McIntiring: grudge final no match for AFL's superior system

[Berkeley_Eagle]

Wests Tigers versus St George Illawarra is, by the length of a Siberian winter, the most keenly anticipated qualifying final. Two fierce rivals with vastly contrasting styles, high-profile stars, a recent history of tightly contested matches and veteran coaches who could enhance already glowing reputations.
 



Read the full article

 

[bones]

Under the AFL model we would have
Melb v Tigers
Manly v Broncos
With the two winners advancing to week 3
And,
Dragons v Knights
Warriors v Cowboys
With the two losers eliminated.

 

[Berkeley_Eagle]

Under the AFL model we would have
Melb v Tigers
Manly v Broncos
With the two winners advancing to week 3
And,
Dragons v Knights
Warriors v Cowboys
With the two losers eliminated.

Looks good
Be great to have another shot at the bronx

 

[bob dylan]

I know it gets rehashed every year but since we were bundled out in 2009 when beaten by the Storm I have been a bigger fan of the AFL system.

Wait for the system to be changed next year if the Tigers or The Steelers are bundled out this year.

Must add in 2009 we would of played Parra and probably still beaten.

 

[The Who]

Seriously, both systems are not about finding the best team; they are about revenue.
Why should a team that loses as many games as it wins during the season be in the finals (Newcastle)?
If they wanted to be fair it would be a finals series with the top three teams only. 2 V 3 to qualify to play 1 in the Grand Final. That way you would be rewarding consistent quality during the 26 rounds.
With our system, team 3 and 4 could be eliminated in the first week.
But having half the 16 teams qualify for finals is a product of the PC times we live in.

 

[Disco]

Unless there was a relegation/promotion system (which would never work here) we need a top 8 otherwise if there was a top 3 like you say the season would have been over for 11 teams months ago

 

[Phantar]

Seriously, both systems are not about finding the best team; they are about revenue.
Why should a team that loses as many games as it wins during the season be in the finals (Newcastle)?
If they wanted to be fair it would be a finals series with the top three teams only. 2 V 3 to qualify to play 1 in the Grand Final. That way you would be rewarding consistent quality during the 26 rounds.
With our system, team 3 and 4 could be eliminated in the first week.
But having half the 16 teams qualify for finals is a product of the PC times we live in.

Should we go back to top 5 or 6 then? That would have seen us not in the finals at all, in 2005 and 2010.

 

[jjai]

I know its a bit daft but i would like the top two teams play a best of 3 decider dnt worry abt finals series 1&2 play a best of 3games series winner is premiers for the year..
Or we could do it as it is now but the last 2 teams play a best of 3 GF lol long season i know

 

[Rex]

Top 8 is here to stay for financial reasons. But the AFL system provides more mouth-watering contests, and is more equitable on teams 3 and 4.
1 v 4 and 2 v 3 worked well in 4 team semifinals, and would work well now. Getting into the top 4 is a real reward under that system. Under the NRL system, teams 3 and 4 are little better off than teams 5 and 6.
Especially now there is no real home ground advantage.

The NRL lottery system of having teams 3 and 4 subject to elimination in the first week is weird. There is more than enough interest without having a lottery like in 2009 where Manly came 5th, lost to 4th (who won the comp) and was eliminated. In fact there is more. If Manly lost to 8th and got eliminated that's fair enough and not a lottery result.

 

[Pablo]

Its Holden vs Ford really.

Our system would be fine with a few tweaks.
The only benefit of finishinging 1st and 2nd over 3rd and 4th is you cant exit week 1. Big deal. Lose and you may aswell have finished 5th or 6th cause your playing sudden death football for the rest of the finals at other peoples home grounds. It's stupid that one bad game can ruin 24 good ones.

The top 4 teams should keep their home ground advantage for the duration of the finals win or lose. ( Neutral for grand final qualifier though). If the Gallop had half a brain he would see this.

 

[ssar]

I don't mind the McIntyre system.

This season, for Manly in 2nd spot, it's sure superior than if we were using the AFL system, for FW1 anyway.

 

[Kiwi Eagle]

Seriously, both systems are not about finding the best team; they are about revenue.
Why should a team that loses as many games as it wins during the season be in the finals (Newcastle)?
If they wanted to be fair it would be a finals series with the top three teams only. 2 V 3 to qualify to play 1 in the Grand Final. That way you would be rewarding consistent quality during the 26 rounds.
With our system, team 3 and 4 could be eliminated in the first week.
But having half the 16 teams qualify for finals is a product of the PC times we live in.

You couldn't do a top 3 the way it is set up currenty, because it wouldn't be a fair comp. To have that few going through you would really have to have every team playing each other home and away to find the true sides that deserved to be there