An alternative to the McIntyre system
Roar Rookie By Dean - Surry Hills, 5 Sep 2010 Dean - Surry Hills is a Roar Rookie
- Tagged:
- McIntyre system, NRL, NRL finals, Rugby League
Will Chambers (Melb) scores the 1st try NRL - 2009 Preliminary Finals Melbourne Storm vs Brisbane Broncos Etihad Stadium, Melbourne Saturday 26 September 2009 © Sport the library/Jeff Crow ©Action Photographics
In last year’s NRL finals series, Melbourne Storm advanced to the Grand Final without having to play either teams that finished first or second over the 26 competition rounds. The McIntyre system, in my humble opinion, is flawed.
Here I have provided an alternative for a five week finals system rather than the current four. The benefits of this system are as follows:
1. Maximisation of crowd numbers and television ratings.
2. Top four teams cannot be eliminated in the first week.
3. Top four teams given advantages throughout finals.
4. Top two teams given one weeks rest.
5. More evenly matched contests throughout the finals.
6. Higher chance of top two teams facing each other in the GF.
7. Quality finals matches from beginning to end.
Australian League Finals System (ALFS):
WEEK ONE
Friday night – 6 (at their home ground) play 7
Saturday night - 5 (at their home ground) play 8
Sunday daytime – 3 (at their home ground) play 4
Teams that finished 1 and 2 earn and deserve one week’s rest. The losing sides from Friday and Saturday’s games are eliminated. This leaves 6 teams in the race for the trophy.
WEEK TWO
Friday night – The loser from teams 3 and 4 game gains a home ground advantage and plays the lowest placed winning team from week one. The winner advances directly to the MAJOR FINAL (A). The losing team is eliminated.
Saturday night – The winner from teams 3 and 4 gains a home ground advantage and plays the highest placed winning team from week one. The winner advances directly into the MAJOR FINAL (B). The losing team receives a second chance and plays in the week three match.
Sunday daytime – Team 1 plays Team 2, at the nearest major venue to the Minor Premiers. The grounds may include Homebush, SFS, Suncorp, Telstra Dome, and/or Ericson. The winner advances directly into the MAJOR FINAL (A).
Five teams are still in the race. Three teams are now in the Major Finals.
WEEK THREE
Saturday night – The loser from teams 1 and 2 play (at their home ground) the loser of week two’s Saturday game. The winner advances to the MAJOR FINAL (B). Loser eliminated.
Teams that have already qualified for the Major Finals earn a week’s rest. Four teams remain in the race for the ultimate prize.
WEEK FOUR
Saturday night – MAJOR FINALS – (A) and (B) – double header at Homebush. Alternately two separate venues are utilised such as Suncorp, SFS, Homebush, or Telstra Dome. Winners of each match proceed to the GRAND FINAL.
WEEK FIVE
Saturday night – GRAND FINAL – Homebush.
Recommend this story.
The Turkey 10
The Turkey 10 teams have now been selected, as Wild Turkey Bourbon's sport sponsorship kicks into the next exciting phase.
Choose which side you're going to support and get in the running to win $2,500!
Simply visit Wild Turkey Australia on Facebook for your chance to win.
Find out more.
- Explore:
- McIntyre system, NRL, NRL finals, Rugby League
September 6th 2010 @ 2:58pm
the watcher said | September 6th 2010 @ 2:58pm | Report comment
I prefer an alternative system which gives an extra game in week 2 and reward’s only 1 team with a week off, and unlike the the AFL system, it differentiates between top 2 and teams 3-6 play for two weeks on a best of basis, with home ground advantage alway’s to the higher team It goes like this:
Week 1
Game A: 1 vs 2 (winner to week 3, loser to play winner of 7vs8)
Game B: 3vs 6
Game C: 4vs 5
Game D: 7vs 8 (winner to week 2 vs loser of 1 and 2, loser eliminated)
Week 2
Game E: loser of game A (tema 1 or team 2) play winner of 7v8 (winner of Game E to week 3, loser eliminated, if winner is 1or2 then they get home final in week 3)
Game F: 3v5
Game G: 4v6
Out of teams 3-6, the two teams with the best record in the first two weeks of the finals go to through to week 3. If need be fore and against and/or percentage can be used to seperate teams with same record.
Week 3
Game H: PF: Winner Game A vs 2nd team out of teams 3-6, winner to GF, loser eliminated
Game I: PF:Winner Game E vs 1st team out of teams 3-6, (home ground advantage to higher placed team from home and away season), winner to GF, loser eliminated
Week 4:
Grand Final: Winner Game H vs Winner Game I.
This is similar to the existing system, except only one team is eliminated and ensures that there isn’t the often meaningless game between 4 and 5, under which the losing team needs both team 1 and team 2 to lose. Also unlike the AFL, it rewards teams 1 and 2 more than teams 3 and 4 and treats teams 5 and 6 better than teams 7 and 8.
September 6th 2010 @ 9:16pm
Mister Football said | September 6th 2010 @ 9:16pm | Report comment
I like that 1 and 2 can’t knock each other out before the grand final.
Don’t like the ring-around-a-rosy with 3 to 6.
A better option might be:
Week 1
Same as above.
Week 2
Game E: same as above
Game F: Lowest winner of Game B and C plays highest loser of Game B and C (the HIghest winner has gone through to the prelim, and the lowest loser is eliminated)
etc.
September 7th 2010 @ 11:50am
Renegade said | September 7th 2010 @ 11:50am | Report comment
This is ridiculous….i stopped reading at Week 2. There is nothing wrong with the current finals format, give it a break…
September 8th 2010 @ 6:40am
Dean - Surry Hills said | September 8th 2010 @ 6:40am | Report comment
Renegade – There are plenty who will strongly disagree with you. A host of people have been disgruntled with the Mcintyre system for years and commentators have remarked that they don’t like it – but don’t know what to replace it with. St George Ill last year finished first – lost their opening finals game to Parramatta (many say referee related decisions cost them the match) and then had to play Brisbane (who finished sixth) at Suncorp Stadium. There is little justice in this system – especially when Melbourne who finished fourth did not have to play 1st or 2nd to make it through to the Grand Final.
September 8th 2010 @ 5:40pm
ptovey01 said | September 8th 2010 @ 5:40pm | Report comment
I think there is justice. If you are 1st place, then you have been given enough advantage to go through by playing lowly 8th. 8th place doesn’t even desrve a spot. So, if the Minor premiers lose to 8th its their own fault. I’m a proud dragons fan also, but still think that we got what we deserved, by thinking we had it sewn up and played poorly in both games. Hopefully we don’t make the same mistakes this year.
September 8th 2010 @ 6:11pm
Dean - Surry Hills said | September 8th 2010 @ 6:11pm | Report comment
ptovey01 – You’re not related to Geoff by any chance ???? I wouldn’t be calling eighth place lowly by any stretch of the imagination. The current salary cap has shown that all teams are competetive on their day, and the McIntyre system was developed before the cap was put in place, without thought that positions 1 & 2 could really lose their initial match ups with the lower placed finalists. Is there any real insentive to bash away for 26 weeks for a poultry $100k prize for the minor premiership? A few coaches have worked out that it is possibly better to time your run towards the finals and hit your peak when it matters most. I am equally outraged for the some of the middle placed finalists who are bundled out first week of the finals when there are a few upsets. The system needs a definite overhaul if the salary cap is to stay in place. Regards, Dean.
September 8th 2010 @ 7:57pm
Renegade said | September 8th 2010 @ 7:57pm | Report comment
Finally a post with common sense.
Much better than “why didn’t the dragons get four chances during the finals series?”
September 12th 2010 @ 9:15am
Dean- Surry Hills said | September 12th 2010 @ 9:15am | Report comment
Renegade – you may see some logic with the system I have developed now. After Fridays and Saturdays games, it now looks like the poor old Wests Tigers who finished the year in third position and lost in a nail biter to the Roosters have been disadvantaged big time. If StGeorge lose to Manly today then the Tigers are eliminated ! And lets face a few facts – if Manly were full strength then this scenario would be highly possible. If StGeorge win, then the Tigers get the ultimate reward of having to travel to Canberra next week to take on the inform Raiders at their home ground. The Tigers at the end of the day receive NO home final and are at the mercy of other pending results. Again I say – this McIntyre system is a complete farce, and needs to be overhauled.
September 13th 2010 @ 12:15pm
Renegade said | September 13th 2010 @ 12:15pm | Report comment
Dean,
You make a fair point.
But still, it’s finals football and if they won the game they would have had a week off.
There always has to be a winner and loser in sport….and in this case the winner’s gain the benefits, which is fine by me.
Raiders shouldn’t have to play the tigers at leichardt after knocking off the 2nd placed panthers at penrith.
The Tiger’s didn’t make the most of the advantages they got in week 1 of the finals….it’s simple, you win your games and and reap the benefits.
September 15th 2010 @ 11:30pm
Dean - Surry Hills said | September 15th 2010 @ 11:30pm | Report comment
The Tigers received no advantage in week one. Full stop. The Roosters got to play at home.
The Raiders played a Penrith team decimated by injury and suspension.
Why shouldn’t the Raiders have to play away again – or at least on neutral ground ? They had an average season and just scraped into the top eight.
If you’re going to insist on a salary cap that evens out the competition then you have to amend the structure of an outdated finals system. You can’t have your cake and eat it to.
November 20th 2010 @ 1:36pm
fingAU said | November 20th 2010 @ 1:36pm | Report comment
The McIntyre Final 8 System if flawed! Check out my blog here…
http://gerry.finlay.wattle.id.au/2010/11/footy-finals-systems.html