The dust is settling over David Gallop’s surprise resignation as the NRL’s CEO after ten years at the helm, but the challenge remains to keep his legacy intact.
The Australian Rugby League Independent Commission is now solely charged with ensuring the intricacies put in place during the Gallop tenure continue to develop and grow throughout all aspects of the game of rugby league.
It has been well documented that the commission’s top priority is to finalise the code’s forthcoming television-rights deal.
Furthermore, the commission must ensure all facets of the game – from the NRL teams and players down to those at the developing grass roots level – are financially secure.
Yet there’s no point focusing all the available resources solely on the ‘big fish’ when there are so many other issues yet to be resolved.
The commission’s early-season report card looks promising with the rightful hardening of the stance it has taken on its players in relation to violence against women.
Moreover, it should be praised for scrapping of the cumbersome McIntyre system in preference to the AFL finals series method, which so many experts and pundits alike had constantly called for throughout Gallop’s reign.
The AFL disbanded the McIntyre system back in the late 1990s, instead opting for the highly popular ‘two-tiered’ finals pool system.
This has been met with resounding success since its inception at the turn of the century.
It’s a big tick to the rugby-league commission for having the initiative to adopt another code’s proven system in an attempt to enhance their own game.
But why stop there?
Gallop was instrumental in introducing the exciting golden-point extra-time concept.
Whether you love it or loathe it, there’s no denying that those final added minutes add edge-of-the-seat entertainment to the game.
However, the extra-time tie-breaker model could do with some tinkering.
The first place to look is none other than on the dejected faces of those players who have just watched a field goal, whether spectacular or just plain flimsy, sail directly over the crossbar of their defending goal posts.
Any team that remains unbeaten after 80 minutes of a thrilling encounter must walk away with some form of recognition in terms of competition points.
Likewise, why should a team who fails to secure a win within regulation time take all of the spoils!
As per the AFL-sought finals series adaptation, the rugby league commission need look no further than the US-based National Hockey League (NHL).
In this competition, teams are awarded three points for a regulation time win, two points for an overtime win, one point for an overtime loss and zero points for a regulation time loss.
Should a deadlock at the conclusion of the designated extra-time period still remain, a sequence of penalty shoot-outs ensue to determine the victor.
The overtime winning and losing teams are then awarded the two and one points respectively.
Unlike the NHL, the rugby-league commission would need to keep its time-sanctioned golden-point rule as status quo in awarding each team a solitary point where the deadlock remains unbroken.
It is of some significance that through 14 rounds of the current 2012 NRL Premiership, there have been six games to date that have ended after 80 minutes with the scores all locked up.
All six having been decided in less than the allotted 10 minutes of golden-point extra time.
A substantially advantageous by-product of the overtime win/loss points system is that ties will no longer be so significant to the final ladder.
Whereas the often dreaded for-and-against method of determining standings throughout the regular season ultimately plays a big part in determining the final eight come September, the importance is somewhat reduced under the NHL formula.
It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out there are a number of NRL teams who aren’t as flamboyant as others.
Those teams generally defend with grim determination and concede very few points.
More often than not these teams do just enough in attack to ebb out a win by a few points.
In turn, they tend to have a lesser points-differential ratio.
With teams potentially earning three, two or one points per round, the ladder remains just as congested.
However, the NHL method provides a truer reflection of the outcome of individual games.
A re-formulated ladder sees many teams separated by a solitary competition point on the ladder, rather than having five or six teams on the same number of points.
This prevents the sequential order being resolved by how many game points they score or concede throughout the season.
The adjusted table below provides an indication as to how the 2012 NRL competition standings would look after 14 rounds with the introduction of the NHL-style 3-2-1 points system.
Let’s hope that the new commission continues its open-minded approach and has a good look at this one…
Round 14 – NHL-style 3-2-1 Proposed Ladder
Team P W OTW OTL L D B F A +/- Pts
1.Storm 13 11 0 0 2 0 1 358 153 205 36
2.Broncos 13 9 0 0 4 0 1 332 236 96 30
3.Sharks 13 8 0 1 4 0 1 242 228 14 28
4.Bulldogs 13 8 0 0 5 0 1 285 193 92 27
5.Sea Eagles 13 8 0 0 5 0 1 228 211 17 27
6.Wests Tigers 13 6 2 1 4 0 1 269 229 40 26
7.Rabbitohs 12 5 2 0 5 0 2 268 265 3 25
8.Cowboys 13 7 0 0 6 0 1 312 250 62 24
9.Dragons 13 5 1 2 5 0 1 190 224 -34 22
10.Warriors 13 6 0 0 7 0 1 302 304 -2 21
11.Titans 13 5 0 1 7 0 1 209 245 -36 19
12.Raiders 13 5 0 0 8 0 1 249 318 -69 18
13.Roosters 13 5 0 0 8 0 1 216 312 -96 18
14.Knights 13 4 0 1 8 0 1 208 279 -71 16
15.Panthers 13 3 1 0 9 0 1 212 297 -85 14
16.Eels 12 2 0 0 10 0 2 208 344 -136 12
NHL Fan
Guest
US based league?
DrBill
Guest
I find the idea interesting however here's the top 8 after round 16 using the Hockey style 3-2-1 scoring system. You'll note that the only change in position is that the Sharks move from fourth (for and against) to second for an 'overtime loss'. It seems unnecessarily complicated when we could just as easily scrap golden point and award a draw after 10 mins extra time. Team P W OTW OTL L D B F A +/- Pts 1. Storm 15 12 0 0 3 0 1 388 195 193 39 2. Sharks 14 9 0 1 5 0 2 262 247 15 34 3. Bulldogs 15 10 0 0 5 0 1 333 217 116 33 4. Broncos 15 10 0 0 5 0 1 358 260 98 33 5. Cowboys 15 9 0 0 6 0 1 364 268 96 30 6. Sea Eagles 15 9 0 0 6 0 1 302 251 51 30 7. Rabbitohs 14 8 2 0 6 0 2 304 297 7 28 8. Wests Tigers 15 8 2 1 7 0 1 317 309 8 26
Mark Roth
Guest
You want to play Canadian football?
Gavin
Guest
Ditto, this is the best of the alternative points systems.
Ripper Eater
Guest
Yeah let's increase drop goals to 3 points and hand out a point for missing kicks at goal.
turbodewd
Guest
Golden try auto win then leader after 10 mins sounds good. But it wouldnt work. I mean teams would first attempt the easiest bit - the FG so they can win the 10min game. But if youre 1 behind your team will attempt the FG before a try in order to get that part back to even Steven. Golden Point needs no tweaking whatsoever. If your team has a good FG kicker and good defence AND can hack the tension then they will prevail.
BarnabusXI
Roar Rookie
Oh and no points for byes. I don't know why that annoys me so much, but I really do hate it that teams get points for the week off. If everyone gets the same, then why have them at all? Seems to be just to make the teams down the bottom appear to have more points than they should.
oikee
Guest
I just think 5 minutes each way is the simple answer. And i also dont mind 1 point each for a draw after 80 minutes, if you win after the next 10 minutes of overtime, then you get the 2 points, not 3. If it is a draw after 90 minutes, again, 1 point each. It is simple, it is common sense, let it be written, let it be done. I dont think we need the 3 points, this just makes the whole thing more confusing. Like 0 and 1's with computers, keep it simple, it works. 1 point each for a draw, after 90 minutes, still a draw, one popint each, if you win after 90 minutes, you get 2 points, the other team gets 1 for drawing after 80 minutes, so they get rewarded for flogging hteir guts after 80 minutes. Hope you understand that, its simple common sense, take away the spelling errors.
turbodewd
Guest
How many teams have failed to win the grand final due to losing a golden point game? How many teams have failed to make the top 8 due to losing a golden point game? You can make this change...but it barely make a difference to anything. Seriously. It will make almost no difference to anything. The best team around playoffs time will win the GF no matter what.
BarnabusXI
Roar Rookie
I suppose its not that different to the NHL system but i wouldn't mind seeing a points system where a win in regulation is 4 points, lose in regulation zero (as per the current AFL). Games that are decided in golden point split the 4 points as- 3 to the winner, 1 to the loser. And games where its not decided in golden point 2 each- for the draw. I just feel that losing in extra time shouldn't go completely unrewarded. But I'd definitely still like the draw to be an option in the home and away season.
Sportsflow
Roar Rookie
Thanks Byron, glad you liked the option presented - let's hope that the Australian Rugby League Commission do 'bring it on'!
Sportsflow
Roar Rookie
Thanks for the clarification Mark - seems like I did get a little bit ahead of myself there as I know that the NHL are pushing for the 3-2-1 system as an expansion on their current points awarded. It was proposed in 2004 for the 04/05 NHL season, but was put on hold due to the player lockout. It was again put forward by the NHL due to its popularity, but the all-powerful NHL team owners rejected the proposal in 2007. It is interesting to note that some of the US college conferences have recently brought the 3-2-1 system in so the momentum looks to be gaining once again. I agree with your sentiments in that it's a far more sensible approach to have the same amount of points on offer from the start to the finish of any sporting contest.
Patrick Angel
Roar Guru
Love the 3-2-1, but I'd love golden try with the leader after 10 minutes if no try the winner. However, in a random sequence of events, what would happen if someone nailed 5 field goals in that time, the other team scores and fails to convert?
Sportsflow
Roar Rookie
Thanks for the vote there peeeko - hopefully the commission are looking at something along those lines already.
Sportsflow
Roar Rookie
I certainly agree with you there Football United in that the draw does make the table more interesting, however, I doubt that they will go back in that direction given the popularity of the golden point - not to mention extra viewer/advertiser time. Hopefully there will be some sort of compromise though.
Byron
Guest
The International Hockey, including the Olympics, all use the 3-2-1 method and it’s believed that the NHL whilst not officially coming out and saying it, will definitely use it next season as most of the teams, players and fans are all calling for it because as it stands there are only two points on offer at the commencement of each game and they remarkably add an extra point to the pool if it goes to overtime. I think it would be a great idea if the NRL were to introduce the 3-2-1 points system as it would make the competition table far more interesting with 3 points on offer every game and depending on the scenario, it could be split into a variety of different ways. Bring it on.
Mark Roth
Guest
Personally I would be quite happy with a draw being a draw. If that cannot be done, why not have a different 2-1-0 system: two points for a win in 80 minutes, 1 point for a win in golden point, 0 points for a loss of any kind. Also, for the record, the 3-2-1-0 system described in the article is used by international hockey, but not the NHL. In the NHL's home and away season, teams earn two points for every win (in regulation, in sudden death overtime, by the shootout); one point for a loss in overtime or a shootout and no points for a loss after sixty minutes. That idiotic system has the nonsensical effect of making different matches worth different numbers points. Some matches award 2 points to the winner and zero points to the loser, while others are three point matches with the extra point going to the loser. I cannot say that it is happened yet, but I am waiting for the day when two teams agree to go to overtime so each can take the point they need to make the finals--or worse one team agrees to out-rightly lose a game by sudden death overtime goal in exchange for being allowed to simply take the game to overtime . After all, giving away the so-called "loser's point" doesn't cost the winning team anything on the day.
peeeko
Roar Guru
its not a bad idea with some merit
Football United
Guest
or we could just go back to having a draw like it should be. honestly hate it when the nrl go around changing the rules like they own the game.