at telstra. More of en even game, but Wests with the HGA should get the edge. (Yes, I know Melbourne recently flogged 'em - but 4 v 5 is supposed to be the close one!)

Under Ryan:

Brisbane v Saints at Kogarah - Saints have to be favorites
Wests v Parra at Parra - Parra would have to be favorites.

Some top 4 incentive, isn't it!

Meanwhile, Melbourne cop whatever rabble of Manly, Easts or Penrith, and a home game. Cowpats get Cronulla in Townsville.

Week 2 under Mac

potentially:

Brisbane v Melbourne, Wests v NQ.

Critics say that this is nothing more than a swap over of these teams games from lastr week. Fair point -but this is now a full elimination playoff to determine who will challenge the top 2 clubs for a grand final spot. Thus it gives creedence to the benefits due to the top 2.

Under Ryan:

Parra to week 3. Manly/Penrith, Easts eliminated

Brisbane v NQ
Wests v Melbourne
Saints v Cronulla

So, we wind up with the Mac round 1, but with the higher finishing teams having played harder games. All at neutral venues, the advantage would be with Melbourne and NQ. Meanwhile, Saints have to front again, over a side they would still probably flog. But, they’d trade the chance to rest injuries under the Mac system to gain more in the Ryan system. And Cronulla would get another bite for losing!

At this stage, there is a definite advantage to the lower placed teams.



Say the winners are NQ, Melbourne and Saints.

You end up with this comparison for the GF Qualifier:

Mac:

Parra v Brisbane
St George v Wests

And probably a Parra v Saints GF

RYAN

Parra v NQ
Melbourne v Saints

With Wests and Brisbane fallen along the way, you’d possibly have a Parra v Melbourne GF, or a Melbourne v NQ GF!

 

[Surandy]

It doesn't matter if you finish 3rd, 4th, 5th, or 6th

If you win, you can possibly get the week off.

If 1 and 2 both lose, then whoever wins the 3v6 and 4v5 matches will get the week off.

There's an incetive to get into the top 2, but no incentive to get into the top 4.

In what system does it not matter if you finished 3rd, 4th, 5th or 6th? I know in the present system it does matter. The higher you finish the better. I know the Storm would dearly love to get a home final.

 

[Berkeley_Eagle]

I still think the current AFL system is good. Not too complicated either...

\

Im with you, that system seems to work well

 

[El Diablo]

We used it in 98.

 

[Jono078]

Sorry, but what is the AFL system ?

 

[El Diablo]

Sorry, but what is the AFL system ?

the one we used in 1996, I think.

 

[Raiders Plight]

the one we used in 1998

it was used in 95 and 96. 98 was some hybrid 10 team final system.

 

[aussies1st]

the one we used in 1998

I think he is asking how it works.

 

[Knight76]

This whole problem began with the NRL money grabbing and increasing the finalists. They should just go back to the top 5. Every top 8 system has flaws which will be debated endlessly. Plus, with the top 8 you see teams that only win %50 of their matches and still make the semis and have a chance to win the comp.

The final 8 as it stands now the 8th team have won less than %50 of games, and team 7 barely scrape above the %50. The 8th placed team this year scoming into this round, was only 3 wins in front of getting the spoon. We are rewarding mediocrity. Its really pathetic.

 

[ucantseeme]

The McIntyre System is good because it rewards the higher placed teams with an easier match in the first round and it is more likely to eliminate the easybeat sides in the first round, in the Ryan system you could end up having some real mismatches in Week 2 & 3 which result in blowout scorelines. As the finals progress the matches should get tighter so we arent seeing the occasional thrashings we see in the first round and it is better to have the big guns playing each other further down the line than in the first week as it builds greater excitement in the fans when it is a sudden death match between the heavyweights.

I think the only improvement to the finals system can be to make all matches elimination matches.

 

[Knight76]

Now that would make each game count and be interesting.

Week 1

1v8
2v7
3v6
4v5

All losers out

Week 2

winer 1v8 plays winner 3v6
Winner 2v7 plays winner 4v5

Losers out

Week 3

Grand final.

Each game counts. None of this easy ride crap, and if you lose your still in crap. 1v8 gives 1st place the biggest advantag playing the lowest team, and so on down the top 4. Even give the top 4 home semis in the first week.

 

[Cockadoodledoo]

So potentially 2nd place can win their first game, lose their second game and they're gorn? I don't rate that...

First thing I picked up.. Ludicrous.. I remember him going through this last season, as David Morrow and the other clowns lick his butt they happily endorsed it, but it is a farce.. In Week one the second lowest loser (perhaps the team that ran 7th) is in the same position as the team who could have finished 2nd and who may have won their first final. What a load of crap..

 

[bluenwhite]

i like that one better. better footy.