McIntyre vs AFL system

[Coxy]

Another thing that's bugging me is the argument being used to "show" that the McIntyre system is shit. They're not the only ones, but Fox Sports is there today pointing out that 1 is playing 2 in the AFL Grand Final, so therefore their system must be the better one.

They're also forgetting that Geelong and St Kilda won their first finals games, which gave them a free ride to week 3. And they did that by beating 3rd place and 4th place respectively in week 1.

It's somewhat of an anomaly in the NRL this year that teams 6 and 8 were in particularly good form going into the finals. But again, let's pretend the NRL used the AFL system, including finals venues allocation, this season.

Week 1
St George-Illawarra Dragons vs Melbourne Storm at Sydney Football Stadium
Canterbury Bulldogs vs Gold Coast Titans at ANZ Stadium
Manly Sea Eagles vs Parramatta Eels at Sydney Football Stadium
Brisbane Broncos vs Newcastle Knights at Suncorp Stadium

Winners based on form/actual winners from week 1.
Knights and Manly eliminated.
Melbourne Storm and Bulldogs through to week 3.

Week 2
Gold Coast Titans vs Brisbane Broncos at Suncorp Stadium (it would be there rather than Skilled because under AFL rules Skilled is too small)
St George-Illawarra Dragons vs Parramatta Eels at Sydney Football Stadium

Winners based on form/actual winners from week 2.
St George-Illawarra and Gold Coast Titans eliminated.

Week 3
Melbourne Storm vs Brisbane Broncos at Etihad Stadium
Canterbury Bulldogs vs Parramatta Eels at ANZ Stadium

Wow! What a shock! Same result!

 

[Bucking Beads]

How strange that it is the same result. I do agree that the AFl final system is better but the NRL will never see sense.

 

[Coxy]

I prefer the ARL 1996 (aka AFL) system for two reasons:

1. You know what the outcome is of each match and result. Therefore it's easier for both casual supporters of rugby league (and Souths, Toidans, Oils and Dragoons fans) to understand. We have more casual observers at finals time and the whole "if Team X wins today then Team Y is out, and if Team Z wins tomorrow then Team W is out, but if Team A wins tomorrow then team B is out" is over complicated.

2. Teams are in control of their own destiny. You won't have a situation where one team's supporters are cheering on others to try and "Save" them or eliminate a rival...eg, Manly fans cheering on Bulldogs and Dragons after the Broncos beat the Titans.

 

[Flutterby]

I think that having potentially 6 vs 8 in the grand final is another demonstration that our code is superior and the competition is much closer!

 

[Coxy]

Bingo! And the fact that result would've happened regardless of the system is testament to that fact.

 

[Dexter]

Not to mention the AFL system does not give teams 1 & 2 any extra advantage, only teams 3 & 4 by giving them a garauntee of playing beyond week 1.
If anything, teams 1 & 2 have a harder road to the prelim because usually if facing teams 3 & 4 they should be harder games to win.
If the NRL had absolute descretion over venue allocation it wouldn't be long before howls of bias came from a team that didn't like a particular venue.

 

[gUt]

I like the McIntyre System. The top teams are rewarded because they are given an advantage in the first week of what is a brand new 4 week, 8 team competition. The top two teams are further advantaged because they can't be knocked out in the first week. It's up to those teams to make the most of their advantage and um, win a game or 4.

I don't buy the whine about the top 4 teams deserving 2 bites at the home team cherry either. Maybe they could tweak it to allow the top teams to choose their opponents but this could open up chances for clubs to cheat, eg, claim that (say) Hayne is in serious doubt but suddendly he makes a full recovery on the morning of the match.

 

[ronnyd]

I think that having potentially 6 vs 8 in the grand final is another demonstration that our code is superior and the competition is much closer!

How does having the 6th and 8th best teams over 26 rounds playing in the gf demonstrate superiority over having the 1st and 2nd best teams in the final???

 

[Bucking Beads]

I think that having potentially 6 vs 8 in the grand final is another demonstration that our code is superior and the competition is much closer!

How does having the 6th and 8th best teams over 26 rounds playing in the gf demonstrate superiority over having the 1st and 2nd best teams in the final???

It means the comp is far more even and depth is also very good. I dare say never ever will the 8th placed team play the 6th placed team in a Grand Final for the AFL.

 

[The Brizz]

Its funny how the AFL this finals series has gone exactly to the seedings with every match won by the higher seed whereas ours has been chaos. Regardless of the systems its nice to have an unpredictable and exciting finals series.

 

[Jeba]

As they said on the Sunday Roast, there is no right or wrong answer for a top 8 system. Both systems have their pros and cons. I think I'd take the AFL one if I got the deciding vote, mainly because it has greater reward for finishing in the top 4, which is a good achievement.

I think the home grounds rule is fine the way it is. Why should the minor premiers get reward for losing to the 8th place team in week 1? Going by that logic, if St George had beaten us on Saturday, they would have to get the home preliminary final even though Melbourne got the week off.

 

[OXY-351]

Wow! What a shock! Same result!

Based on your assumtionns though. Who knows what would have happened in those match ups. Just because team A loses to team B, doesn't meant Team A would also lose to team C

 

[Coxy]

No, but as it was each of the winners faced losers in the AFL system, so it's not an unreasonable assumption.

 

[Professor47]

Look, obviously there is no perfect answer but I'd rather give 3 and 4 the fair go the AFL system gives in our comp - end of story.

The fact that there is a CHANCE of 3 and 4 being eliminated in the 1st week is just toooooo harsh. Simple as that.

Furthermore with the comp being the way it is now - 7/8 will win a few here and there which just puts HUGE pressure on 4/5 match... it's not right IMO.

Because:

4/5 will go into the game with great tension - because they play first as well.

7/8 will go in thinking we have NOTHING to lose - let's go all out.

Not a fan. Seriously... 5-8 is the same crapola now as far as I'm concerned.

Finally, as Coxy mentioned... not knowing what the hell is going on and waiting for results is garbage... I say week 1 of the finals is ridiculous under the McIntyre system.

 

[Coxy]

Gallop continues to be defiant.
http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,865 ... 66,00.html

"A lot gets debated every year about the McIntyre system but we're pleased about what it's produced," he said.

"It's a system that is the right one, we believe, for rugby league with the mid-season impact of rep footy.

"One playing eight and two playing seven makes sense to us.

"If you're good enough from seventh or eighth and you keep winning then you can get through to the grand final and that's what we've seen with Parramatta.

"We're pretty pleased with how it's turned out."

Gallop says teams making a late-season charge towards the grand final, such as the Eels this year and the Wests Tigers in seasons before them, should be applauded and deserved due reward.

The bits I've highlighted just don't make sense. The impact of the rep season justifies having 8 teams out of 16 making the finals, whereas a top 5 would likely rule out teams like the Broncos or Storm if they do get hit by rep duties and subsequent injuries (Storm seem to be so lucky in that respect).

And if you're good enough from seventh or eighth and you keep winning in the AFL system the result will be the same. As I pointed out earlier in this thread I think, assuming the order of teams as they were eliminated (1. Parramatta, Melbourne, 2. Brisbane, Bulldogs, 3. Titans, Dragons, 4. Manly, Newcastle...under the AFL system the exact same order of teams could've been eliminated, and the winners the same each week...

That is, we still, most likely, would've ended up with a Melbourne vs Parramatta Grand Final!

So why change? 1 reason. If the Storm had been slightly off on that first round, and Manly a bit better, and the Sea Eagles sprung the upset, the Storm would be out. Under the AFL system that simply wouldn't have been a possible result, and neither it should be. If you finish top 4, you deserve the advantage of a guaranteed second chance. Under McIntyre, it's only a "likely" second chance.

As Gallop points out, there are late season charges - Wests Tigers in 2005, Broncos in 2006, New Zealand Warriors in 2008, Parramatta and Brisbane in 2009. If those teams finish in the bottom half of the 8 it is actually dangerous for the top 4 teams who may well have dipped slightly or be in a holding pattern coming into the finals.

Yes, to win the premiership you have to be in form in September. We all agree with that. But by finishing in the top 4, I think those teams have earnt the right to have the first week to feel their way into the finals. If they lose, and week 2 they're still not up to it, then bye bye.

If you finish bottom half of the 8 then fair enough, it's do or die. And so it should be.

I just can't understand how Gallop's comments above are in any way a vindication for McIntyre. At all.

 

[Foordy]

They thing that people are complaining about seems to be mainly that losing teams from the top 4 that lose in week 1 play their second match against a bottom 4 team) away from home. and they McIntyre system doesm't determine where games are played the NRL does.

That also means the complaints are only valid when the top 4 teams if they lose have to play outside their state.

for example there would have been no complaints this year if the Dragons after losing to Parramatta had of played another Sydney team because the game would have been played at the SFS or ANZ.

I don't have a real problem with the McIntyre system because teams 1 and 2 especially have a greater advantage by playing teams 7 and 8 at home than they would have under the AFL system where they would have played teams 3 and 4. Take this year; under the AFL system the Dragons would have played Melbourne (and got a touch up as well) and the Bulldogs would have played the Titans (who i think would have been a good chance because of no Kimmorly for the dogs)

 

[Coxy]

Yeah the venues have nothing to do with the system and everything to do with the NRL's own implementation.

I don't see it as that big a deal playing against a better team. There have been cases where the minor premiers have had an easy first up match against a lacklustre team 8 and then had a week off...not the best preparation for coming up against a form team in the preliminary final.

eg Sharks in 1999. Had an easy win over Broncos in week 1, then faded against the Dragons to miss out on the GF. They might have benefited from a tougher game against then top 4 Roosters before getting the week off.

Just saying.

 

[mrslong]

People do you remember that up until last year the argument against the Macintyre System was: "what's the point of having 7th & 8th...they're only their to make up the numbers, they will never win...The macintyre system is useless"

That was right up until last year before the Warriors beat the Storm...then everyone said "vindicated, Macintyre works...the Warriors beat Melbourne....Macintyre System is full of win"

Now the media has changed their minds. Now Macintyre System is full of fail "because the Minor Premiers have lost, the Macintyre system doesn't work. It's not fair, boohoohoo"

HMMMM? Have I missed something here?