Chris Judd of Carlton clears the ball during the AFL Round 07 match between the St Kilda Saints and the Carlton Blues at Etihad Stadium, Melbourne. Slattery Images
We’ve known for some time that, with two new clubs entering the competition, changes to the structure of the season were inevitable. Now, in launching a website for supporters to give their feedback, the AFL have laid their cards on the table and presented all the different options under consideration.
Some of the ideas presented seem just plain crazy. Others seem quite intriguing.
But it’s good to see the league taking the transparent approach to changes, especially when among those potential changes are the idea of a final ten or, remarkably, a final twelve.
So let’s dissect some of the options.
The preseason is the first talking point, with three alternatives presented: practice matches, representative games alongside practice matches, and a “lightning” format similar to what we’ll see next year.
Obviously, the most interesting part of that list is the idea that representative football (as in, State of Origin) could return. It’s good to see it at least on the agenda – the reasons for its demise are mostly no longer relevant – and you’d have to think this will be the options most preferred by fans.
Another thing we can take from the selection is that the AFL is favouring a shorter pre-season to the present arrangement of four weeks, as most options seem likely to fall short of this time frame.
During the home and away season, a number of different scenarios have been presented. The first is the current, 22-round structure. Then there are two conference-based models, one with two conferences and one with three.
Then there’s the idea of a reset fixture, whereby after 17 rounds of each team playing each other once, teams are allocated in to three divisions based on their ladder position. This option seems as bizarre as it does unlikely.
Finally, there’s an idea many have (rightly) put forward over the years – the notion of a locked fixture.
Under this option, the fixture will be locked in for three years to ensure each team plays each other four times over three years, twice home and twice away. Over the three-year cycle, two seasons will be played over 23 rounds and one over 22 rounds.
The reason this makes sense is because it removes so many of the inequities in the present draw. All teams would be considered equal at the fixturing table, something you can’t really say at the moment, with some teams consistently given less interstate teams than others.
Needless to say, it’s hard to see Collingwood’s final seven games all being played at the MCG under a locked fixture.
After the home and away season, it’s the finals series up for discussion.
I’ve been quite critical of the signals emanating from AFL House on this subject, and while it’s comforting to see the final nine suggestion has been taken off the table, nothing put forward this week makes ditching the present set-up seem even remotely tempting.
The league has put out two final twelve formats, but those ideas are harmed by the sheer number of teams they allow to progress to finals action. Having two thirds of the competition play finals won’t add to the spectacle of the series.
The other option is the final ten, which isn’t as flawed but still seems unworthy of replacing the final eight. More than half of the competition will be represented. The top teams would get multiple weeks off. There will be twice the number of non-elimination finals. The system becomes even more complicated.
So the first option, keeping the final eight, gets my vote on this one.
But the beauty of what the AFL have done is that it’s not up to one person. The final say may rest with the league, but at least the fans are able to have their say.
Black Diamonds
Guest
12 Home Games 12 Away Games 1 Neutral Game For each team. Which means a total of 9 Neutral Games per year - to be played in New Zealand, Cairns, Darwin, Canberra, Newcastle etc. etc. Makes 25 Rounds work even better actually.
Black Diamonds
Guest
Agree - hope you've submitted this idea to the AFL. I have the same (and similar) idea. 25 Rounds makes sense - it actually matches the current system. Currently - With 16 Teams Play half the competition once (8) Play other teams twice (7x2 = 14) Total Rounds (22) From 2012 - With 18 Teams Play half the competition once (9) Play other teams twice (8x2 = 16) Total Rounds (25) Whether you have Conferences or not, I don't see why the AFL has capped things at 24 when 25 presents the perfect solution? More people who agree with this option need to raise it with the AFL. Also guarantees 225 Games per year + Finals - and a bumper TV deal.
Brian
Guest
The problem with conferences is that there is no natural 6/6/6 split in AFL and any division that breaks up Victorian clubs or has unfair travel is well grossly unfair. Personally I prefer the reset fixture. After 17 even rounds. 1-6 play to determine finals positioning, 7-12 play for the last two spots and 13-18 play for the top draft picks.
Tom
Guest
I'm impressed that you didn't forget to include a bit of Collingwood bashing in your article.
Joel
Guest
An odd number of rounds is not a show stopper in my opinion, you just reverse the fixture the following year to even out the games. Given the current unbalanced nature of the fixture, with home games sold interstate, different numbers of interstate travel games and that many clubs share venues - it's really not such a big deal. I think a 25 round season gives us an opportunity to restore credibility to the fixture, it just works.
Fly on the Wall
Guest
The three-year cycle idea has merit but in the third year the teams you have yet to play a second time in a season may all be in the top 8 - or bottom 8. Too much unknown in such a proposal. But the three-pool, 22-game format is easiest to compile on an annual basis. At the end of the home-and-away rounds the teams are ranked from 1-18 and the first 17 rounds for the next year are done - easy. When we now split the 18 teams into three pools of six, you play the five other teams in your pool a second time to make 22 rounds. How to split them? a) Teams 1, 4, 7, 10, 13, 16 into Pool A, Teams 2, 5, 8, 11, 14, 17 into Pool B and Teams 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18 into Pool C. b) a Wimbledon seeding of 1, 6, 7, 12, 13, 18 into A then 2, 5, 8 ,11, 14, 17 into B and 3, 4, 9, 10, 15, 16 into C. Under the current system you have 22 x 8 = 176 round matches plus 9 finals. Under my system you have 22 x 9 = 198 round matches plus 9 finals. The 22 extra fixtures are worth more than the pre-season in terms of TV rights so cut out the pre-season altogether and have an Origin week and a few split rounds so teams get more than a week to recover at various times. And for finals: pls a maximum of 8 teams and go back to the old system of 1 v 8 etc in the first week. And no more favourable blockbuster matches for Collingwood that screw the other clubs for revenue.
Northen League
Guest
Must say the site is a brilliant idea and reading some of the ideas is eye opening. There is also a website one bloke made for his idea search "best and fairest afl finals" it's prepared fairly well. As a biased huge MLB fan I would love to see a wildcard playoff for 10th and maybe 9th, scrap all these conferences just have 10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17 not the wooden spooners all battle off for 1 or 2 spots. fixturing hell but I would personally be interested. To me the Minor premiership has always held a special significance, it's given to the best over the season, another reason why the A-League is a joke, soccer shouldn't have finals. Enjoyable article Michael
Mister Football
Roar Guru
All the options are worth tossing up and come with pros and cons. I agree with mds that members prefer to have a fixture worked out at the start of the season so they know which games they can attend for the season - having a potential fixture with only two weeks notice doesn't cut it. I also would like to dispel the notion that the fixed 3 season fixture is equitable just because everyone gets to play each other twice home and away over the 3 year period. Means absolutely nothing. A lot can happen to a team over the space of 3 years. First season you've copped a team that is doing well twice, in two years time your rival cops the same team twice and they're on the bottom - it achieves absolutely nothing over and above what we do now - not even worth contemplating, especially when you lose so much flexibility with what you can do with your draw from a marketing point of view. Lastly, whatever is done, there should be an even number of rounds so that every team has an equal number of home and away games, unless, in the circumstance where we were to go to a 23 round season, nine games are to be at a neutral venue around Australia, and that might be a positive.
Michael DiFabrizio
Expert
Carlton and Hawthorn are also big Melbourne clubs. How does Collingwood stack up next to, say, North Melbourne? Look, I'm sorry if it comes across as me singling out one club. Essendon I think only travel three times (one less than Collingwood) this year. The Pies having their final seven games at the MCG - be they home games or otherwise - is just one of the inequities. So I apologise for that. However, you can't say those inequities don't exist. You can't say everyone gets an equal run with the draw.
Michael DiFabrizio
Expert
All valid points, VooDoo and Baz35. Perhaps I should have been more open-minded. At any rate, allow me to elaborate on my stance. The idea that the top six will be locked in for finals five weeks before they start, and the bottom six excluded from finals, doesn't sit well. As Joel points out in his comment, it would be mathematically possible for teams to have more wins that a finalist, yet still miss out. A middle-tier team may also have more wins than a top six team, but will still be ranked below them and have a tougher finals draw. Also, the effects of not knowing when/where the last five games of the season will be held presents other issues. Not knowing what teams will be in what division until after round 17 will make it hard to organise five weeks of footy straight away. There would probably have to be a week off to allow for dates to be set, venues to be booked, fans to be given enough time to organise tickets, book flights, etc. Then there's also, as mds1970 points out below, the effect on memberships. Splitting the season into three sections (basically with five weeks of pre-finals) also seems a bit odd. But as I said in the article, it's not about what one person thinks. Thanks for sharing your views.
Beaver fever
Guest
I want it to become easier to follow, rather than conferences, final 12, finals wildcards etc I have a very limited interest in American sports and one of the reasons is that i could not be bothered working out the conferences, playoffs, etc . 18 teams, final 5, and if a team is out of the running, then bad luck ----- hard work to follow with players, sponsorship etc.
Joel
Guest
The final round is unscheduled so that games can be organized to give everyone an equal break before the finals.
Joel
Guest
No, it's not more equitable. It punishes the teams that are legitimately doing well by forcing them into tougher draw and rewards weaker teams for being rubbish. It's also mathematically possible this could lead to teams with more wins being excluded from finals, as they may be tipped out after 17 rounds but end up with more wins than the eventual finalists, how annoyed would that make you? It will do nothing else more so than any other system either. I don't like the idea of splitting the season into a third section either. What this results in is a home and away series, a preliminary finals series and a finals series. There is also the problem that people don't know well in advance who is playing when, which the AFL is always telling us is why they can't move sell out games from the docklands.
Joel
Guest
The AFL should bite the bullet and expand to a 25 round two conference system. All these other options are a joke.
St.ornum
Guest
I'm with the comments above in that 17 normal rounds then splitting the comp into definite finalists, wildcards and a group who's points are eleminated and fight off for a reward (draft picks, large cash incentive, even an extra 4 premiership points). The afl has probably put it in to entice us to vote and find out our 2nd favourite coz there's no way they wouldn't guarentee 2 matches between the big 3 in Melbourne plus the 4 derbies.
mds1970
Roar Guru
The problem with the reset opton is that over the last third of the season we won't know when our club's home games are. This could be a problem for selling memberships. One advantage of the current system (other than the AFL's mystifying idea of having an unfixed final round), is that in October of the previous year we know in advance when our home games will be. So, with certainty, we can buy club memberships and lock those dates in our diaries. And then tell everyone that if they're planning a wedding, party, function, conference, dirty weekend away, funeral or any other event where our presence is required to not hold it on those dates. Without having the dates locked in, it's a disincentive to purchasing memberships - the risk of having to pay for games you may not be able to attend. It's a reason why NRL club memberships are relatively low.
Baz35
Guest
Yeah, dead right VooDoo. It deserved a hell of a lot better consideration than the following. "Then there’s the idea of a reset fixture, whereby after 17 rounds of each team playing each other once, teams are allocated in to three divisions based on their ladder position. This option appears seems as bizarre [sic] as it does unlikely." The "reset" option has the following features compared to the current system: -it is more equitable -it has more integrity -it will significantly increase interest -it will increase revenues I have yet to see any other system that fits within the current parameters, and better meats all objectives than this one. I for one hope it is adopted.
Dik dunkers
Guest
How many of collingwoods Last 7 games are home games. Constant carping about their draw is tiresome. last time I checked they travelled interstate 1 less time than blues and same as hawks, who play in Tasmania by choice. please build a bridge and get over it
VooDoo
Guest
The reset fixture option I believe is actually the best proposal I've seen put forward. I'd hate to see a locked fixture, as I think each season should feature the same number of rounds (22 - any more is overkill), and the reset fixture option would make for more interesting matches than any other, as well as removing the incentive to tank or for top teams to rest players leading into the finals.