NRL changes finals system: Bye, bye McIntyre

I just wrote about this on my site. Apparently every club in the league (and everyone I have spoken to) so far has supported the change, which I am glad to see. Rest be assured after this season, I’m sure we will all have something to moan and groan about the new system…..that’s just what we do for the love of our game!!

I said on a league thread, that really the NRL should have kept it current system, but with minor twist. Let the #1 team select it's opponent, then the second highest ranking team gets to pick next (Unless they were picked by the #1 team), and so on. It would make the first week of the finals so much better.

Billo Coming from a ru background before I even bothered to watch rl,I have a reasonable idea on how both codes promote the game. And I have to say you are wrong. Try for a start getting decent membership for the Tahs the only S15 club in this state of 7 million,before lecturing rl on marketing as having no idea.Stop rigging a comp,by ensuring a team from each region is assured of a semi appearance,regardless of their performances.Get your game in full on FTA. Tina Turner,seems to have escaped you. Market the game try ,sponsorship not only by the code,but the individual clubs.Special deals on tickets,community service by the players,regular contact with and working with sponsors,visiting schools (115,000 over the off season) promoting healthy living and the game. Market the game,wonder why merchandise sales for rugby league are higher than the AFL. Market the game,why Toyota has been happy with the T0yota cup u20 comp. Having a SOO in Melbourne is promoting /marketing the game. The only thing stifling the code,is lack of FTA coverage in the non heartland states.That is not to say the code cannot do better at marketing,it surely can,but for someone to suggest they have no idea,is ludicrous. BTW I spent 4 years of my working life in marketing.One thing I have learned,do not treat your clients as mugs and try to satisfy their needs with at times face to face contact. The new semi format may be a backward step in your eyes,but it will not reduce the crowds,not Tv audiences,nor merchandise salesThe best of the best playing.And more so now that teams are more evenly matched,compared to other codes.That in my book is fairness.That is what judging by peoples' comments on radio,magazines,newspapers and at the grounds want.The I.C has acted in the best interest of the game(players and fans).

Should really be a Top-6 that way stop the situation where a team can still make the 'Finals' by winning as many games as it loses in a season eg Won 12 Lost 12. Hardly the kind of form over a season that justifies rewarding with a finals berth...

Cattery, all four games mattered under the McIntyre system because of the order the games were played in, starting with 4v5, neither of which could go into that game knowing that they would still be there the following week if they lost first up.

robma On the point of rewarding those teams who win, that's true of 1st and 2nd, but as for the other teams from 3rd to 6th, all sorts of anomalies would come up such as winning one week and as a reward getting to play a higher ranked team the following week.

I think that's a fair point, top seeded teams retaining home ground advantage come what may would have fixed one of the anomalies of the McIntyre system, however, many would argue that the flaws in herent in the McIntyre system went well beyond that.

Billo marketing is probably the incorrect term, you are talking about exploiting the commercial value where the product is already being consumed in large numbers (as far as TV audiences go). Also, I think you are incorrect in saying that all four games in the first week mattered under the McIntyre system - in fact, two games only mattered if 1st and/or 2nd lost their games, otherwise, they did not matter in the least - that was a big problem with the system.

Crosscoder, I said that you leaguies have no idea how to market the game. The fact that you get high TV audiences is down to the players. Marketing is how you exploit those audiences for the benefit of the game. Getting the value from the TV companies that those audiences should deliver, for example. The Commission has just changed a system whereby you have four games in the first week of the play-offs where everything is at stake in every game, to one in which only two games will have so much at stake. It's a backward step, whichever way you look at it. If 'fairness' is your key criterion, why not do away with the play-offs and declare the top team the champions?

The code could do that Ben,but being environmentalists and showing genuine concern for our fellow man,we like our fields small and concise and have the ability to be used by 3 codes of football.The smaller the fields ,the less the carbon footprint right Julia!! Julia are you there? Sorry Kev ? . 1 We prefer our athletes to leap into the air at impossible angles to plonk the ball down with centimetres to spare in the corner.Rounding a field's dimensions,would make it too simple.Ask mead,Barba,Morris,Uate. 2.If we want to bounce the ball ,we could take up basketball or netball.It is a contact sport after all. 3.Introduce another two posts!!!.We don't need extra posts to secure a miss. If the goal is missed ,tough t*tty.Maybe we should introduce posts on the sidelines,and just have that ole scoreboard ticking over. 4.When an athlete runs at full speed,bouncing a ball or fumbling it in the process tends to restrict speed,which is after all what athletics is all about.A player running at full capacity,unhindered,is what rl fans come to see. 5 Memberships are already up 10% so far this year.Crowds overall were down minimally in 2011 ,compared to other codes which had greater % decline.Given reasonable weather the crowds will no doubt increase. Maybe the ARLC could bring in a 3 strikes drug policy ,give em a break LOL.Or instead of tackling ,chesting. Seriously I think the new mob will get most things right,but as humans be prone to the odd stuff up.Even JON/Vlad/Lowy/Swimming Oz have had their odd stuff ups.

B.A, I take your point, but I'd contend that, if you look at for and againsts over the past years, you'd see that teams with a low against were excellent defensively (Melbourne springs to mind) and those with high for scores had great attacks (Tigers, North Queensland). While you might get a lucky 10-20 points difference through conditions (weather, vagaries of the draw), I reckon it balances itself out through the year as Nathan has suggested. Furthermore, I'm not sure there would be an uproar if a lot of teams finished equal on points. I reckon everyone would be pretty excited. I also reckon that, knowing the competition is so close, there would be increased emphasis on defensive teams to play a more attacking style, and for attacking teams to tighten up their defence in the interests of getting a for and against advantage. This would create it's own little intrigues and be interesting to follow in and of itself. Just my opinion. In any event, I think most agree the new system is far superior to the Macintyre.

In general the AFL/former ARL system is superior and has less anomalies. You get less combinations but I don't think that's too important. One thing I have picked up on, however... Like TomC said, the swap-over produces an interesting result for the Grand Final Qualifier... the minor premier is "rewarded" with a higher ranking opponent in week 3 (ie team 3 instead of team 4). Not sure if this is a fair thing. I know it's been done to avoid repeat games and to ensure opponents in week 1 can still meet in the GF, hence the eppeal of the McIntyre system. I'd be keen to see a top 6, although if we expand to 18 teams this won't happen.

International - England, Great Britain (the qualification rules are a bit hard to follow) has played in Sydney 3 times in 20 years...Now soccer (Victoria) or football (NSW) is the international game..

That's a good thing CC. The next few items on the ARLC agenda 1. Round the corners off on the playing field 2. Scrap the "scrum" and introduce a Ball in/bounce 3. Introduce another 2 posts at either end of the field 4. Force the ball runner to bounce the ball every 15 meters 5. Increase membership/crowds to a sustainable level I like the way they move! good things are a happening

This is a long overdue reform that the game has needed. The argument in favour of the McIntyre system is that it rewards those teams who WIN in the finals series as opposed to those who may have had a stronger regular season. This is unfair in my opinion but to all those who are complaining about what happened to the Tigers last year, once you have reached the second week of the FInals, if you lose, you're out! In any system including the new system just adopted. So the Tigers losing had nothing at all to do with the McIntyre system and everything to do with the fact that the Tigers were unable to beat their opponent on the day. This system now adopted is infinitely fairer because it rewards regular season performance by guaranteeing the top 4 a double chance AND a home final (for the teams that lose the first week, they have a home final the next week against the winners of 5v8 and 6v7). This is the way it should be giving a significant incentive to finisha s high as you can in the regular season.

"It shows that as usual rugby league people have only a vague understanding of how to market the game." Now let's see, record Pay Tv ratings and SOO ratings in 2011,growth in FTA,record participation levels and sponsorship,record merchandise sales.No idea of marketing LOL.Coming from a self confessed rugby fan,the irony is noted. .Perhaps the code should ensure that a team from each regional area is assured a semi spot,regardless of their performances.Oh wait ,that is being used by another code,rigging anyone? The ESL is doing quite nicely. The top four teams that have busted their guts and achieved(the operative word)over 26 rounds, are entitiled to a second shot at their home ground.If one believes that the play offs (as they get a second chance) will lack innate excitement,one can only suggest they have only a passing interest in the code,or in reality pretend so. The Commission is a "dud " ,because of a decision applauded by the majority of fans.The commmission was set up to act in the best interests of the game.QED it has no idea because their removal of the McIntyre system, happens to be a no brainer. Us leaguies have no idea,yet are quite capable of getting their game on FTA,because of the demand.

Like Superleague.

Have any of those in favour of this change actually thought it through? NRL has botched this again. Is there anyone at NRL HQ with more than half a brain? They should have left it as is and simply tweaked it by saying the higher-ranked side ALWAYS gets home ground advantage in the finals. That would have fixed that problem. If you slog away for 26 weeks to finish top 2 then you should keep your ranking and home ground throughout the finals. Otherwise why have a season at all? Just play an FA cup. If you come 8th you don't deserve to play at home in the finals. What the AFL system does now in week 1 is give team 8 a match against team 5 rather than team 1. Is this fair? No. Why should team 1 have to play team 4 instead of team 8? 8-team finals are joke and reward mediocrity. The AFL finals in week 1 are now humdrum, absolutely no drama of who will be the teams to miss out - you know it will be two from the bottom 4, whereas in NRL it could have been anyone from 3 to 8. Yes it seems unfair if 3 drops out but if they cannot get psyched up enough to beat 6 in the first week of the finals then they don't deserve to be there. And now they'll be playing team 2 - go figure. Mind you, due to the gladiatorial, closely-fought (spacewise) nature of NRL there will always be more upsets in NRL finals than AFL where superior fitness almost always wins the day - go back and look at finals resuIts from 10 years to see this is the case. The AFL changed because team 3 got knocked out years ago and that club complained. The NRL system allows the top teams to play much weaker teams in week 1. Why would the top teams think a change to this is better. Again it is rewarding medocrity.

It's not the decision of the NRL,but the ARLC.Get the facts right RedB. One thing about the game they don't rush things.Rushing things at times,can be embarrassing.

Sheek, so did I :)