Whatever the merits of a top-six final series in a ten-team competition, the number of teams who make the A-League play-offs is unlikely to change now, with the impending addition of two more teams in the next two seasons.
In 2013, with little fanfare, the A-League changed the format for their top-six series.
Previously, the top-six series followed this process. Teams ranked No.1 and No.2 played a home-and-away tie, with the winner hosting the grand final.
The other four sides played a No.3 vs No.6 and No.4 vs No.5 game with the highest ranked team hosting the tie.
The winners of those games played each other, and the winner of that game played the loser of the No.1 vs No.2 tie for the other place in the grand final.
It sounds complicated in the reading but actually followed a reasonably symmetric format to get down to the grand final.
The 2013 format change did away with any second chances and reduced the finals series by a week.
Now, the top two teams have a week off and the other four sides follow the same format as previously.
However, in the second week, the lowest-ranked winner from the first weekend plays the premiers, and the highest-ranked winner plays the team that finished second. The two winners from that week go on to the grand final.
Back in 2013, then-Central Coast Mariners coach Graham Arnold protested the change, saying that it gave no advantage to the teams finishing first or second.
He repeated those complaints in 2018 when guiding Sydney FC. He’s absolutely right.
(AAP Image/David Moir)
The top two get rewarded – if that’s the right word – with Asian Champions League qualification the following season, but retain no ‘double chance’ advantage that became the feature of the play-off series, whether it involved four, five or six teams.
The new format eliminated the possibility of teams ranked No.1 and No.2 playing each other three times in a four-week finals format.
Mind you, no-one complained much about that when Central Coast and Brisbane played three epic contests in 2011, culminating with that grand final in Brisbane when the Roar scored twice in the last three minutes of extra time to draw 2-2.
Nor were there too many grumblings in 2010, when Sydney FC and Melbourne Victory locked horns three times, with the Sky Blues ultimately triumphing on Victory’s home ground in the decider, again via a penalty shootout.
The current finals series ensures there is no possibility of a repeat game anywhere in the format.
It does throw up the possibility that teams five and six could conceivably meet in the grand final, whereas the previous incarnation of the play-offs ensured that one of the grand final slots had to go to first or second place.
However, the revamped finals series has – for the past five seasons – created a logistical nightmare for the A League.
From 2006 to 2012, finals organisers knew that the grand final could only be played at two possible different venues, with the ground size caveat coming into play in 2008, when Central Coast won the right to host the decider but their stadium was not deemed large enough, so the game against Newcastle Jets was moved to the Sydney Football Stadium.
With the change came the head-scratching possibility that any of the top five teams could end up being grand final hosts, with the ultimate grand final venue now not being finalised until a week before the match itself.
News reports today suggest that the A-League have provisionally booked grand final venues in Sydney, Melbourne (both AAMI Park and Marvel Stadium), Perth, Adelaide and Wellington for the weekend of May 18 and 19.
That sounds awfully messy. It’s a lot of sports ground real estate to reserve for the A-League showpiece.
Even as late as the week before the grand final, the game could go to any one of three different venues.
If the top four as it stands now in Round 22 end up being the final four in the play-offs, Perth Glory would host Wellington Phoenix and Sydney FC would host Melbourne Victory, with only Wellington being statistically unable to host the grand final.
The A League is fortunate that there is now a five-point gap between sixth and seventh place.
If the Newcastle Jets hadn’t been shocked by Central Coast last weekend, they’d be two points outside the play-offs and only four points adrift of Melbourne City, which would probably have necessitated that Newcastle’s stadium was also provisionally booked.
And the Jets are not out of the finals race yet, so will the league be forced to look at McDonald Jones Stadium’s availability if City and Adelaide falter and the Jets surge in the coming rounds?
I wonder how costly this exercise is, the assumption being that reserving Perth’s Optus Stadium, Melbourne’s Marvel Stadium and AAMI Park, the Sydney Cricket Ground, Adelaide Oval and Westpac Stadium in Wellington wouldn’t be done with a handshake and a ‘don’t worry if you don’t need us come mid-May’ deal.
Would it be perhaps wiser to return to the previous format where the grand final venue is known two weeks in advance and by the end of Round 27, a month before the grand final, can only occur in two venues?
That’d at least make Arnie happy.
It might also eliminate the situation that occurred at last year’s grand final when tickets to the Newcastle Jets vs Melbourne Victory game in Newcastle sold out so quickly that thousands of Jets members missed out on securing seats.
The grand final is the most-watched game of the season and it crowns our champions.
Perhaps it would be better if the league had a two-week window to promote the venue as well as the game.
apaway
Roar Guru
Nowhere in the article did I say this is an issue for the broadcaster. Rather, it is a logistical issue for the league organisers.
apaway
Roar Guru
Sorry, that's incorrect. Under the old system, as soon as the finals series begins, there is only a need to have two grounds reserved, because the Grand Final was always hosted by one of the top 2. And the grand final venue is known a fortnight ahead of time. Under the new system, in Week One, it is still logically possible for the Grand Final to be hosted by any of the sides who finish 1st to 5th so that's 5 grounds in Week One, 3 grounds in Week Two and only one week before confirming the grand final venue.
Jordan
Guest
A 12 team competition splitting up after a full home and away to play round-robin championship/relegation series would be excellent
rakshop
Roar Rookie
Why would Fox care about the venue for the Grand Final but not care about any other venues the for rest of the final series???? The timing of the Grand Final is another matter. Fox would obviously have a preference of when the grand final is aired. However, realistically, under the old system, it still would be only able to lock that in until 2 weeks before the final (if there were competing interests at play). Judging by the fact that Fox hasn’t demanded that the old system is reinstated to alleviate these concerns, given its power as the major financial contributor to the A League, I very much doubt that extra one-week window really means anything to Fox. If it did, I would guarantee that we would be operating under the old system.
Redondo
Roar Rookie
Nemesis - I meant demand in two senses, both from an expanding player base wanting more opportunities, and, from an expanding fan base willing to pay for an expanded league.
Nemesis
Guest
I'm honestly not too concerned about demand. It only becomes relevant if we create a model that requires "demand" to sustain the competition. We should create a football pathway that is driven purely by supply. We have more teams & more competitions only if there are people wanting to play the game. Unfortunately, only over the past 20 years, Australian sport has lost its focus. We've made demand & potential demand drive the way we create sporting competitions. This is a flawed strategy for sport. Being driven by demand is vital for TV, and films and circuses because they exist only to entertain. Sport exists because people want to test themselves in various athletic pursuits.
Redondo
Roar Rookie
That would work for me too. 12 teams is not too few if there is pro/rel with a div 2. If we start there then each div could expand slowly with the population and demand. As long as there is a div 2, I don't think I'd even mind if div 1 was heavily populated with good quality foreign players. Div 2 could impose local and youth quotas if necessary, but it might not be.
Brian
Guest
But moving other finals games is not really an issue. Most grounds are nearly always available at a particular point in the weekend. Its only the GF that broadcasters need a specific times weeks in advance. Under the old system with your top 6 only Optus and Stadium Australia need to be reserved, and further with 2 weeks to go you will know which one is required.
Nemesis@gmail.com
Guest
I'd be happy with 12 teams in 1st & 2nd Div with pro/rel. Keep the seasons tight & competitive. Regular Season = 22 matches Championship/Relegation = 5 matches Mix it up with a League Cup as I outlined 12 months ago: Australian football needs A League Cup https://www.theroar.com.au/2018/01/03/australian-football-needs-league-cup/ League Cup = min 4 matches FFA Cup: min 1 match 32 matches per season Breaks for international tournaments will make it around 9 month season.
Redondo
Roar Rookie
Waz - You’d have to agree we have a difficult and unusual set of circumstances in Australia. If it’s not unique, it sure comes close. Anyone planning the A-League’s future would be struggling to find exemplars anywhere else in the world to guide their decisions about the direction the A - League should head in.
rakshop
Roar Rookie
I don’t buy ‘having to hire the ground’ only one week in advance logic, because this issue will exist throughout the entire finals including the week before the grand final, and the week before that, and the week before that. In fact, and using your logic, the new format will reduce the burden because overall less stadiums must be booked. The GF ground argument a simplistic argument that is viewed solely in isolation of the GF and not of the finals as a whole. Step through it logically – where each top seed wins (and assuming Sydney FC play at Stadium Australia) Current top 6 Perth Sydney Victory Wellington City Adelaide Current System Week One – AAMI Park and Westpac Stadium – and have pending reservations for the grand final for Optus, Stadium Australia, Marvel Stadium and Westpac (4 reservations) – plus book HBF Park and Stadium Australia for week two (no pending reservations) Week Two – HBF Park and Stadium Australia (cancel one reservation for the GF) Week Three – Optus Oval (2 cancelled reservations one taken) This results in a maximum for 4 pending reservations throughout the finals series with three cancelled (one cancelled after week one, and two cancelled after week 2) Old System Week One – Bookings at HBF Park, AAMI Park and Westpac for week one – One booking for Stadium Australia for week 2 plus pending reservations at HBF Park and Stadium Australia (2 reservations) for week 3 – Reservations for Stadium Australia and Optus (2 reservations) for the GF, reservations for AAMI Park and Westpac (2 reservations) for week 2 Week Two – Bookings at AAMI Park, Stadium Australia (1 reservation cancelled 1 taken) Week Three – Booking at Stadium Australia (2 reservations cancelled – GF and prelim final and 1 taken) Week Four – Booking at Optus Oval (1 taken) And this finals series has been rather unkind booking wise. If a Western Sydney/Sydney/Central Coast/City/Victory finals series occurs, you theoretically may only have to book 2 grand final reservations but deal with the same amount of reservations (6 pending bookings and three cancellations) under the existing finals format.
Waz
Roar Rookie
16 is the right number. 18 if we have NZ in there. There’s nothing unique about Australia that means we can’t have a 16 team comp
Redondo
Roar Rookie
I tend to think a 16 team top-tier is too many for Australia's unique combination of distance and small population. On the other hand, a 12 team top tier that mixes it for part of the season with the best of a 10 or 12 team second tier would be a great model. It would even be a good transition model if a 16 team top-tier looks viable in the long run.
Bilbo
Guest
Teams finishing first and second are in a much better place under the new system than the old Previously one of the top two would have been required to play up to four games in the finals, this time it is a maximum two games Two games, two wins, title, simples They get the benefit of a week off and to put out a rested team in the home prelim against a weary side that played an elimination final the week before As for booking venues that is just the nature of the national comp, apart from the AFL and NRL that have locked the same venues in for years to come, most other comps face the same issue The issue with the current set up is too many teams quality for the finals, 6/10 is excessive.. due to be 6/11 from next season of course
Mister Football
Roar Guru
That's a very good suggestion as well, perhaps one for the future (although it seems to work best if you only have 12 teams in the top tier?)
Mister Football
Roar Guru
Well written and thought out article, some very good points made. 1. No doubt that first and second deserve a double chance, let the other four battle it out for that final spot in the preliminary final. 2. It never occurred to me until now that the old system allowed an extra week to organise things for the grand final - that's an excellent point, and the clincher in the debate.
Redondo
Roar Rookie
Better championship models can be seen in Belgium and other smaller leagues. Play home and away once, then top 6 play home and away for the championship. That retains a kind of finals football feel, but is much fairer than the lottery of Oz-style finals football. But that would also need a div 2, whose top 2 would play home and away against the bottom 6 of div 1 for pro/rel. There have been lots of suggestions along these lines previously. Such a model would certainly add fairness to deciding the div 1 championship, and add spice for the div 1 strugglers.
Brian
Guest
A lot of sense there. The old system was better in terms of fairness and arranging a GF venue. The best ties are also often over 2 legs as we see in the champions league because in the 2nd leg nearly always someone is chasing the game. We unfortunately don't get that locally either in the HAL or FFA Cup.