Phil Rothfield has commented extensively on the unfairness of the NRL draw. His main gripe – which is shared by myself and doubtless a large number of other fans – is that the draw, in requiring teams to play some twice and others once, is inherently unfair.
Rothfield proposed a solution involving expanding the competition by two teams and implementing a conference system to regulate who plays who twice. Essentially he suggests a new format:
The conference rationale has many positives, with more local derbies theoretically meaning bigger attendances, less travel costs and guaranteeing four Sydney clubs a spot in the finals each year.
However I have found a number of holes in Rothfield’s proposal.
Expanding the comp by two teams
It could work, and we could argue the merits of adding two new teams in Brisbane and Perth all day long. But that’s an argument for another day. For the sake of this critique, let’s assume that his proposed new teams are added.
The 25-round conference system
The Sydney teams in one conference, the other teams in the other. Okay – but that still doesn’t fix the lopsided nature of the draw.
The relative strength of the conferences will change. If, for example, the Sydney conference is weaker in a given year, four of their clubs will still make the finals, while more deserving clubs in the other conference miss out. This just makes the draw more lopsided.
Enhancing crowd numbers is another positive Rothfield claims. The truth is though, crowds aren’t a big deal so much anymore. Yes, the more bums on seats the better, but the hundreds of thousands of dollars which clubs can make from an extra 5-10 thousand people per home game pales when you consider the multi-millions they make from the new media deal.
Although crowds are important, television viewership trumps them in terms of importance. And in any case, do we really know that more local matches would generate bigger crowds?
Only 15,000 made the Roosters-Sea Eagles grand final replay; chances are the Roosters would have scored more fans in attendance if they were playing the Broncos or the Storm.
As far as the travelling argument is concerned, having these conferences might minimise the travel for Sydney clubs but it also ensures the regional clubs have much more criss-crossing of the country to do before the end of the season, which will no doubt take its toll.
The concept of 25 rounds isn’t exactly correct. Teams will play 25 games (16 against the teams in their conference plus nine against the teams in the other conference), but they will need to have a bye come the second round against their own conference teams. It’s unavoidable.
So there will actually be 26 rounds and teams who are already claiming the season is too long will have one extra home-and-away match to contend with (teams presently play 24 matches each).
Stand-alone Origin weekends
The Origin situation as it stands isn’t ideal, with six weeks of the NRL season affected by byes causing unfairness in the draw, as well as player fatigue and unavailability caused by the three Origin matches. But stand-alone Origin weekends will require three extra weeks to be added to the season.
26 rounds, plus three Origin weekends, plus four weeks of finals – in 2014 the season would have started on the last weekend in February. I doubt the players and clubs would be happy with an even longer season and more games in hot summer weather.
Unless the regular season or finals length are shortened, stand-alone Origin weekends will not work.
All things considered, Rothfield’s proposal, while admirable, is not possible to implement. So what do I suggest?
Clearly the season is unbalanced, and although Origin is the jewel in the game’s crown, having six weeks of bread-and-butter club footy negatively impacted by it is not what the game deserves.
I would keep the comp at 16 teams, as there is not enough talent to support two new teams. This might or might not involve relocation rather than expansion; again, where you relocate teams and which teams are relocated is an argument for another day.
But I would suggest the 16 teams be divided into two pools based on where they finished the previous season before the finals; teams 1, 4, 5, 8, 9, 12, 13 and 16 in one pool and teams 2, 3, 6, 7, 10, 11, 14 and 15 in the other. This will spread the talent of the teams using the best available criteria – where they finished last season – pretty evenly.
The NRL actually used to do this until a few years ago, when they decided that teams should have the right to choose who they want to play twice.
Teams play all in their pool twice, teams in the other pool once, requiring 22 rounds of football. Because the number of teams in the pools is even, there will be no byes required. The finals format stays as it is.
Origin should be moved to earlier in the week, to a Tuesday or perhaps even a Monday night. The weekend before should be football-free. This would ensure no teams are disadvantaged by the Origin disruption the week before, and Origin players have three or four days to recover for the next found of club footy.
This format would shorten the NRL season by two games, thus giving players and teams a bit of a rest. It would get rid of byes, restore the prestige of club games during the Origin period, and it would give the competition as much an objective level of fairness as is possible.
Sleemo
Guest
See my comment above...in my view it would mean one of the pools is slightly stronger than the other e.g. contains 1st place, 3rd, 5th, 7th versus 2nd, 4th, 6th, 8th et al. It's only a minor difference but the fairer solution is 1, 4, 5, 8, 9, 12, 13, 16 in one pool and the rest in the other.
a
Guest
I think it should be odd numbers in 1 pool and even numbers in the other on Odd 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 Even 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 Sounds fair because it does to me
Sleiman Azizi
Roar Guru
I agree. I think the best way to do that is to actually shorten the premiership season and make each game mean more than it does now. Follow this by a knockout finals system (or something where each match matters) and then use that as a trial for Origin which in itself becomes a trial for the Test team. Everything builds up from the previous competition. Every match has to mean something. That's what I believe is the way forward.
Sleiman Azizi
Roar Guru
The quicker the NRL get control over their own rugby league dedicated channel, the better.
Mantis
Roar Guru
Theres been a lot of unlikely things said on the roar before, but that takes the cake
Connor
Guest
I wouldn't Mind a 20 team competition in 2015. New Teams being Brisbane Bombers, Central Coast Bears, PNG, West Coast Pirates. A variety of teams for these reasons: Brisbane Bombers for a new QLD side for cur metrical reasons. West Coast Pirates for a new team and to spread out the competition. PNG for a different country and have a country round with warriors take on PNG. And Central Coast Bears to bring back a old heritage team (north Sydney bears).
Sleemo
Guest
Nothing's wrong with the Broncos and the Cowboys playing each other twice each year, but not if it compromises the integrity of the draw. The integrity of the draw should be paramount in any sporting competition. Look at the EPL and imagine it was unbalanced like the NRL is - no doubt Man U and Man City love their local rivalries, but I doubt they would want to play each other an extra time in an unbalanced comp if it meant they missed out on playing a team they would realistically be almost guaranteed to beat. I don't think crowd numbers trump fairness. If that was the case they would rotate Origin between ANZ and the MCG because they're the two biggest stadiums in Australia and Suncorp wouldn't even get a look in. I doubt a Queenslander would be happy to accept that all because "crowd numbers trump fairness".
Mantis
Roar Guru
An extra 4 games a year is not feasible? Cut the trial games out, sub the extra 4 rounds in. Sounds very feasible to me.
Don
Roar Rookie
No problem with it myself but expect CH9 or another station to pay $200M less for the rights. SOO played midweek is not only a massive ratings kick for them on the night but also props up the following nights news and Footy Show and the Friday Night NRL game as well. The fact it is not up against any of the other codes midweek also means you get the fans of AFL and RU who just appreciate the contest watching. They are unlikely to watch SOO if there was a Test or top level AFL game on at the same time. CH9 would only ever consider Sunday night as another option.
Mantis
Roar Guru
Good luck convincing Channel 9 to do that
Jitter
Guest
When players are fatigued from a long season, and many carrying injuries need to be fixed. Can't see it happening.
turbodewd
Guest
Whats wrong with Brisbane hosting the Cowboys every year and vice versa?! Thats what the fans want! Crowd numbers trump fairness my friend. If you want a fair comp today you have a 15 round season which is a bit short. 2 whole rounds of H & Away is not feasible and too long.
Sleemo
Guest
+ 1. It was fine the way it was until the NRL decided that it should give clubs the right to ask for two matches against certain teams. The idea was that clubs could either look after the bottom line by choosing blockbusters against gun teams or a surer bet for the two points by choosing easier opponents, but either way they would have to take responsibility for the outcome. But this hasn't worked because while clubs have the right to request certain opponents twice, there's no guarantee they'll get it.
Sleemo
Guest
The way I have seen it Morfs, is that you need to divide the comp's finishing order into four sections of four from which your two pools of 8 are determined. Ergo, top four, bottom half of the top eight, teams 9-12 and bottom four. Then to evenly distribute the talent between the two pools of 8 you will take two teams our of each section that add up to the same number. E.g. teams 1 and 4 = 1 + 4 = 5, and teams 2 and 3 = 2 + 3 = 5. Do that throughout each of the pools and the "value" of each pool will be the same...e.g. here, it is 1 + 4 + 5 + 8 + 9 + 12 + 13 + 16 = 68 for one pool, and 2 + 3 + 6 + 7 + 10 + 11 + 14 + 15 = 68. Whereas if you go odds and evens, it's 1 + 3 + 5 + 7 + 9 + 11 + 13 + 15 = 64 in one pool and 2 + 4 + 6 + 8 + 10 + 12 + 14 + 16 = 72 in the other. So theoretically, the team with 1, 3, 5, 7 et al will be a more difficult pool than the other. Sorry - too much mathematical thinking involved! But I'm sure you get my drift.
Cugel
Roar Rookie
Up until a few seasons ago it was fair (given a true home-and-away system wasn't on the cards), and they deliberately unfaired it.
Sean
Guest
It makes so much sense, so it'll never happen.
ScottWoodward.me
Roar Guru
When it comes to expansion it is a no brainer. Any thinking businessman will tell you that before you expand in to new territories you make sure you have your current base in good order. There should be an NRL match played in both Brisbane and NZ every weekend. Both these areas are massive RL strong holds and only each have two games each month. DUMB!
TriangleFlatDog
Guest
I like your idea but with Origin played on the weekend (Saturdays) and using the odds and evens split for the two groups using the table from the previous year
turbodewd
Guest
A 25 round comp would kill average crowd numbers. We run 24 rounds over 26 weeks and the fans still arent showing up. An extra round would worsen things. Quality is more important quantity.
turbodewd
Guest
The fairness of the draw is irrelevant. What is relevant is crowd numbers. What good is fair draw if noone is in the stadium to see it?! Quality is what matters - not quantity. You determine the amount of games to be played in the season....then what those games will be. Anyone who thinks the fairness of the draw matters is misguided and I challenge them to produce a shred of evidence to the contrary.