How the NRL finals series should look

I have written an analysis of the AFL and NRL finals systems. You can find it here... http://gerry.finlay.wattle.id.au/2010/11/footy-finals-systems.html I would appreciate any comments.

If you have a situation where 1 and 2 always retain their home ground advantage, it would probably overcome a fair bit of angst (and I believe they deserve that right). It's true that in an attempt to avoid repetitions of the first week of finals, the AFL has this cross-over system, which is how 1st ends up playing 2nd this weekend

Mister football , that is one of the big disadvantages of the Macintyre system in recent years in the NRL. Now that the competition is so even, the 7th or 8th place team has a good chance of beating teams 1 or 2. When that happens teams 1 or 2 completely lose their advatange they have worked all year for and have to play away to a lower ranked team the next week. That the Raiders and Roosters (6th and 7th) are hosting home games this week is ridiculous. We are making it easier for teams 5 thorugh 8. Teams 1 through 4 should have a clerar advantage. Yes that is the only 1 minor disadvantage of the AFL system that teams 1 and 2 can meet before the grand final although I dont see it as a big deal. To elimate that after week 1 just get the teams to carry there ranking forward into Weeks 2 and 3 the subsequent weeks like they have done in UK Super League ( just dont let the highest ranked team choose their opponent in the grand final qualifier like they do). You could get the same games as in week 1 but I dont have a problem with that.

Let's not forget, the AFL systems is actually the original NRL system! But can I repeat that the McIntyre system has the benefit that that top two cannot knock each out prior to the grand final, whereas the AFL system has that as an almost 50% probability (this weekend, the pies meet Geelong). Also, it has to be said that the NRL does seem more suited to the McIntyre system than for the AFL (when it had it). In the AFL, for the most part, !st and 2nd are going to trounce 7th and 8th, which is not a very exciting prospect, whereas, in the NRL, 7th and 8th have a very good history of being competitive against 1st and 2nd, so they are generally very tightly contested affairs (as Penrith v Raiders was). This could because of the inherent natures of either game, but also because of the effect of SOO, which often means you have some good teams floating around 5th to 8th, who are back to full strength in time for the finals. The fact is, the NRL has produced 8 strong teams for the finals (this year and last), and the AFL had perhaps five strong teams (at a pinch), thus the AFL system suits them because the weaker teams are knocking each other out before they play the stronger teams. I don't think it's a straightforward proposition either way.

Please get rid of the Mcintyre system , it is absloute rubbish. Every year we are talking about how ridiculous it is. So many things wrong with it. Every year we do a poll and 80% of the fans want the AFL system. ( The other 20% are probably people who's team have gottten an advantage in that year). You never hear the AFL complaining about there finals format. If only Manly could have beaten the Dragons for us then the Tigers would have been elimanated then Gallop and his NRl cronies may have finall woken up and got rid of it. The 3rd place team eliminating in week 1, How ridiculous is that! And yes this week we have the 6th and 7th placed teams hosting teams that placed 2nd and 3rd , well done Mr Gallop!

Three cheers for Beer. Spot-on.

afl finals system is 10x better then the nrl... you get no reward if you finish in the top 4..unless 1st and 2nd both win in the first week thats the only advantage they get...as much as I HATE the dragons..them exiting last yrs finals series to parra and then a red hot bris up at suncorp was a joke to the system...how does a team who comes first have to travel up to brisbane to have an elimination final....that game still should have been played in sydney to accommodate for the dragons losing to parra in week 1 who seemingly couldnt do a thing wrong at the back end of last yr...fair to say the dragons had a bad 2 weeks...but also fair to say they probably had the toughest 2 weeks of the finals for a team who finished 1st! geelong who got beat to the saints last week...get the reward still by playin freo at the MCG this weekend...now this works as they finished 2nd and freo finishing 6th should always have the tougher run finishing outside the top 4, to make the grand final. Yes the prospect of geelong v freo at subiaco would have been interesting but wouldnt be the right reward for a team who finishes 2nd, to travel all the way across to the other side of the country to play an elimination game. If they get beat this weekend at the G then so be it..but at least they have been given the right reward.. If the Tigers lose to the roosters, and the warriors beat the titans, penrith beating canberra...the tigers would then have to travel across the tasman to face the kiwis...geez tough ask for a team who finishes 3rd to travel across the country for a black friday match up...the system doesnt work and must be scratched, and give the top teams their right otherwise the regular season is losing its meaning!

And that's their problem for not finishin higher up the ladder.....there's never going to be a perfect system but the current format is more than satisfactory.

Well said Stevo - I'm glad there is at least one other person out there that has noticed the inherant flaws of the outdated Mcintyre system. The system was put in place before the salary cap was implemented, and the strength of teams 1 through to 8 is close to equal on any given day. A lot of finals success also centres on injuries, suspensions, and teams that hit their peak at exactly the right time. All advantages should be given to clubs who have been successful throughout 26 competition rounds - and not to those who only decide to show up in the first few weeks of finals footy.

Sure, it's got its advantages as well. But I think the disadvantage to teams finishing 3rd through 6th is of bigger concern than the advantage given to the top 2. In years like 2008, Cronulla finished 3rd, equal on points with the top two, yet draw wise they were at a massive disadvantage (except that 8th surprisingly won that year). And It's happened so many times in the second week, almost every year. Looking through the finals series since 1999, it's happened almost every single year, with only 3 out of the 11 years (1999, 2004 and 2009) giving fair draws in the second week. In every other year the team winning either the 3 v 6 or 4 v 5 game is playing a more difficult team in the prelims than the loser of the same match is.

I would have loved to see Manly v Dragons with full strength teams on the field, what we are going to see is a full strength team (bending the salary cap) versus a salary cap decimated team with half their team missing through injury and suspensions. Yes this game should attract a lot of interest, Dragon fans can come out of the cupboard and see them actualy win a finals game LOL.

Stevo the situation you describe above is what I've also pointed to further above as a flaw of the McIntyre system. Another way to look at is thus: if the week one results go according to rankings, you end up in the second week with 3rd vs 5th and 4th vs 6th, in other words, the system is designed to give the higher ranked winner of week one with a tougher game than the 2nd ranked winner of week one. And if 7th or 8th beat 1st or 2nd, the flaw in the system becomes even more apparent. But - this "flaw" is a strength from another perspective. If 1st and 2nd have gone through, they are seeded to play stronger and weaker pools, consistent with their rankings. So underneath it all, there is a certain logic to the McIntyre system that aims to reward 1st and 2nd in that order.

I haven't been a fan of the McIntyre since 2000. That year the Raiders finished 4th and got the home semi against Penrith, which they won. As expected 1st (Brisbane) beat 8th, and 3rd (Newcastle I think?) beat 6th place. However Parramatta who finished 7th upset Easts (2nd). So Canberra's reward for their victory was a knockout game in week 2, at the SFS, against 2nd placed Easts. Penrith's penalty for losing was a game at the same ground the day before against 7th placed Parramatta. So Canberra would have been better off throwing the game, to meet the weaker opposition in the next game. This system was and remains a complete rort, even with the 2nd week home ground advantages which weren't around then. A simple litmus test is this... if you change the order in which the games are played in a finals series (so start with 1 v 8 in McIntyre), would teams deliberately try to manufacture a loss? If they would, like some may have in the above scenario, then the system should not be used.

+ a thousand!

You make a point....but i still disagree that a losing team should get home advantage. It places further emphasis on winning finals matches. I can see your point about gold coast but it's not like they had to play at Parra Stadium, it was the SFS. However Parra beat the minor premiers in their own backyard while the titans lost to team 6 at home. It again shows that you have to win each game in the finals....that's what it's all about, otherwise why even have a finals series. Anyways back to the original point....the current system is great and it is fair.

Probably because they won far more games than the team they will play in the regular season. Last year Parramatta were nowhere near as good as the Gold Coast throughout the year, yet they gained a home final, and Gold Coast had to play away after losing to Brisbane by just 6 points. If we want to go back to the 'you have to win' type attitude, then we might as well just have a knockout finals series, hell we could even include all 16 teams, as if 1st can't beat 16th, well they deserve to be kicked out right?

bring back the top 5....

"* 1 & 2 playing away while 7 & 8 play at home in week two if they lose" I'm not sure if that's a problem.....if Team 1 manages to lose to team 8 at home, then they should have to play their second chance at an away venue the next week. Why give them home advantage for losing?

"The rewards for winning and losing in the first week of the finals are not equitable, and the other thing is that teams from 3rd to 6th do not really know what they are playing for" That's exactly right, all they know is they have to win which clearly defines that every game counts. As for the tigers and cowboys situation in 05, well that has been fixed due to the winners in week 1 now getting a home city/region venue.....so again it re-iterates the point, that you have to win or face the prospect of having to play canberra in Canberra or the warriors in NZ. This system is great and the unpredicatibility adds to the excitement!

In the past, one of the complaints of the McIntyre was that 1 vs 8 was a no-brainer. But the last two seasons have seen 8 beat 1 and turn the play-offs on their head. Funnily enough, had Manly beaten Canterbury last Sunday, we would have had the Dragons vs Canberra as 1 vs 8 and I'm sure the Saints wouldn't have relished that prospect at all. There is also a lot of talk of the "unfairness" of the top 2 facing an away match if they lose their first game. So... don't lose the first game!