Salary cap justifies the McIntyre System

Reward the losers? Playing away from home, and having to bounce back from a defeat... hmmmmm just ask StG/I how that worked out for them last year... the lowest losers get eliminated, remember? So are you trying to say that the worst losers as opposed to the lowest ranked losers should be eliminated? why bother with a finals series?

Sorry mate, but read what I wrote again, never did I say that the regular season doesn't matter... because it quite clearly matters a great deal. What I was saying was that the finals are a seperate competition from the finals, whereby after the "seeding" is done, all that matters is how you play on the day. there is a clear difference in dynamic between regular season games and the finals. As for this year, the Warriors are being rewarded by playing far more consistant football through out the regular season by getting a plum seeded rank in the finals system. The league table doesn't lie, the warriors didn't some how fluke their way into the finals... they were better than Canberra and Manly, and those that finished outside the eight over the course of the whole email... Lets look at it in dot points -Top two winners get a week off -Other two winners get home finals -Top two losers play away from home -Bottom two losers eliminated What other system better rewards teams for their normal season consistancy with this kind of seeding AS WELL AS rewarding winners during the final series?

Bonehead, you did bother, and are obviously still bothered. If you claim not to be, then why did you respond? You should take your Fathers advice to heart. From my perspective it appears that your are only quarrelling with yourself.

Geez that's real constructive, can you come off any less arrogant.....i'm not even going to bother! My father told me "don't argue with fools, because from a distance one can't tell who is who"

Only a bonehead such as you Renegade would assert that NRL administration is competant. A history lesson over the past decade of neglect may convince you of of their shortcomings.

But why reward losers you say, it's all about winning you say... It seems you may have contradicted yourself...

Oikee, They should play every finals game as if it's their last....

What a stupid comment....that's why the adminstrators of the game stick by it! But what would they know......they're not as educated as Colin.

That's the advantage of finishing higher....if you lose you may get a second chance! Your beating your own argument yourself mate......it's simple WIN and you get rewarded!

Peter, The knight's example is invalid as in the current system....they would be playing the broncos at home. Which again is a reward for WINNING! What has the fact that 5 players got injured have anything to do with a finals system?

Well said Springs, your win or loss in some cases depends on other results, you are not always rewarded for winning as Danny mac puts it but you can also sometimes be rewarded for losing as the Cowboys. Spot on Colin ! They just don't get it , supporters of the mcintyre are obviously one eyed fans who their club who has obviosuly got the luck of the draw by the system this year and don't care for the good of the game. AFL is laughing at us all the way , only took them a few to work it out but its taking the NRL 10 years and stiill counting. Surely this year is it's last!!!

Springs, your wasting your breath. Boneheads who think the Dunlop system is fair, have no concept of the various alternatives. As my dear Father says "DO NOT EDUCATE A FOOL".

You basically just said that the regular season doesn't matter. Of course it matters! What an unbelievably stupid thing to say. We might as well just have a 16-team knockout. It's pretty simple. Whichever team wins the most games over the grueling 26-round regular season deserves the advantages, as they are the winners. The McIntyre system is ridiculous, most of all because of the stupid scenario where teams have to rely on other results to determine their fate. If Canberra lose on Saturday night, the Warriors are still alive. Now how does Canberra losing make the Warriors deserving of a semi finals spot? The Cowboys in 2005 get smashed by 50 in the same game yet go on to make the Grand Final. And if you say that it's all about winning and winners get rewarded, then how come the Warriors weren't kicked out regardless of the other results?

Why even have a freakin' season then? Teams don't finish first due to a favourable draw, they finish first because they are the best, and they should be rewarded for that. Exactly, winners get rewarded and losers don't, yet under this system, an undefeated team for the regular season can lose ONE match and then have to play away to a 6th or 7th placed side that could have lost more games than they won. Seems like the losers are getting rewarded there.

For the system to work you need to seperate the season from the finals, ie the finals are a whole new competition. This is something that gets slung around quite liberaly by pundits, but it is true. The way I look at the finals is this, the "top eight" determines the draw for the finals. After the first week, all winners are rewarded and the losers "punished". The McIntyre system provides winners with either a week off or a home final, the losers are either eliminated or have to play away the following week. Who you actually play shouldn't matter at all, because it will be (nominally) at home, they are on the back of a (possibly) demoralising loss, and at the end of the day, to win the comp you will have to beat teams who could be considered "better" than you... People just get hung up on where clubs finished in the regular season, frankly it doesn't matter. If it does matter, then a first-past-the-post system should be in place as it is clearly the most fair in this regard. I just can't see how the AFL system works better to distribute advantages to winners and disadvantages to losers. There is no real luck of the draw in the McIntyre system, people just need to better understand how it works! Any percieved "luck" is to do with the performace of you club through the season and the finals, you will be rewarded for playing well... (or rather playing well and winning!)

Yes the differnce is that teams 3 and 4 would be at home in Week 2 aginst the lower placed teams and a much better chance. Then again you might have a point , I guess in that aspect you'd say that the Mcintyre system advantages teams 7-8 by giving them an opportunity to have a home game, yes nice one. It's pretty clear in all arguments that the AFL system gives teams 1-4 more chance and the Mcintyre system much more chance for the teams 5-8 of getting through to the grand final qualifiers under the way it is currently set up with the NRL My point to Renegade was to do with winning where he stated the Mcintyre system rewards teams that win. It hasn't , it is only in the last 2 years that is the case. In most other years the team that has won has generally had to play a higher ranked side (especially out of the 4 v 5 game). It is the luck of the draw with the mcintyre which is what all the fans hate, Bring on the commission and it'll be gone forever!!

I think you've overlooked the point. This year the broncos struggled, but thier origin representation was lower as a result. one counter-balances the other when you're performing poorly. When a team is on top form, the loss of key players and in two cases, coaching staff, can and does have a disruptive impact... and 2, 4 or 6 (or more, should you start to factor in fatigue and injuries) dropped points a season will mean missing the finals almost definately... geez having a good for/against is vital these days! At the end of the day the clubs pay the players' wages, and they are not going to risk sponsor & membership dollars by missing out on the finals by a handful of points lost at origin... origin will become a joke, and it is the best part of the game!

Yeah its a shame, but the Toyota Cup is a curtain raiser to NRL matches, I don't think that it has been set up to be viable outside its role in this regard (I've actually just had an article published today about the Toyota Cup). Unfortunately when it comes time for the finals the system falls apart a little bit, the system (or rather the mechanisim that makes it viable) results in games where you could have four different clubs playing in the same "slot". the flip side is that the games, regardless of who is playing, should be of a high quality and enjoyed by the spectators... or at very least will give you three sides to boo :-P

Peter, I think that you're under-estimating what role form plays in the final series. Turning things around after a confidence crushing defeat in week one of the finals is tough, and when you factor in the idea that you have to play a fired up "under-dog" in the second round, the odds start to stack up against the 3-4 sides. My opinion has always been that the AFL adopted this modified version of the McIntyre system as it would tip the scales slightly against the interstate clubs that were begining to rise. As for your response to renegade, this only higlights a naive game plan on the part of the knights. If you need to play a game that results in you losing five players, the assumption is that it would have been equally damaging for the opposition, meaning that there is no disadvantage to either club should they have gone through. But again, it highlights that they have not planned for the fact that they were in another game the following week. The only game you ever play like that is the grand final...

Yes i know, but they would have been rubbed out by merit, not results later that week-end. Look, imagine the games if you know you might not play another game, then think about the effort put in if you realise, this is it, if we lose we are gone. The wrriors were clinging onto hope, and this is wrong. If they played the other system, at least they know, you and i know, exactly where they stand, now thats fair, in anyones book.