The annual finals system debate thread

[adamkungl]

Any system that allows a team to lose after week 1 is terrible. And maybe its just me, but anything more than 4 weeks is far too long

 

[Chaos]

The Macintyre System has had it's critics in the past but the 2008 final series has highlighted a need for change.

Beside Manly supporters...no-one else would agree that the Sea Eagles were a 40 point better side then the rest of the competition.

I believe the AFL top 8 is a much better system...is anyone talking about it in this forum?

 

[Tom Shines]

http://forums.leagueunlimited.com/search.php

 

[Chaos]

26 rounds of football is a lot to play for 1 week's worth of advantage.

AFL system is much better. You spend 26 weeks earning a top 4 position, you deserve more.

I came on to this website to say the same thing.

Beside Manly supporters...no-one else would agree that the Sea Eagles were a 40 point better side then the rest of the competition, so why was that the Grand final difference.

 

[Tom Shines]

Uh, because they were the better side on the day?

Tell me how a different finals system would have led to a different result ON THE DAY.

 

[adamkungl]

I came on to this website to say the same thing.

Beside Manly supporters...no-one else would agree that the Sea Eagles were a 40 point better side then the rest of the competition, so why was that the Grand final difference.

That's a new one. The McIntyre system made Melbourne choke :lol:

 

[Tonearm Terrorwrist]

no-one else would agree that the Sea Eagles were a 40 point better side then the rest of the competition, so why was that the Grand final difference.

absolutely right ... they were more like 60-0 victors ... you know you could have dribbled without signing up here ...

 

[Matt23]

I smell an alter ego...possibly of someone who's been copping it a bit since sunday :-k

 

[Chaos]

That's a new one. The McIntyre system made Melbourne choke :lol:

It surely didn't help a team who play 26 rounds to end up on top of the ladder...have one slip up and face the Broncos in QLD.

 

[Tonearm Terrorwrist]

if you are first and can't beat 8th why should you be rewarded? ... we came 4th and had to go play new zealand in new zealand ... WOE IS US

 

[adamkungl]

It surely didn't help a team who play 26 rounds to end up on top of the ladder...have one slip up and face the Broncos in QLD.

Playing the 8th placed team with a guaranteed second chance seems like help to me. How many slip ups do you bloody want in finals before you get knocked out. Finishing 1st on the ladder does not make it your god given right to win the comp.

 

[Chaos]

I smell an alter ego...possibly of someone who's been copping it a bit since sunday :-k

Bit of a cold...have you?

 

[Matt23]

Bit of a cold...have you?

Cheers for proving me right.

 

[Chaos]

Playing the 8th placed team with a guaranteed second chance seems like help to me. How many slip ups do you bloody want in finals before you get knocked out. Finishing 1st on the ladder does not make it your god given right to win the comp.

So do you think the Mckintyre system is fairer then the current AFL system?

 

[Charlie124]

The Macintyre System has had it's critics in the past but the 2008 final series has highlighted a need for change.

Beside Manly supporters...no-one else would agree that the Sea Eagles were a 40 point better side then the rest of the competition.

I believe the AFL top 8 is a much better system...is anyone talking about it in this forum?

They don't have to be, they only had to be better than their opponents on grand final day.

What if the Sea Eagles had won by 2? would the Macintyre system still need to go?

Tigers and Cowboys were 4th and 5th best teams in 2005. But they were the best and 2nd best team in that finals series.

 

[Chaos]

Cheers for proving me right.

You missed...I'm not a Melbourne supporter

 

[simmo1]

IMO, the current AFL one is the better system.

In saying that, if you win your bloody games, then there is no reason to bitch about any finals system. Thats what finals are about - winning. If Storm beat the Warriors in week 1 (as they should have), then there wouldn't be a problem. You can't expect an easy run and to be able to lose the games willy nilly. And at the end of the day, you'll have to beat the better teams at some point.

 

[Gaba]

IMO, the current AFL one is the better system.

In saying that, if you win your bloody games, then there is no reason to bitch about any finals system. Thats what finals are about - winning. If Storm beat the Warriors in week 1 (as they should have), then there wouldn't be a problem. You can't expect an easy run and to be able to lose the games willy nilly. And at the end of the day, you'll have to beat the better teams at some point.

In the afl system the storm would have been knocked out in week 2 if they lost same as the macintyre system , the storm would have got the home game for losing so how can that be better, reward teams for failure in the first week of the finals

the macintyre system is the fairer system . it rewards winners and not the losers

 

[Chaos]

IMO, the current AFL one is the better system.

In saying that, if you win your bloody games, then there is no reason to bitch about any finals system. Thats what finals are about - winning. If Storm beat the Warriors in week 1 (as they should have), then there wouldn't be a problem. You can't expect an easy run and to be able to lose the games willy nilly. And at the end of the day, you'll have to beat the better teams at some point.

I got your point Simmo and your right about winning your games but the highest quality game was Brisbane vs Melbourne...it's a shame Manly didn't play either of those two teams with a full squad.

 

[adamkungl]

So do you think the Mckintyre system is fairer then the current AFL system?

I don't know, I don't follow the AFL, and nor do I think there is any major problems with the McIntyre system. Every system has minor flaws, but I have never seen any reason to think we should change again.