Conference Finals System

[Coxy]

The whole premise of the AFL system is that no matter the results, the higher ranked team plays at home...

Having said that, I like your hybrid system!

Yeah, but too many people get the finals system and venue allocation logic mixed up. They're mutually exclusive.

Hell, there were no home finals (all neutral) when the NRL (then ARL) went to an 8 team series back in 1995.
From 1999-2006 (maybe 7?) there were no home finals beyond week 1.

IMO the most important factor is the fairness of the system itself, and on that front the ARL (we used it first, AFL copied) system wins hands down (teams 3 and 4 can't be eliminated week 1).
The next issue is the venue allocations, and I think the NRL has that right. Positions decide home finals in week 1, week 1 results decide home finals thereafter.

 

[nathano11]

Professor47's idea is pretty creative!
There's going to be upsets and teams feeling robbed and teams feeling luckier than others with any system. Finals puts emphasis on performing on the big stage, not consistently over a year. For example Tigers have the right to feel very hard done by after coming 4th, winning week 1 of finals and being eliminated by the 6th placed team who lost week1 of finals. Warriors can count themselves very lucky on the other hand. If we wanted a system that fairly rewarded consistency over the 26 rounds we wouldn't have finals like the premier league, Its all about bringing it when its all on the line

 

[Dexter]

I honestly cannot see the problems with the McIntyre system. It's no better or worse than the AFL one.

What about team 6 getting hammered by team 3 then get to play an easier team the next week while the winner of that game gets a harder side ( according to the seedings ), if you finish 5 6 7 or 8 your task should get harder each week not easier.

 

[dukey]

What about team 6 getting hammered by team 3 then get to play an easier team the next week while the winner of that game gets a harder side ( according to the seedings ), if you finish 5 6 7 or 8 your task should get harder each week not easier.

Did the Warriors' task get easier? They had to face off against the minor premiers last night. They finished high enough that they weren't eliminated in the first round of the finals, and since then they've beaten two teams which finished the regular season in increasingly higher positions than them.
Meanwhile, Brisbane have had the luxury of playing lower placed teams since the finals began. The first time we had to play a higher-ranked opponent was the penultimate round.
You can't blame our loss on the structure of the finals.

 

[ningnangnong]

You can't blame our loss on the structure of the finals.

No, you can't, but it is a little ridiculous that a team placed sixth who lost 40-10 in week one of the finals, makes it into the decider.

Not bagging the Warriors, they've done fantastically.

 

[Coxy]

Thing is in the AFL system, warriors would've had a home final against Cowboys in week 1. Doubt they would've got flogged 40-10.

Meanwhile we would've played Manly in Sydney. Doubt we would've won 40-10.

 

[Big Pete]

By the same token I think we would have had a better chance with Locky than without. And say we win, we go to Week 3 and play at Suncorp.

It's a bit ridiculous we flog the Warriors but get treated as equals.

 

[Bucking Beads]

Conference system would never work unless we actually had Conferences in the regular season.

 

[Porthoz]

Thing is in the AFL system, warriors would've had a home final against Cowboys in week 1. Doubt they would've got flogged 40-10.

Meanwhile we would've played Manly in Sydney. Doubt we would've won 40-10.

Chances are we would've have had a home prelim with Lockyer in the side, because I believe we would've beaten Manly in the first finals round!

 

[ningnangnong]

Thing is in the AFL system, warriors would've had a home final against Cowboys in week 1. Doubt they would've got flogged 40-10.

Meanwhile we would've played Manly in Sydney. Doubt we would've won 40-10.

The only real solution is to reduce the amount of teams in the finals, but that will never happen for obvious reasons.

 

[Dexter]

Did the Warriors' task get easier?

I'm not blaming the system for our loss, just making the point that the MC system allows team 6 to get an easier game according to the seedings (eg 6 plays 3 then 6 plays 4) after a loss while team 3 gets a harder game. That is IMO one of the faults with the system.

 

[Woody]

No, you can't, but it is a little ridiculous that a team placed sixth who lost 40-10 in week one of the finals, makes it into the decider. Not bagging the Warriors, they've done fantastically.

I've been in Oz for 7 years now and still dont really undertsand the finals systems (either the AFL or NRL) for the reason NNN highlighted.

It will never happen but I would like to see straight knock out from week 1.

 

[Coxy]

Should see the Queensland Cup system.

Top 6. Only 3 weeks of finals. If I'm right:

Week 1:
1 vs 6
2 vs 5
3 vs 4

3 winners and highest ranked loser go through.
IIRC, team 1 got beaten by team 6 this season, team 2 won, and team 3 lost to team 4. So teams 3 and 5 were eliminated.

Week 2:
Highest ranked winner vs highest ranked loser
2nd Highest ranked winner vs 3rd highest ranked winner

Highest ranked loser (minor premiers) and 3rd highest ranked winner (team 6) won.

Grand final:
Winners from previous week, which turned out to be team 1 vs team 6 again, as per week 1.
And team 6 won again.

Wynnum, team 6, went into the finals with a 10-11 record (and 1 draw). And they won the premiership. LOLZ. Meanwhile Tweed, minor premiers, went into the finals with a 20-1 (and 1 draw) record! Just shows that the finals is a whole different game.

 

[Kaz]

Doesn't matter what system we have, people will still b!tch about it.

IMO, make it the top 7, team on the top of the ladder gets the week off.

If you lose the semi, you're eliminated. (no 2nd chances)


Super League have Club Call

Club Call will take place on the second weekend of the play-offs and will be hosted by the highest ranked winning club from Week 1.

The host club will select who they play in Week 3 and can only select from the winners of the two Preliminary Semi-finals (Week 2) – they cannot choose the other Qualifying Play-offs winner.

The highest ranked club from the Qualifying Play-offs (Week one) must choose their opponents – they cannot cede the responsibility to the other Qualifying Play-offs winner.

The team with Club Call and the other Qualifying Play-off winners from Week 1 are guaranteed home advantage in Week 3. For example, should the teams that ended the regular season in 1st and 2nd place lose their opening play-off match, they could still find themselves playing away to the 3rd or 4th placed teams in Week 3.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_League_play-offs

 

[Professor47]

3 weeks between games is too long, IMO it would kill the minor premiers chances.

That is the biggest flaw with the system - but I guess it comes down to... if you can't get up for semi-final to get into the GF as minor premiers... at HOME... well... you don't deserve to be in the GF.... You're practically given a free ride there...

However I would prefer a conference system one day.