What is the best and fairest Finals system?

Tammy that's because some of the teams that finish 6 - 8 are effected by SOO and lose games they otherwise may well have won. Minor premiers are sometimes there because others didn't have same advantage. (i.e. Not many Dogs played all 3 SOO games where a million Broncos were involved). Also it's not the best idea to "peak too early" and then slump at finals time (see Dragons run of losses). if this slump is mid season and then they start the run to get the cup the team may well finish down the ladder but in the eight (see Parras run of wins).

Final 5 = no eels, no broncos, but Manly and Titans get to be there? That would a crime against entertainment and logic in a 16 team comp. Top 8 is the way to go.

Bring back the final 5.

Hey Wally, you're creeping dangerously close to identity theft. I'm the original, the expert and the ones who upsets the punters! But I agree with you totally on the home ground point. The AFL does, too, which is why the higher ranked team retains said advantage. In AFL, as someone has said, all the Melbourne teams are out of MCG or Docklands so the issue really only matters when dealing with interstate contests, but in the NRL every team wants to maximise the home feel - hence St G playing out of Kogarah in week 1 and not SFS or ANZ. 26 weeks of hard slog should not be thrown out the window after one loss. Otherwise draw the opponents out of a hat. The governing body has to choose - a wide open finals month in which ladder position doesn't really matter, thus generating possibly more excitement and interest than usual - or a more ordered series in which 6 months of effort is rewarded. Funny that we have the former rather than the latter.

AndyRoo, there were plenty of tears on Sunday evening :-(

There only human. Look at it this way, there would have been much more tears on Friday night if they knew they were eliminated...the Macintyre system deprived us of Manly tears!

You're right. Teams really shouldn't be lacking motivation in Sept.

I dont like the mcintyre system. I heard David gallop say on the footy show that teams 1 - 4 are rewarded by playing teams in the bottom half of the 8 and thats part of the reason for keeping the system. In my opinion it's not much of a reward considering the comp every year is getting closer and closer and there isnt much between the teams nowadays. I mean this is the second year in a row the team that finished 8th have beaten the minor premiers.

I think it shows the difference between Manly this year and last - attitude has been hot and cold all year. Still don't think a team with the right stuff would have any problem switching on.

I've said this before, make it all sudden death from week 1 (1 v 8 etc.), home advantage for top seeded teams through to the GF. Of course, it means two less finals so there's no chance of TV letting it happen, but everyone would know where they stand, and every game would matter the same. There is always going to be the chance that the hot team coming into the finals is number 8 like this year, but I'd suggest it doesn't happen that often (last year I don't think the Warriors were hot, they just fluked one).

But the players deep down would have known they were likely to still be in the comp. It's like training, when your told your supposed to treat it like a real game, you try but it's not the same.

Surely they should have been treating it as an elimination game. I'm sure that's what Des Hasler would have wanted them to think.

The home game issue is a moot point in AFL as 50% of teams use Etihad or MCG as their home ground anyway. The 'home' advantage in AFL is home state rather than home ground! I suggest RL give teams 1 & 2 the option pf a home ground semi either week 1 or week 2 if they lose. Ib St George's case they could have selected Kogarah for the Parra game and forfeited the home ground advantage week 2 if they lost (which they did). Alternately, if they were playing Newcastle they could have chosen a neutral ground like SFS and kept home ground up their sleeves if they lost. Say they won - then week 3 is as it always is home town advantage to highest team.

on Fred McGee's Monday article about his day at Kograh last weekend, Roarer Thommo offered this little tid bit, which may come as a suprise to plenty of NRL people calling for the introduction of the AFL finals system: "The NRL is being particularly bloody minded in not adopting the “AFL” system, as it was actually the NRL (then ARL) that used this system first. This seems to have remarkably been forgotten by everybody involved including the NRL themselves! In 1995-96, the old ARL used the current AFL system. First week in 1995 was 1Manly vs 4 Cronulla 2 Canberra vs 3 Brisbane 5 Newcastle vs 8 Norths 6 Canterbury vs 7 St.George" So perhaps it's News Ltd holding back the move to what is the old ARL system!?!? ;-)

I guess the difference is 5 v 8 is an elimination final, and 4 v 5 is potentially an elimination final. If Manly had won they would have hosted a final the next week. The disparity between the systems is not, I believe, at 5th place. It is in the top 2. The Dragons had 26 rounds worth of form go down the gurgler in 80mins last weekend. They have to play the next two finals away. This doesn't happen in the AFL system.

In the now AFL system they would have played Parramatta at Brookvale, loser is eliminated.