With 22 rounds, the AFL will never have a fully even draw, but I have come up with a solution that gives each team a fair draw and, just as importantly, maximises big matches for good crowd attendances and TV ratings.
Here is my proposal:
All teams play each other once from rounds 1-18 (17 games plus a bye for each team). After 18 rounds, teams are split into three groups – first-sixth, seventh-12th and 13th-18th.
Teams then play all other teams in their group a second time – this gives each team 22 games.
After Round 18, there is a need for three different ladders. The top division play for the top six places on the ladder. The middle division play for the places seventh-12th. The bottom division play for placings 13th-18th – this means they can’t make the finals, but I don’t ever recall a team jumping from 13th to eighth in the final five weeks anyway.
Wins from before Round 18 are still counted towards each team’s total, however a team placed seventh after Round 18 can’t finish higher than that, even if they finish Round 23 with more wins than one of the top six teams.
This is a fair and balanced draw for all teams but also guarantees lots of blockbuster matches, with the final five rounds of the season producing teams playing off for top four positions or fighting it out for the last two spots in the eight.
The AFL could remove the incentive to tank as well as add more interest in the bottom group by giving the top draft picks to the team that finshes 13th (i.e. top of the bottom group), second pick to 14th and so on.
No team placed 10th-12th is going to tank to get in the bottom group, as being 12th after Round 18 has them still in the hunt for the finals.
It also gives teams down the bottom of the ladder more chance to win games. For example, this year Western Bulldogs and Brisbane only play GWS once, under my proposal it would happen twice (assuming those two teams were in the bottom six after Round 18).
There is a negative in that some big match-ups may only occur once a year – derby, showdown, Collingwood v Essendon, etc. – but this would be made up for by more competitive matches at the business end of the season.
Reserving stadiums may also be difficult but after 12 rounds, the AFL would have a rough idea of who would be where and would be able make sure stadiums used for other events can be reserved as necessary.
The format may also result in some teams getting two home games against the same team within the same season, but this would be a very rare occurrence.
Imagine these possible Round 23 scenarios if my proposal was in effect this year:
– Essendon versus Fremantle in the final round for the last top four spot.
– Carlton versus Richmond for the final top eight spot.
– Melbourne versus GWS for the spoon.
These type of match-ups would be occurring throughout the final five weeks of competition, effectively creating a finals series before the finals even start.
Radelaide
Guest
I like this idea.
Dan of SA
Guest
"This year the AFL tried to be fairer and had all bottom 4 teams from 2012 play eacj other twice. This turns out to be unfair due to Port Adelaides rise up the ladder" Do some research mate. First of all Port did not finish in the bottom 4. Secondly, of all the clubs that missed the finals last year, Port this year only play GC, GWS and Carlton twice. They played GWS once last year and GC once in each of their two seasons, so were due for a double up against these teams.
Patrick Hargreaves
Roar Guru
Or each team plays 22 games, once each, and rotating every year play teams twice, so the last 4 rounds are different year to year.
Me too
Guest
The AFL is a non profit organization and has stated as one of its guiding principals in its annual report 'An even competition'.
Me too
Guest
History suggests no one has a chance from outside the top four in the current format. And you are suggesting a team in seventh with five games left is not given the chance? What happens in a close season where only a game or two separates seventh from fourth? And only percentage separates sixth and seventh, with the latter in far better form over the most recent weeks? We also saw last season Essendon in sixth after 17 rounds, then fall to 11th, Not too much of a stretch to see a team in a similar position repeat the dose after 18 rounds. The fixture will remain unfair as long as the team numbers mean not every one plays each other twice. So to minimize simply create a rolling draw. Over three seasons it will even out if derbies are kept. Not perfect but as close as we will get for the foreseeable future.
David Jones
Roar Rookie
The AFL is a business and rightly sets the draw to maximise attendances, TV ratings and revenue.
Jsteel
Roar Pro
Why not allow the top 9 teams from the previous year to have the extra home game in rounds 1-17, and then the top 3 of each group for the remainder of the year.
Damo
Guest
Or still play 22 rounds, but for effectively only 17 results. Each team is able to get only exactly 4 points against each other team. If they meet once, it's still for 4 points. But if they meet twice, it's for only 2 points per match. The best double-ups will continue to be the local derbies and other blockbusters. So schedule them during the opening 5 rounds and the last 5 rounds (for 2 points a match), with the season's middle 12 rounds then being the 12 one-off match-ups. It also means that each team will play every other team once during the first 17 rounds 1-17, and once during the last 17 rounds 6-22. If it sounds radical, trial it in a lesser competition first, that also has an uneven and so possibly unfair draw. Rugby has bonus points, and soccer has 3 points for a win but only 1 point for a draw. So tweaking points to achieve a fairer table isn't really a new idea...
Scubloke
Guest
I'd like to see relegation/ promotion brought in. The premier team in each state league play each other in some sort of end of season comp, the winners get promoted, with the wooden spooners in the AFL relegated. Dunno how you would deal with the occasional imbalances in team numbers which would occur in state level leagues though.
John Hamilton
Roar Pro
But 6th can't drop any lower plus gets the chance to finish top 4. 7th will still have to win 2-3 of it's final 5 to make the 8 and even if they manage that, they are guaranteed an away match against 6th.
Timmuh
Roar Guru
There is also the fact that 7th gets a much easier run home than 6th, far more skewed than the current (lack of) system tends to deliver.
Gr8rWeStr
Guest
The fairest solution to the AFL draw conundrum is to split the competition into 3 set 6 team groups, each with their own table. Each team in each group plays equivalent H&A schedule (H&A against own group, H against other group 1 and A against other group 2; other group 1 & group 2 alternate each year). The solution suggested in this article relies on the often expressed idea that playing a team H or A does not impact on fairness. While this is effectively the case for Victorian teams, where all but a few Geelong games are played on either MCG or Etihad, it is certainly not true for non-Victorian teams and, therefore, is not a fair draw. Would supporters of Victorian teams be happy to play all their matches against interstate teams away under a play everybody once draw?
John Hamilton
Roar Pro
Even with 16 teams, that is a 30 round season (plus any byes you add to the fixture). Then add finals on top and it is hardly viable
John Hamilton
Roar Pro
It is a flaw but not fatal. Every team is guaranteed 10 home games and has a greater than 50% chance of getting 11. This can be accommodated in contracts with sponsors etc. In the rare occurences where teams get 10 or 12 home games, they can be guaranteed 11 home games the following year if the AFL makes sure that they get 9 home games for the round robin section. Keeping a tally of which clubs have had extra home games is not that hard and the AFL would be able to make sure that over time no club is getting either losing or gaining a home game regularly. I am not selling this proposal as the ideal solution. But I think it is a lot fairer and commercially attractive than the current setup. This year the AFL tried to be fairer and had all bottom 4 teams from 2012 play eacj other twice. This turns out to be unfair due to Port Adelaides rise up the ladder. This is not the fault of the AFL as no one saw this coming. I use to illustrate that having a fixed draw for 22 rounds is always going to be unfair. My proposal gives all teams an even footing until Rd 18.
Ben of Phnom Penh
Roar Guru
You could do it though the quality of football would drop as the teams would need to rotate more of their squad. I agree though that a couple of mergers in Melbourne would not go astray.
Brad
Guest
Unfortunately the MCG, SCG and Gabba (and presumably the Adelaide oval as well) would all be unavailable for a large chunk of season if this were the case.
Brad
Guest
"Of course a drop from 22 rounds to 17 would be a loss of revenue. How could it not? " I did say a "massive net loss". Anyway, it might have something to do with increased demand for the reduced supply. Maybe. How many rounds does the NFL have again? What's their average attendance?
Pau
Guest
Trim at least two teams away by mergers and that may be possible.
Chairman Kaga
Guest
Every team should play each other twice, simple as that. It is the only fair system.
mds1970
Roar Guru
Of course a drop from 22 rounds to 17 would be a loss of revenue. How could it not? With only eight home games compared to the current 11, the value of memberships and corporate packages would be reduced by a third. Another consequence of reducing a season is that, with only 8 home games, there'd only be enough product for a club to satisfy their main market. Taking games to a secondary market would leave so few home games to their main area as to make memberships unviable. So it would be the end of games in Canberra, Tasmania etc.