The annual finals system debate thread

[Raider_69]

Farah's a whining bitch... if you dont want to play canberra in canberra, you (the 3rd placed side) should have beaten the roosters (the 6th place side)
your reward would have been a week off and a grand final qualifier, you lost to the 6th ranked side so the punishment for that is playing canberra in canberra, the 7th ranked side who travelled to the foot of the mountins and toppled the 2nd ranked side away. We are rewarded for winning, you (the tigers) are punished for losing. Good system

 

[bileduct]

What I'd like to know is who gives a f**k what the AFL are doing?

Why are we looking to them for the best finals system?

f**k them, the system we have now is the best.

 

[El Diablo]

What I'd like to know is who gives a f**k what the AFL are doing?

Why are we looking to them for the best finals system?

f**k them, the system we have now is the best.

we wouldn't

they looked to us and copied it

 

[Jason Maher]

The Raiders won and the Tigers lost. The Tigers had an advantage in week 1 and they gave it up by losing. The finals are a whole new competition and you should not be rewarded for losing.

Why should teams be rewarded for not bothering to play at all for half a season? For that matter, why bother with a home and away season at all? Just have a 16 team knock out competition and be done with it.

 

[*Paul*]

For that matter, why bother with a home and away season at all? Just have a 16 team knock out competition and be done with it.

Now we getting somewhere. A knock out comp would be exciting but last only five weeks, so no good. First past the post, better - but lots of who cares games. No good either. Solution - both.

Now here's the clever bit, the knock out and the round robin are connected by home team this, ranking that so that everyone can pretend they are intimately entwined. They aren't.

 

[CMUX]

What I'd like to know is who gives a f**k what the AFL are doing?

Why are we looking to them for the best finals system?

f**k them, the system we have now is the best.

So that is your justification for keeping a clearly inferior system is, “you don’t want to be seen as copying the AFL”?

I notice that the Super league use the AFL system with the added intrigue of the tope ranked winner from round 1 getting to choose their preliminary final opponent once the semi’s are played.

Maybe something like that would be a good idea.

 

[The Engineers Room]

So that is your justification for keeping a clearly inferior system is, “you don’t want to be seen as copying the AFL”?

I notice that the Super league use the AFL system with the added intrigue of the tope ranked winner from round 1 getting to choose their preliminary final opponent once the semi’s are played.

Maybe something like that would be a good idea.

This is what gets me. It isn't the AFL system. It was created or at least written down by a guy called McIntyre as was the one the NRL uses. They are both McIntyre systems.

I think we need to look at a system where the top three or four play a round robin in the first two weeks and the rest play elimination in that time, then it become elimination for the next two weeks.

 

[mepelthwack]

Some of you guys act like the season proper counts for nothing.

We all know the teams are relatively even when all's been said and done. Therefore if you play well enough to make top 4 you deserve to know your position and an earnt 2nd bite at the cherry.

Epic semis allround if bottom 4 play SD and top 4 battle for a week off. Top 4 losers then rightfully gaining a home semi v bottom 4 winner in week 2 SD.

Clearly fairer and superior to what we hav now.

 

[Goddo]

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A PERFECT SYSTEM. They are designed to give advantage to some teams over others.

Assuming each team has a 50/50 chance of winning each game, under the current McIntyre System, each teams chance of winning the comp is:

1 18.75%
2 18.75%
3 15.625%
4 12.5%
5 12.5%
6 9.375%
7 6.25%
8 6.25%

I like that the higher you finish, the better your chances. The NRL also has Origin which can distort where teams finish. You may get a strong team finnishing low. This would very slightly skew these odds down the ladder. This makes it a fairly balanced comp where anyone can win. And in a game where the salary cap is so important, isn't that fair?

The main concerns people have is that 3 and 4 can be eliminated in week 1, and the home ground advantage to a low ranked winning side in week 2.

The first concern is unlikely to happen, and in the case it does, 3 or 4 had a chance at going to the prelims and missed it. Also, playing "weaker" oponents gives them a possibly better than 50/50 chance of winning. You can't expect to be in the Grand Final if you are incapable of winning games.

The second is an issue of scheduling. Why not say the highest ranked sides in round 2 play at home? So this year that would be Raiders v Tigers at SFS, and Penrith v Roosters at Penrith. I personally have no issue with the way it stands as is now. You have to win to be rewarded.

A finals system (regardless of who plays who, especially with a salary cap) is always going to advantage the team with the best form at the right time of year, coupled with a lucky run of opponents with injuries and other issues. Think the St George v Manly match up in contrast to St George v Parra last year.

This is why I think the Minor Premiers should be better rewarded, and that prize more sought after, like it is in the A League, or Premier League. Two rewards: one for the play-off champion, the other for best team through the year.

Compare that to the old ARL system (current AFL):

1 18.75%
2 18.75%
3 18.75%
4 18.75%
5 6.25%
6 6.25%
7 6.25%
8 6.25%

I don't like the strongest sides (and most likely grand finalists) meeting in the first week, and that 8th has the same chances as 5th. High ranking losers getting home games too is a bit dumb in a play off. Its about winning, why should a loser be rewarded? The second chance is reward enough.

A sudden death system would see all teams sharing a 12.5% chance of winning.

 

[hellteam]

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A PERFECT SYSTEM. They are designed to give advantage to some teams over others.

Assuming each team has a 50/50 chance of winning each game, under the current McIntyre System, each teams chance of winning the comp is:

1 18.75%
2 18.75%
3 15.625%
4 12.5%
5 12.5%
6 9.375%
7 6.25%
8 6.25%

I like that the higher you finish, the better your chances. The NRL also has Origin which can distort where teams finish. You may get a strong team finnishing low. This would very slightly skew these odds down the ladder. This makes it a fairly balanced comp where anyone can win. And in a game where the salary cap is so important, isn't that fair?

The main concerns people have is that 3 and 4 can be eliminated in week 1, and the home ground advantage to a low ranked winning side in week 2.

The first concern is unlikely to happen, and in the case it does, 3 or 4 had a chance at going to the prelims and missed it. Also, playing "weaker" oponents gives them a possibly better than 50/50 chance of winning. You can't expect to be in the Grand Final if you are incapable of winning games.

The second is an issue of scheduling. Why not say the highest ranked sides in round 2 play at home? So this year that would be Raiders v Tigers at SFS, and Penrith v Roosters at Penrith. I personally have no issue with the way it stands as is now. You have to win to be rewarded.

A finals system (regardless of who plays who, especially with a salary cap) is always going to advantage the team with the best form at the right time of year, coupled with a lucky run of opponents with injuries and other issues. Think the St George v Manly match up in contrast to St George v Parra last year.

This is why I think the Minor Premiers should be better rewarded, and that prize more sought after, like it is in the A League, or Premier League. Two rewards: one for the play-off champion, the other for best team through the year.

Compare that to the old ARL system (current AFL):

1 18.75%
2 18.75%
3 18.75%
4 18.75%
5 6.25%
6 6.25%
7 6.25%
8 6.25%

I don't like the strongest sides (and most likely grand finalists) meeting in the first week, and that 8th has the same chances as 5th. High ranking losers getting home games too is a bit dumb in a play off. Its about winning, why should a loser be rewarded? The second chance is reward enough.

A sudden death system would see all teams sharing a 12.5% chance of winning.

Wow well said. Can you publish that in the paper please?

 

[Goddo]

The thing is that there are holes in the old ARL (current AFL) system just as big as in the current McIntyre System.

The question we need to ask is, what are we trying to acheive with a play off system? I personally think the McIntyre system, even with its faults, provides clubs with a fair oportunity to win the comp. People seem to whinge only when a top team loses and has to travel interstate (ala my club last year, or the Tigers this year).

If you want to try and measure fairly over the course of a year which team is the best, a home and away season where you play every other team an equal number of times (once or twice seems easiest), and then crown the Minor Premier.

Alternatively, you play a sudden death comp like the Challenge Cup. You win, you continue, you lose, you are out.

What we are trying to achieve with a "Finals Series" is a "Champions League" style competition, seperate from the regular season. The game tries to advantage teams based on where they finish in the regular season, but it is a completely different comp.

The question here is, does the current system work to this end? Yes it does.
Ok, why change it to another that is better in some ways, but in others worse?

 

[Deacon]

It's said today in the NRL that Minor Premiership means nothing at all expect for $100k and the JJ Giltinan Shield, so I propose this(probably will get shot down for it).

Okay assume the current system is scrapped for 2011 and beyond...

After the 26th round of the competition has concluded and the table has been finalised the minor premiers decide from the 2 finals systems, yes the 1st placed team after the regular season

Its unique and rewards the minor premiers that extra bit more for finishing first past the post after the regular season and gives minor premiers a slight average over the 2nd place team from the 26 rounds (another reward for finishing 1st in the regular season)

The first placed team gets to pick from the 2 finals systems...

1. Current AFL System

Week 1
1 v 4
2 v 3
5 v 8
6 v 7
(1,2 advance to Week 3 & 7,8 out)

Week 2
3 v 5
4 v 6
(3,4 advance to Week 3 & 5,6 out)

Week 3
1 v 3
2 v 4
(1,2 advance to Week 4 & 3,4 out)

Week 4
1 v 2
eg. Results on highest ranked team winning shown

or
2. Alternate System (essentially just Weeks 1 and 3 reserved)

Week 1
1 v 3
2 v 4
5 v 7
6 v 8
(1,2 advance to Week 3 & 7,8 out)

Week 2
3 v 5
4 v 6
(3,4 advance to Week 3 & 5,6 out)

Week 3
1 v 4
2 v 3
(1,2 advance to Week 4 & 3,4 out)

Week 4
1 v 2
eg. Results on highest ranked team winning shown

-Venues will still be determined under the same system of home, city then regional for weeks 1-3


The Minor Premiers would have a time period after there final match in round 26 of like 2-3 hours to determine which finals sytem will be played,
the major benefit of this would the minor premiers get to pick if they want to play in week 1 being either team 3 or 4 so they can base there selection on the potential opponents form, injuries location to them. Or they can strategically pick the finals system which will help them best get past week 3.

 

[CMUX]

It's said today in the NRL that Minor Premiership means nothing at all expect for $100k and the JJ Giltinan Shield, so I propose this(probably will get shot down for it).

Okay assume the current system is scrapped for 2011 and beyond...

After the 26th round of the competition has concluded and the table has been finalised the minor premiers decide from the 2 finals systems, yes the 1st placed team after the regular season

Its unique and rewards the minor premiers that extra bit more for finishing first past the post after the regular season and gives minor premiers a slight average over the 2nd place team from the 26 rounds (another reward for finishing 1st in the regular season)

The first placed team gets to pick from the 2 finals systems...

1. Current AFL System

Week 1
1 v 4
2 v 3
5 v 8
6 v 7
(1,2 advance to Week 3 & 7,8 out)

Week 2
3 v 5
4 v 6
(3,4 advance to Week 3 & 5,6 out)

Week 3
1 v 3
2 v 4
(1,2 advance to Week 4 & 3,4 out)

Week 4
1 v 2
eg. Results on highest ranked team winning shown

or
2. Alternate System (essentially just Weeks 1 and 3 reserved)

Week 1
1 v 3
2 v 4
5 v 7
6 v 8
(1,2 advance to Week 3 & 7,8 out)

Week 2
3 v 5
4 v 6
(3,4 advance to Week 3 & 5,6 out)

Week 3
1 v 4
2 v 3
(1,2 advance to Week 4 & 3,4 out)

Week 4
1 v 2
eg. Results on highest ranked team winning shown

-Venues will still be determined under the same system of home, city then regional for weeks 1-3


The Minor Premiers would have a time period after there final match in round 26 of like 2-3 hours to determine which finals sytem will be played,
the major benefit of this would the minor premiers get to pick if they want to play in week 1 being either team 3 or 4 so they can base there selection on the potential opponents form, injuries location to them. Or they can strategically pick the finals system which will help them best get past week 3.

Not a bad idea although I have a feeling the minor premiers will always pick McIntyre, feeling confident that they will beat 8th spot. Even last year, if I was given the choice I would have chosen to play Eels over Storm.

I think the NRL has to have the balls to change the system in the best interest of everyone involved.

 

[Eels Dude]

Not a bad idea although I have a feeling the minor premiers will always pick McIntyre, feeling confident that they will beat 8th spot. Even last year, if I was given the choice I would have chosen to play Eels over Storm.

I think the NRL has to have the balls to change the system in the best interest of everyone involved.

I don't think that's what he's suggesting, more so the AFL system is the go but the minor premiers get to decide whether they play 4th or 3rd in the first week and the rest of the games follow accordingly.

 

[lockyno1]

I prefer the AFL System. But I like the idea of keeping the McIntyre system and team 1 chooses EITHER team 7 or 8.

 

[undertaker]

Another thing about the McIntyre 8 system is that teams 1 and 2 cannot meet each other before the Grand Final, whereas this is not the case in the AFL's final system (as is seen in this year's competition, Geelong and Collingwood have been by far the two superior teams in the comp, yet they will meet each other in the Preliminary Finals).

 

[Deacon]

Yer this weekends AFL games are very interesting 1. Collingwood v 2. Geelong and then 3. St Kilda v 4.Western Bulldogs, common sense would say the winner tonights game should do the job again next Saturday

 

[Deacon]

My Finals idea may not be so stupid after seeing this...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_league/super_league/st_helens/9012759.stm

 

[undertaker]

I'm interested to know how would people feel if this "club call" idea was implemented into our McIntyre 8 system? Say that the highest-ranked winner at the end of Week 1 (Qualifying Finals) got to choose their opponent for the Preliminary Final (in this year's case, it would be St George/Illawarra). How would you feel about that? Also, do you think they would have chosen the Wests Tigers (which they are playing this week) or the Sydney Roosters (and if the Roosters were chosen, would the match still have been played at ANZ or would SFS have been chosen?)?

It also makes me wonder whether the Bulldogs (highest ranked week 1 winner in last years week 1 finals) from last year would've chosen playing Brisbane over Parramatta (to maximise home ground advantage, as well as avoid playing Parramatta who had a lot of momentum at the back end of last season) in the Preliminary Finals last year, IF this "club call" system were in place.

 

[hellteam]

I quite like it. Would be interesting, that's for sure.

I think they would have chosen the Tigers. They had a comfortable win over them this year, and I think they would be more of a sure bet against them.

And no doubt, Bulldogs would have chosen the Broncos. We were always going to lose that prelim with Tonie Carroll at five eight.