Let’s be honest: the AFL season fixturing is unfair and a disgrace to the ideals of a fair and even competition. How can you fit 18 teams into the 22-24 round parameters preferred by the AFL and not have unevenness in the draw?
My fixture guide solves the problem and could be the way forward for the AFL.
We first have to understand the parameters when trying to come up with a new fixture. Obviously the fairest solution for all 18 clubs would be to have a play-once competition with 17 rounds or play-twice home-and-away competition with 34 rounds.
Unfortunately, both scenarios are not viable for the AFL who have expressed an unmovable desire to have a 22-24 game home-and-away regular season.
There are other factors that have to be addressed. The issue of big marquee games such as the yearly ANZAC clashes and various local derbies have to be retained as much as possible.
The current fixture system is currently unfair for a number of reasons. Some clubs get ‘easier’ draws by playing the lowly sides more often. Some clubs receive receive a disproportional number of interstate away matches. Meanwhile the whole tanking situation by the lower clubs adds yet another dilemma.
My AFL fixture provides a 23-game home-and-away regular season. The 23-game number begins with Stage One of the home-and-away season (rounds 1-17). During this period, every team plays each other once.
We then move on to Stage Two of a further six rounds of matches where teams play three games at home and three away to complete the end of the 23-game home and away regular season.
The contentious issue of who plays whom and where is finally resolved in my fixture.
As of this week, we have arrived at the end of round 18 in the AFL 2012 season.
In the below table all the clubs are listed in ladder order. They have been divided into four groups (top four; 5th-8th; 9th-14th; and bottom four).
1. Sydney
2. Hawthorn
3. Adelaide
4. Collingwood
5. West Coast
6. Geelong
7. Essendon
8. North Melbourne
9. Fremantle
10. St Kilda
11. Carlton
12. Richmond
13. Brisbane
14. Port Adelaide
15. Western Bulldogs
16. Melbourne
17. Gold Coast
18. GWS
The group represented at the bottom (teams 15-18 after round 17) become officially relegated for the remainder of the season and cannot make the finals.
These bottom four clubs proceed play to each other twice, once home and once away, for a total six games until they complete their 23-game season.
This scenario provides these clubs with valuable end-of-season competitive matches against each other. It also gives these clubs the chance to blood kids and the supporters six winnable matches to look forward to at the end of the season.
Pushing the bottom four clubs into their own round-robin fixture also protects the integrity of the competition as tanking would become a non-issue.
Clubs above them would not benefit unfairly by playing matches against bottom four clubs in their race for important top-eight positions on the ladder. Also, imagine the sheer excitement as we approach round 17 and we have several clubs desperately trying to avoid getting relegated.
For the rest of the competition, everyone is alive. Teams from first to 14th after the completion of round 17 will undergo an important ballot/lottery system of selecting their fixture list for the remaining six matches.
The idea is to ensure the most even fixture list for all clubs, thus matches played in those last 6 rounds are divided equally, with every team playing the same amount of matches against teams in the top four, fifth to eighth and ninth to 14th.
For the top four, the six remaining matches would look like this: one match against a fellow top-four team, two matches against any two of the 5th-8th placed team and three matches against any three of the teams from the 9th-14th group.
These six matches reward the top four team for finishing at the top by having to play only one more match in the season against a fellow top four side.
Obviously all the six matches in this phase of the season will be played at the venue opposite to the corresponding fixture earlier in the season.
For teams in the bottom half of the top eight after round 17, their remaining matches would involve two matches against any two of the top four, one match against another team in their group and three matches against any three out of the 9th-14th placed teams.
For the teams between ninth and 14th, their six matches will consist of two matches against any two of the top four teams and two matches against any two of the teams finishing fifth-eighth. They will alo play two matches against teams in their own group.
The advantage of this fixturing format is clear. It creates an extremely even competition for every club and provides the AFL with an exciting Stage Two of the regular season. Importantly for the league, it also provides the necessary amount of games (23).
The details and the exact method of lottery and selection of Stage Two fixtures will still need to be ironed out. There might perhaps even be the capacity to preselect preferences at this stage, giving preference for interstate teams to draw its derby rival at the ballot.
I can see it unfold in my mind’s eye.
It is Sunday night and the last match of round 17 in the AFL 2013 season has just finished. We cross live to a TV special where the ballot/lottery for Stage 2 of the AFL season will be held.
Every player, every coach, every club administrator and every fan will be on the edge of their seat as the draw is read out and teams find out who they are playing in the last six games of the season.
The excitement and suspense would thrill everyone but the main satisfaction would be the knowledge that finally the AFL regular season will be as fair and even as possible.
perthling
Guest
I had a very similar thought about 5 years ago, and was going to submit to the AFL (but as if that would ever be listened to!), i.e. three "divisions" of 6 teams; play your own twice, blah blah blah = 22 games. The groupings wouldn't need to be permanent, but you could ensure the local derbies/showdowns remain always paired. If you were to look at adjusted* ladder positions, you would assign two teams from the top, middle and bottom 6 to each "division". It will even out the final ladder result, so the top 8 positions (even as they currently proceed to finals) would still be fairer. Teams like Hawthorn, Collingwood and West Coast need to be applauded for their ladder results this year, considering they only played lowly sides (GC, GWS and Melbourne) once each; whereas North Melbourne and Adelaide got 2 extra wins from playing these sides more often. From Perthling, the guy that invented the table-top card game (that was bastardised and put into publication by Team Coach - if anyone wants the original version of the game, drop me a line - perthling[at]iinet.net.au) *Adjusted = if anyone's keen, I can show you this thought. Can't display here without getting stupidly wordy, but basically adjusts for teams that have played each other 6 times in the last 3 years along with those that have only matched up 3 times in 3 years.
Rob
Guest
I think the problem will be resolved within 10 years when another 2 teams are introduced - Tassie, Nth Qld, 3rd WA team or Canberra. Because the game will be even faster, there will be a 19 game fixture (all teams play once) with 2 byes and an expanded finals campaign. The solution is within reach.
Baz
Guest
Can't really tell what you divisions are from the post. I assume you have them in 3 divisions of 6. First 6 then next 6 then last. The issue with this is only the last 6 would do any real travelling. The idea is to make the divisions fairly even in terms of travel. The Melbourne teams are never going to travel as much, but if they are all in the one division then, the travel will be virtually nil. You have to leave Perth teams in 1 and Brisbane teams in another, as they have the farthest to travel and games in home tows are gold. You could probably put Sydney sides in with Brisbane, as it is a shorter distance for Brisbane and about the same as traveling to Melbourne for Sydney. Put Hawthorn and North in with the Adelaide teams, because they play some games in Tassy, so there is travell in there, but not as much as travelling to Perth. And maybe Geelong as well (the long drive on top of the flight). Then you just have to divide the other Melbourne teams. So you get Brisbane, Gold Coast, Sydney and GWS with maybe Melbourne and St Kilda. Adelaide, Port Adelaide, Hawthorn, North Melbourne and Geelong with maybe Richmond. West Coast and Fremantle with rest, maybe Carlton, Collingwood, Essendon and Western Bulldogs. The Melbourne based teams could be divided differently. That is just an example.
Thomas Sutherland
Guest
My idea for an AFL conference is to be devided like this : Carlton, Collingwood, Richmond, Essendon, Melbourne, Geelong St Kilda, Western Bulldogs, North Melbourne, Hawthorn Greater Western Sydney, Sydney Swans, Brisbane Lions, Gold Coast West Coast, Fremantle, Adelaide, Port Adelaide
Baz
Guest
2 problems. 1, AFL current ly have a 22 game season with 1 bye each. I don't think they want to increase this. 2, not being able to fixture games for rounds 18 - 23 until the end of round 17, would be a logistical nightmare. In theory I like the idea, but it would be to hard to impliment. The 3 conference idea by ren (below) would be far simpler way of making the qualifing rounds more even. The biggest problem with his idea is how to decide on which teams to group together.
Baz
Guest
100% agree with the principal. It's the onnly way to guaranty that you are competeing on a level footing. Yes some will argue that there division is harder, but at least you can be sure the teams that can knock you out are playing the same teams that you are.
ren
Guest
the only answer to developing a fair fixture is to establish divisions or conferences (name is irrelevant). Three groups of 6 teas each.Teams play every team in their group twice and all other teams once. top two teams from each group proceed to finals along with two wildcards (next two best performing teams). Teams are seeded 1-8 and the finals progress under the current system. The important bit is to ensure that the groups are permanent so that rivalries can develop and be maintained between teams in the same group. This ensures that teams compete against sides with identical fixturesfor a spot in the finals. the wildcards ensure that we maintain a op eight and ensure that a team in a strong group isnt pnuished. At the end of the season the best team will win the premiership regardless of the fixture etc.
Jano
Guest
Sounds great. The AFL will have to give up about $200M of the TV deal but a good idea. It may be more than $200M, as there would be no return games of the blockbusters. Broadcasters can cnly count on one Derby, Q clash, Showdown and the Sydney game, each year. Unless both SA, WA, NSW or QLD teams are in that bottom 4 teams then they will have 3 in a year. No certainty of a second ANZAC, Dreamtime or rivalry round clash. Venues for the last rounds could also be an issue, plus fans booking trips to see games. I am not sure about deals at Hobart, Launcestion, Darwin Cairns, Canberra, Olymic Stadium or Geelong. I know that there is a minimum number of games at MCG and Docklands but I am sure that the "G" will not want any of the bottom 4 end of season fixture and I bet that the non Melbourne grounds will host many of those games. I am very happy that you call it a FIXture and not a draw. All of these petty issues and concerns can be resolved IF the AFL wanted a fair competition. Unfortunatly this expanded VFL competition is not and never will be fair.