? Would a final "Top Ten" compensate for the inequitable home and away fixture.

[speedpeck23]

I realise that two wrongs don't make a right...but think about it. Given that the home and away fixture will always be compromised because not all teams play each other twice a Final Top Ten would most times give a good team with a bad draw at least some sort of reasonable chance to make the finals. In other words if you can't make the finals you can't blame the dodgy fixture.

 

[Byron_Clanger]

Nope, just dilutes the pack which means more finals smashings

 

[Riders of Rohan]

Just think of it as 6 finalists with 4 wildcards. People are bitching about nothing here.

 

[Sttew]

The finals system is equally inequitable - Geelong will never get a home final. 17 other clubs have and will

 

[Mervyn Beasley]

The finals system is equally inequitable - Geelong will never get a home final. 17 other clubs have and will

What a load of poo.

You seem to be conveniently forgetting that you actually get a far better home ground advantage during the year that every other Victorian team.

You also forget that teams like St K can actually play at the G as little as twice a year and then play all their finals at the G and not at the Docks.

You also seem blissfully unaware that finals advantage is about not having to travel. Nothing else.

Maybe you are taking the pi55. Sure hope so.

Back to matters at hand.
Our inequitable and credibility void draw has always bugged me.

I hadn't really thought about it when thinking to myself that a top 8 would suffice in an 18 team comp.
That is, until Malthouse started spruiking about our elite competition and i thought to myself about how there is no other elite competition in the world that has such a lopsided and generally unfair draw.
It was then that I thought exactly the same thoughts as the OP about the chance for teams who cop it year in year out, getting a chance to break even.

 

[Father Jack]

Outside of playing each other twice, about the only way you could do it transparently would be to go to divisions/conferences, which might work, but I for one would take a lot of convincing.

The lopsided draw is also a good reason to not be rewarding first place too highly. The way it is now is fair enough, sort of lots of two with two larger groupings of four, or with the final ten, a top four, then the next two, then the bottom four.

The finals system is equally inequitable - Geelong will never get a home final. 17 other clubs have and will

Well, we played two grand finals against you, both times we were the higher ranked participant and both times we had to travel the breadth of the country while you merely had to take a jaunt up a short highway.

 

[Ando727]

I realise that two wrongs don't make a right...

I think you are kind of asking that with your question in the thread title...

 

[UrLordUnbeliever]

I don't quite know if it were that equitable, to be honest.. The draw may make it harder for some teams to make the finals than others, and there's not too much we can do about that without either drastically shortening or lengthrning the season..
But the teams that make the finals in any kind of 'wildcard' playoff sysem won't get a week off (like the better teams most likely will) and then will have to front up against teams who will quite possibly be far too good for them.

Personally I'd rather just have the top 8 make it through..

 

[CAS79]

Why would adding hte numbers to the finals make up for an inadquite draw. the team who finishes eleven is just as likely to have been robbed by a bad draw as the team who finished ninth now.

 

[Clark G]

Putting more teams in the finals who are just making up the numbers does not make up for the lack of equality in the draw.

 

[compass]

I realise that two wrongs don't make a right...but think about it. Given that the home and away fixture will always be compromised because not all teams play each other twice a Final Top Ten would most times give a good team with a bad draw at least some sort of reasonable chance to make the finals. In other words if you can't make the finals you can't blame the dodgy fixture.

That is one good reason. In 2012 we can have teams that play GWS twice while others play Collingwood twice. Of course it could impact on whether they finish 7th or 10th. This is just one example why a final 10 can help.

While we’re at it, let’s debunk some myths about the final 10:

Myth 1: It rewards mediocrity.
All final systems reward mediocrity as they give teams that did not finish top some chance. But a good model creates different levels with different probabilities, with higher probabilities to higher teams. In fact the current system reward mediocrity more than other models as it give 4th the same probabilities as 1st. It’s easy to design final-10 models that give the top team more than 18% chance while the 10th team gets only around 3% chance, for example. If anything, it rewards success.

Myth 2: It makes the home-and-away season almost redundant.
Well, it doesn’t. For the same reasons as above: finish higher and you get a much better chance of winning the flag. In fact the most compelling reason for having a final-10 is to make almost every H&A game meaningful, as more teams are involved in the race for the finals and/or in better positioning themselves for the finals.

Myth 3: We will get one-sided games.
History shows that lower teams can beat or be comparative in finals. When the AFL first introduced the final-8 in a 15 team comp in 1994 Collingwood finished 8th, went to Perth to play West Coast, which were top, and lost by 2 points in one of the best finals. Last year one of the best finals was 5th v 8th (Sydney v Carlton).

Myth 4: It’s all about the money.
Even if it’s true. So what? It goes back to grass root football, the clubs, game development etc. We all win.

 

[kosifantutti]

The finals system is equally inequitable - Geelong will never get a home final. 17 other clubs have and will

We get our "home" finals at the MCG. We played two games there before the finals last year and one in 2009. Our first "home" final in 2009 was at the MCG against Collingwood.

 

[UrLordUnbeliever]

Also Sydney never get finals at their home ground either - for some stupid reason the AFL is only allowed to have the swans play at ANZ Stadium if they reach the finals.

 

[Pessimistic]

Unequal draw probably only means one place difference.

Under current systems 2nd/3rd and 6th/7th are really affected, because the higher team MAY get home ground advantge.

It would be the same with 8th/9th under an expanded final.

You coulf have a situation where 2nd played third only once in the H&A, and 2nd is second and third is third purely because 2nd had the home game in the H&A (eg just one win and inferior percentage differene)
Because of that, 2nd is 2nd, ans getst to play 3rd in a final at its home ground again.

But the system was developed in the VFL when all finals were at a neutral venue.
Im not saying how you could fix it, but the system will always be inequitable

 

[Pessimistic]

Its obviously unachievable, but the season should be played out, then the top four teams go into some finals series with home and away legs.

The other teams could play the NAB cup at the end of the season, possibly with some overseas exhibition games included

 

[Father Jack]

Its obviously unachievable, but the season should be played out, then the top four teams go into some finals series with home and away legs.

The other teams could play the NAB cup at the end of the season, possibly with some overseas exhibition games included

Literally LOL. How does that improve the season?

I assume you are taking the piss.

 

[Furn]

The point of the finlas is to find the premiers and while its good for up and coming teams to sneak in and and maybe win one, the premier invariably comes from the top sides.

If your a genuine premiership threat you can make the top 4 with any draw. If you need to play the easier teams twice to make the 8 or 10 or even the top 4 your not gonna win it anyway, especially if you have to win 5 games straight against teams that have had weeks off.

 

[azza29]

I'm in favour of a top 10 in an 24-round, 18-club competition. The wildcards make it interesting, plus as a fan it's great to see your club in the finals, even if only in the first round.

Malthouse's comment about only allowing 'elite teams' to make the finals is arrogant bullshit, and a very easy comment to make when you're doing well. Having more teams in the finals helps to make up for the inconsistent travel/opponent arrangements, and is good for the game overall.

 

[MarkT2]

Is the draw inequitable? Sure you don't play everyone twice and there are a host of other minor issues that get sooked over but is it inequitable? Has a team ever really made or not made the finals due to a draw inequity? I seruiously doubt that has ever happened but if it did and that team then got an "extra" finals berth would they beat anyone in September anyway?

Just another invented problem if you ask me.

 

[MarkT2]

The point of the finlas is to find the premiers....

Spot on. Really we already put too many teams into the finals. I understand the financial issues so I don't expect anything other than more finalists in one form or another but I'd prefer the finals limited to 6 teams unless the competition stretches to maybe 20 clubs.

 

[DeZi]

The point of the finlas is to find the premiers and while its good for up and coming teams to sneak in and and maybe win one, the premier invariably comes from the top sides.

If your a genuine premiership threat you can make the top 4 with any draw. If you need to play the easier teams twice to make the 8 or 10 or even the top 4 your not gonna win it anyway, especially if you have to win 5 games straight against teams that have had weeks off.

Yup, in 2010 Pies played Saints, Cats and Dogs twice...They all played each other only once

 

[db swannie]

Also Sydney never get finals at their home ground either - for some stupid reason the AFL is only allowed to have the swans play at ANZ Stadium if they reach the finals.

True, which really pisses me off...

Back to the OP, no you can't fix one problem with another problem, ie having a more lop-sided finals series will not fix a lop-sided fixture IMO. As we all know 7 & 8 are cannon fodder in the current arrangement, so how will bringing two more sides into the finals make the finals more interesting? Can't see it myself...

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

As it is, the top couple of sides - even with horror fixtures - are likely to finish in the top few positions. And it is from those that the premiers will come from. Adding two extra mid-table places into the finals makes no difference as to the likely winners of the only prize that matters. Eight is overkill already interms of deciding a premier; surely the main purpose of finals; and gives more than enough "compensation" for any side with a genuince chance to make finals. There may be a case for a 10 team finals system - but if there is, this isn't it.

 

[AussieFTW]

Good article by mark Stevend about the merits of a 'final 9'

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/why-a-final-nine-gets-10-out-of-10/story-e6frf9jf-1226024411204

Basically it's a system where the top team would get a week of (finally a good reason to get top spot) and the other 8 teams that make the finals play in the first week..

 

[FootyJunkie]

Good article by mark Stevend about the merits of a 'final 9'

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/why-a-final-nine-gets-10-out-of-10/story-e6frf9jf-1226024411204

Basically it's a system where the top team would get a week of (finally a good reason to get top spot) and the other 8 teams that make the finals play in the first week..

Article didn't go into any more details.

A Final 9 has to go for 5 weeks. A Final 9 over 4 weeks will break atleast one criteria the AFL hold dear with a Final System.

Could just go 2 v 7, 3 v 6, 4 v 5, with the winners joining 1 in the Qualifying Finals and the losers joining the winner of 8 v 9 in the Elimination Finals... then play finals as they are now with a Final 8 from week 2, avoiding repeat matches when/if possible.

WEEK 1

GAME A - 2 v 7
GAME B - 3 v 6
GAME C - 4 v 5
GAME D - 8 v 9

WEEK 2

GAME E - 1 V WINNER GAME C
GAME F - WINNER GAME A V WINNER GAME B
GAME G - LOSER GAME C V WINNER GAME D
GAME H - LOSER GAME A V LOSER GAME B

WEEK 3

GAME I - LOSER GAME E V WINNER GAME H
GAME J - LOSER GAME F V WINNER GAME G

WEEK 4

GAME K - WINNER GAME E V WINNER GAME J
GAME L - WINNER GAME F V WINNER GAME I

WEEK 5

GAME M - WINNER GAME K V WINNER GAME L

2010...

Week 1

Geelong v Hawthorn - MCG
St.Kilda v Fremantle - Etihad
Western Bulldogs v Sydney - MCG
Carlton v North Melbourne - MCG

Week 2

Collingwood v Western Bulldogs - MCG
Geelong v St.Kilda - MCG
Sydney v Carlton - ANZ
Fremantle v Hawthorn - Subiaco

Week 3

Geelong v Sydney - MCG
Western Bulldogs v Fremantle - Etihad

Week 4

same as last year...