Kenneth Gordon McIntyre OBE was a man of many talents: author, lawyer, politician, historian, mathematician. It is with some shame, then, that his legacy in Australian popular culture appears to be inextricably linked with that of a maligned rugby league finals system.
And by maligned, I mean intensely despised.
Much like the night time Grand Finals that sent millions of small children to bed in tears at half time, the McIntyre finals system was a phenomena that appeared to only have the support of a powerful minority.
Here was a finals system so unloved that in its demise it had become the flatulent, native fauna eating, one-eared tom cat that nobody in the neighbourhood wanted to claim ownership of.
This can be seen by the press reports this week, all seemingly flick passing and handballing ownership of the system.
The papers have spoken of the NRL from 2012 adopting the ‘AFL’s final system,’ by which of course they mean the 95 ARL finals system.
In turn the NRL has dumped ‘it’s’ McIntyre system, despite the fact that the AFL and the VFL had in the past used versions of McIntyre previous to the NRL adopting it. For the casual sports fan, it’s all a bit confusing.
Fitting, as confusion seemed to be the overwhelming reaction to the McIntyre system. Many a frustrating September was spent rehashing the finals framework to inattentive work colleagues, trying to explain what next week’s games would be.
To which the only true answer was that ‘you’ll have to wait and see’.
This was an annoyance for spectators, but must have been a logistical and psychological nightmare for players and coaches.
Even the most cynical fan would have to feel sorry for the 3rd-6th placed losing sides, sitting around a TV at the leagues club following their match not knowing whether they should be ripping into training, or ripping into a carton of cold beers and fancy dress clothes.
Sports fans, by and large, crave simplicity, and rugby league can lay claim to being one of the simplest games of all. But, to be simple is to be great, and taking your finals system from a former mathematician who liked to explore Portuguese naval history in his spare time is probably over complicating things a little bit.
This is not to say intelligent minds should be driven away from rugby league. It’s just that, as lifelong Manly fan and world renowned author Thomas Keneally learned after the lukewarm reception to his ‘Blow that Whistle’ television ad, sometimes you just have to give the proles what we want.
So Mr McIntyre, on behalf of the rugby league fraternity, I would like to acknowledge your very successful life and crazy Portuguese conspiracy theories.
You were indeed a man who succeeded in many fields.
However, for mine, your finals system will serve a special place in the dark recesses of my rugby league memory, and will keep good company their with unlimited interchange, the 1997 NSW Origin jerseys and Wollongong Showground greyhound track.
And it looks to me like this time, the fans have beaten the system.
Chris Chard
Expert
Hi Kim Sorry for the stupidly late reply, somehow it slipped through the net. Yours is an interesting tale, don't really know what to say. Obviously with McIntyre the man who came up with the system has gotten the credit for creating the system, and you would assume anyone else who came up with a final system would be eligible for some credit if they had proof. In saying that though I have been privvy to similar situations where an individual has sent in an idea to the league or an individual club, only for that idea to be adopted without any recognition. Unfortunately these things are almost always too hard to prove and not worth it in the long run, but sometimes just some acknowledgment and a couple of tickets would be nice for your effort. This is something that seems to happen more often now that ideas are more easily exchanged via fans and clubs via social media sources. I guess the other way to do it is to float your ideas in another format (i.e. the Roar!) before sending them off . That's unless you want to star in a Today Tonight interview... All the best with it eh, Cheers CC
Queensland's game is rugby league
Guest
The minor premiers could play a "Best of the Rest" team during the second week of the finals. That way they'll gain vital match practice ahead of their third week match.
Queensland's game is rugby league
Guest
Kim, The leagues should give credit to the persons who devise these system.
Kim Crawford
Guest
In 1994, before the McIntyre System had been used by the AFL, I sent them a list of the flaws that could (and eventually did) occur using this system. I also sent them my Crawford Final 8 System as a better alternative, then in 1995 I sent it to the ARL who were about to introduce their own final 8 which was also seriously flawed. The ARL switched to my system just weeks before the start of their 1996 finals series ( I had been writing to them and the clubs for nearly 2 years) then stopped using it because of the Super league split. The AFL introduced my system in 2000, the same year that the NRL made the staggering decision to take on the McIntyre System that had so badly failed in the AFL. After years of anguish the NRL has now reintroduced my system. Funny how both of these National Sporting Leagues claimed my Crawford Final 8 System as their own when they realised that it was the best available and they needed to use it. Prior to this they were thanking me for my efforts but telling me my system would not work effectively. Time has proved them wrong, now it would be nice for both Leagues to be honest and admit the true origin of this system. That would be the decent thing to do. Let's see if they have the moral and ethical "balls" to do the right thing.
Kim Crawford
Guest
Does anyone know the true origin of the system that has been adopted by the NRL? The AFL first used it in the year 2000, but the ARL previously used it in 1996 changing from the system they had used the previous year just weeks before the start of their finals series. Why the late change? I first sent this system to the AFL in 1994 telling them the problems that could arise with the McIntyre System and offering my system as a fairer and more easily understood system. They told me my "Crawford Final 8 System" would not work and that supporters would accept the McIntyre System and its workings. When I heard the ARL were going to use a Final 8 in 1995 I sent them my system but they opted for an alternate system that was two final 4's with the winners playing off in the Grand Final. I spent 2 years telling the ARL the flaws of this system before they finally realised what I was telling them was correct and my system was far superior. When they started using my system they denied any knowledge of me sending it to them (Ihave letters that prove otherwise). When the AFL eventually switched to my system, after I had been promoting it to them for 6 years, they also claimed to have devised it themselves and gave no recognition for all the time and effort I had to put in to make these leagues realise it was the best system they could use. In the past leagues did recognise the people who devised their finals systems but this is obviously no longer the case. Should they be allowed to tell these lies or should we expect honesty from these National Sporting Leagues. They impose high standards of behavior from their players, coaches, clubs and supporters so maybe they to should have high moral and ethical standards. I know other people lay claim to this system but I have all the documentation that proves I was the first to send it to both leagues. What do you think Chris? Is any of this important? Should leagues recognise the efforts of people who try to help them or simply ignore them and claim credit for themselves?
Queensland's game is rugby league
Guest
Here's a 7 team play-off system that I thought up over the last 50 minutes. I don't know if it's a clone of the 7 team format that was used by the ARL in 1997, if so then my apologies to the ARL for coming up with an identical idea. Week 1 Match #1 Major Qualifying Final 2 (Home) vs 3 (Away) Match #2 Minor Qualifying Final 4 (Home) vs 5 (Away) Match #3 Minor Elimination Final 6 (Home) vs 7 (Away) Week 2 Match #4 Major Elimination Final #1 Loser of Major Qualifying Final (Home) vs Loser of Minor Qualifying Final (Away) Match #5 Major Elimination Final #2 Winner of Minor Qualifying Final (Home) vs Winner of Minor Elimination Final (Away) Week 3 Match #6 Semi-Final #1 Minor Premiers (Home) vs Winner of Major Elimination Final #1 (Away) Match #7 Semi-Final #2 Winner of Major Qualifying Final (Home) vs Winner of Major Elimination Final #2 (Away) Week 4 Match #8 Third Place Play-Off Loser of Semi-Final #1 vs Loser of Semi-Final #2 Match #9 Grand Final Winner of Semi-Final #1 vs Winner of Semi-Final #2
Queensland's game is rugby league
Guest
I think they do that for revenue. A top 8 system allows for a total of four games to be played during the first week. Broadcasters love that.
Stomping on Toovey's Face
Guest
question: why did we ever choose the McIntyre system in the first place? Teams deserve to know going into a game whether it is sudden death or not
Nathan of Perth
Guest
My God, it all makes sense now. The tri-lateral commission engineered this!
JVGO
Guest
That's just one time Chris, what about all the other times?
Chris Chard
Expert
Didn't manly win because David Manson didn't call Matthew Rdge held?
JVGO
Guest
Is that why Tony Abbott is the MP for Manly? makes sense I guess.
Chris Chard
Expert
MCintyre 2.0? McIntyre deluxe? McIntyre S? McIntyre Plus?
Gareth
Guest
Yeah, but would the Warriors have lost in Week one with a home game against a lower ranked side? The difference I see is that: Coming 6th under the McIntyre System: Pros - Get a second chance *if* 7th and 8th both lose Cons - Play away against 3rd placed team Coming 6th under the new system: Pros - Home game against lesser opposition Cons - No second chance It's six of one, half a dozen of the other. Given the choice, I'd rather play 7th place at home under threat of sudden death than play 3rd place away with *the chance* of staying alive if we lost. I'm predicting that come September, whoever comes fourth will lose to whoever came first, and everyone will whinge and moan that they go into week 2 off a loss against a 5th-8th team coming off a win.
Nathan of Perth
Guest
Yes, if you can't fight your way in to the top 4 then it hardly seems just to make your claim for best team in the land (ostensibly adjudged by the Grand Final) on the back of a mere three games. If your team really is the greatest and just got done over by injury or what have you, then that is what 5-8th is for; you can perform the absolutely extraordinary to prove that falling out of the top 4 was simply a fluke of outside circumstances. Also, this now gives you two narrative battles taking place at the end of the season. The battle for the Top 4 and the separate battle for the Top 8.
Gareth
Guest
Okay, but ultimately if the Tigers wanted a Grand Final berth, they should have done what Brisbane did the week before and given the Warriors a flogging. By the new system, they would have had to play Melbourne in Melbourne, and given they lost their regular season game against them at Leichhardt - that seems like a big ask. How is an away game against the Minor Premiers a reward for coming fourth when compared to a home game against the team who came fifth? In the Second week, they get to play the 6th placed team *at home* (albeit with a caveat that the home ground must meet certain standards). I get the frustration, but don't think they were grossly disadvantaged. Under the new system - *in theory* they would have lost to the more favoured Storm in Week one, and come up against the Warriors who *in theory* should have easily accounted for the Cowboys at home. And they're in the exact same position of having to beat the Warriors to stay alive. Both systems have their merits and reward the Top four in different ways - and no matter what system you have, there will always be upsetting resuults in finals footy.
sheek
Guest
Brett/Nathan, I agree with Nathan here (sorry Brett). He has annunciated it well - the injustices of the old system far outweigh the advantages of unpredictability factor. Realistically, if you don't finish in the top 4 during 22-24 weeks of home & away regular season matches, then you really don't deserve to win the premiership. You're simply not consistently good enough. And winning any comp, should reward quality of performance & consistency of quality. Having said that, there will come the time when a team form the bottom 4 (out of top eight) who will win all 3 finals matches to claim the premiership. But we shouldn't want it to happen too often.
Jaredsbro
Roar Guru
I'm not blaming it...not really! But it isn't particularly helping. What I'd rather not have in Rugby League is a straight knock-out, or something closely resembling it...otherwise as you say there's no point playing well until you're in the eight at the end of the season. But also the idea that the code is relying on these top 4 teams by in large goes against the notion that the comps supposed to be national or in the NRL's case All-Australasian...this means some markets will miss out with a realistic chance. It improves chances, it doesn't give anything to anyone a la the Warriors last year!
Jaredsbro
Roar Guru
That's an interesting take on it, thanks for that by the way :) I'm not so sure though. State of Origin may change a few results, but what I've seen of late is that many teams rise to the challenge. Here the Broncos are a little abnormal, in that many of the Sydney clubs with two or three Origin players say have got more of an advantage vs Brisbane, which usually has many more than three when it comes to the last few years. Whereas with the McIntyre system everyone in the top 4 has the same disadvantage in the first week...the outcome however depends on those who take advantage of it...usually teams like Paramatta or the Warriors with more to lose than simply a chance to progress or to win.
Andrew
Guest
NRL can never be like that while State of Origin has such a big influence on the table. Just too many players missing during the middle of the season (not to mention player burn out), which makes a difference, even if it's only 2 points, it's usually the difference between finishing in the top 4, or even the top 8.