Alternative fixture idea

Hank Heavenly

πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†
Apr 10, 2013
3,176
7,559
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
East Fremantle
Anzac day game still exists with teams playing each other only once in the home and away. You get that right? What a weird argument. It actually makes rivalry games more powerful and gives them more prestige if there is only one a year.
Yeh I reckon Derbys, Showdowns etc. would be worth more if there was only one per year, bragging rights held until the following season, unless of course they meet in finals.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Hank Heavenly

πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†
Apr 10, 2013
3,176
7,559
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
East Fremantle
the other thing is, if you just want a 17 game season as it is, give the players the two byes they want, then you stretch it out to a 19 week H&A already

The only issue there is the loss in revenue from TV gates memberships etc.
 

wal

Club Legend
Mar 13, 2004
2,764
2,484
6160
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
EFFC
The fairest way to even out the draw is also the simplest. Just make each game against double up opponents worth 2 points.
Can still play all the blockbusters but it is fair because every club has 4 points available against ALL other clubs.
 

Furn2

Norm Smith Medallist
Sep 27, 2012
9,078
14,690
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Anzac day game still exists with teams playing each other only once in the home and away. You get that right? What a weird argument. It actually makes rivalry games more powerful and gives them more prestige if there is only one a year.
Yet they play twice every year because tv wants them too, regardless, its more to solve the problem of everyone getting 11 home games which isn't possible with 17-5.
 

falcons2

All Australian
Feb 19, 2009
810
670
Melbourne OuterEast
AFL Club
Hawthorn
The first thing to be identified is how many games do you want the season to be. Fairness has no relevance at this stage and should not be considered.
Most local leagues play 18 games, so to test the highest league over an extra 4 games seems right. Drop to 20 games, I could live with. Extending to 24 would be ok but I fear the lower clubs.

The current method of fixture seems cockeyed and has developed this little child view of unfairness, but the reality is, it actually works.

In saying this, for clarity I'd like to see a predetermined fixture such as 1,4,7,10,13,16; 2,5,8,11,14,17; 3,6,9,12,15,18 ladder positions are your doubles.

Oh and CotchHP - from the Australian Education Curriculum - Foundation level (that's prep)
'Use comprehension strategies to understand and discuss texts listened to, viewed or read independently'
 

Scotland

TheBrownDog
May 5, 2006
52,679
55,401
AFL Club
West Coast
The only way the AFL works fairly is if there are fewer teams or you somehow split it into two 9 team conferences and then do knockout finals. But the AFL don't want quarters, semis and a final. They want the 4-2-2-1 setup so they can drag it out to 4 weeks. How do you determine 1-8 order of a bunch of teams who haven't all played each other?

In baseball or basketball where you play a bazillion games each year the H&A season becomes full of filler games. If you played a 58 game season in a 30 team NBA (i.e. just every team H&A) instead of 82 games you'd still get the same teams finishing high on the ladder and making the playoffs. The NFL is different because they can only play a short season and there are a lot of teams so they have conferences and divisions which people here don't relate to at all. I can't see Collingwood fans getting behind playing say Essendon twice, Carlton once and North not at all during a season for example.

With the insistence on 22 games and 18 teams I think the only thing to do is leave it up to random chance and let it even out over time.

Alternatively you can roll with something like:

8 home games
8 away games
1 home derby (every team needs an assigned 'rival')
1 away derby

That takes you up to 18 games and 17 opponents. Then each year you play 4 of the 16 teams that aren't you or your rival twice, balancing out over a 4 year period.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Hank Heavenly

πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†
Apr 10, 2013
3,176
7,559
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
East Fremantle
The fairest way to even out the draw is also the simplest. Just make each game against double up opponents worth 2 points.
Can still play all the blockbusters but it is fair because every club has 4 points available against ALL other clubs.
No, you cant tell me winning one game is less valuable than another...
So you can't place different value on the result.
Why should a team that say beats a top 4 team second time around, be penailsed for doing so ?
 

Hank Heavenly

πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†
Apr 10, 2013
3,176
7,559
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
East Fremantle
And a massive no to any american bullshit....

No to conferences (it already failed in the AFLW)
No Wildcard round

It works in their system do to location, numbers of teams, travel, eveness

It does not suit AFL at all....
 

CH Jazz

Team Captain
May 15, 2017
306
784
AFL Club
Adelaide
Don’t mind the creativity but we are really building complexity into it. I have a simply solution: play everyone once or twice. Pick one, not bothered which one.

Each option has its challanges but if the AFL was a professional competition it could happen.

Easier to just prioritise revenue and fat bonuses for the Exec than bother with an equitable competition though I guess.
 

Kwality

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 14, 2011
20,128
6,930
Tootgarook
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Renault F1
The first thing to be identified is how many games do you want the season to be. Fairness has no relevance at this stage and should not be considered.
Most local leagues play 18 games, so to test the highest league over an extra 4 games seems right. Drop to 20 games, I could live with. Extending to 24 would be ok but I fear the lower clubs.

The current method of fixture seems cockeyed and has developed this little child view of unfairness, but the reality is, it actually works.

In saying this, for clarity I'd like to see a predetermined fixture such as 1,4,7,10,13,16; 2,5,8,11,14,17; 3,6,9,12,15,18 ladder positions are your doubles.

Oh and CotchHP - from the Australian Education Curriculum - Foundation level (that's prep)
'Use comprehension strategies to understand and discuss texts listened to, viewed or read independently'
Are you looking for a blank canvas, the Kranky one worked with what we've got, the kiss principle, its an alternative to address the FIXture, its transparent, its fair & its simple.
 
Last edited:

falcons2

All Australian
Feb 19, 2009
810
670
Melbourne OuterEast
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Are you looking for a blank canvas, the Kranky one worked with what we've got, the kiss principle, its an alternative to address the FIXture, its transparent, its fair & its simple.
Must disagree. Kranky gives a whole new season concept, not just a fixture adjustment. I'm with you Kwality that it is a FIXture but I have yet to see better than the current.
As for the blank canvas, I think all these alternate fixtures lack any vision. Fairness as vision....FFS. It already exists on so many levels. Anyone anytime and if you can't handle that you don't belong at the level.
 

Carringbush2010

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 6, 2016
6,100
3,507
Perth
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Pines Football Club
i don't see it.

if you play interstate 6 times against say 5 interstate teams in the 8, but another club gets 3 of them at home....it's magically equal?

anyone who thinks 17, 22 or 34 games is actually 'same for everyone' is missing the reality.
consider this year, you'd have preferred to play the tiges ANYWHERE in rd 11-13 when we were cooked than in rd 23 when we were in form

how is it equal that one team plays under the dome or in 21 degrees in qld and the next day two teams are playing in the snow?

the fixture can never be 100% fair even if we play each team twice, because the interstate teams would travel 16 times and vic teams 8
This is where geography is the enemy of some and not of others, to be fair I doubt you'd find any competition that could find their way around the geography problem within one conference.

NFL has conferences.

Maybe in England (epl) but again they have relegation leagues.

Without going to a conference model maybe the 17-5 is the best available, maybe better than what we have now.
 

doppleganger

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 4, 2005
16,461
7,865
Putney
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Collingwood
Until Freo tell the AFL that they insist West Coast is not part of their 9 home games and that is how home game manipulation can be attained, ditto in the other three non vic states.

Tell me, would WCE fans stand by and say " oh well " if they were to miss top 4 or top 8 by virtue of playing 8 home games to a team who had 9 home games because me thinks eagles fans would be screaming from the roof tops demanding the 9 home vs 8 home fixture be abolished with the way you eagle fans have carried on about home ground advantage of late.
WC fans would demand to get 9 home games every year after implementation.

Any fixture suggestions that span multiple seasons completely miss the point.

There is absolutely no reason to keep 22 games.

The simplest solution is to use conferences - a Melbourne conference and a the rest. But that is too radical of an idea for most to get their head around.

Next best scenario would be 18 games season, but spread out over the 22 weekends (just remove the double up games) Thursday night, Friday night, Sat arvo, Sat Twilight, Sat night, Sunday early, Sunday Arvo would be the standard weekly fixture and then there are a few extra games to cater for public holidays etc. and potentially play all 9 games in R22.
 

Kwality

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 14, 2011
20,128
6,930
Tootgarook
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Renault F1
Must disagree. Kranky gives a whole new season concept, not just a fixture adjustment. I'm with you Kwality that it is a FIXture but I have yet to see better than the current.
As for the blank canvas, I think all these alternate fixtures lack any vision. Fairness as vision....FFS. It already exists on so many levels. Anyone anytime and if you can't handle that you don't belong at the level.
Very obviously the definition of fairness differs on a State by State basis, those accused of benefiting denying it.
 

Tiger Toffee

πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†
May 22, 2014
12,396
39,236
Punt Rd to Goodison Park
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Everton
WC fans would demand to get 9 home games every year after implementation.

Any fixture suggestions that span multiple seasons completely miss the point.

There is absolutely no reason to keep 22 games.

The simplest solution is to use conferences - a Melbourne conference and a the rest. But that is too radical of an idea for most to get their head around.

Next best scenario would be 18 games season, but spread out over the 22 weekends (just remove the double up games) Thursday night, Friday night, Sat arvo, Sat Twilight, Sat night, Sunday early, Sunday Arvo would be the standard weekly fixture and then there are a few extra games to cater for public holidays etc. and potentially play all 9 games in R22.
There is nothing wrong with the current set up, no need for conferences or reduced seasons.
 

doppleganger

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 4, 2005
16,461
7,865
Putney
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Collingwood
There is nothing wrong with the current set up, no need for conferences or reduced seasons.
I think most agree that having inconsistent double up games, that are designed to handicapping teams, is not the ideal situation.

As recently as 1993 the AFL ran with a 20 game season, and for the majority of the VFL it was an 18 round competition...22 games only introduced in 70s to coincide with introduction of VFL Park.

So yes, reduced seasons and conferences that would enable improve equity of fixture between teams make sense to be explored.
 

Tiger Toffee

πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†
May 22, 2014
12,396
39,236
Punt Rd to Goodison Park
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Everton
I think most agree that having inconsistent double up games, that are designed to handicapping teams, is not the ideal situation.

As recently as 1993 the AFL ran with a 20 game season, and for the majority of the VFL it was an 18 round competition...22 games only introduced in 70s to coincide with introduction of VFL Park.

So yes, reduced seasons and conferences that would enable improve equity of fixture between teams make sense to be explored.
What's inconsistent about it though, it's a fair system in that the best teams double up against other best teams and less against the bottom teams and vice versa which has seen teams come from the bottom to top 4 in recent years,

Richmond and Collingwood, Geelong have a 3-1-1 set up which is totally fair IMO

As for reduced season, as a fan the off season is already too long and people want to make it longer in the quest for fairness...fu** that.

Conferences would lead to same same year in year out and god forbid one conference becomes stronger than the other and an unworthy team makes finals because of it. Look at AFLW with blues and cats making finals despite winning less games than those who missed finals in the stronger group.
 

Underarm

Norm Smith Medallist
Feb 13, 2011
8,127
9,103
AFL Club
Richmond
Its an interesting Idea. All systems are going to have their pros and cons.
start the season two weeks earlier.
This is going to be an Issue. Ground availability is a problem, as is the temperature/playing conditions in the first week of March.
Each team plays the other - alternating home and away each year.
Some teams will get 9 home games, others get 8. There's no way around that. Sydney, GWS, Brisbane, Gold Coast, Geelong and which ever team Geelong play will be at a disadvantage every 2nd year. The fact that the home team would alternate wouldn't stop fans bitching about the fact that they were disadvantaged in the current season.

after round 17 the final 8 is set.

The top 8 become the first division - they get a week off then play each other once so thats 7 games - if you had a home fixture in the first 17 its away this time and vice versa
This is dangerous. Based on 2019, Richmond would have 2 home matches and 5 away matches in the run home. Which means 10-11 home matches and 13-14 away matches. West Coast already complain about travelling 10 times, how are they going to react when they have to travel 13 times?

It also encourages 8th place to tank/rest players if they know they can't be eliminated from finals.

the bottom 10 become the second division - play each other once as well - same formula - the top 4 of the bottom 8 play off for division 2 premiership with wafl finals format. No weeks off.
This will be equally unpopular. Crowds and Interest will tank, The players have no incentive to play well. TV won't want to show the matches, Venues won't want to host the matches. Plus it has all the same fixturing problems as the top 8 does.

It also sucks for fans wanting to travel Interstate/make plans in July/August. 7 rounds is a lot of fixtures that won't be locked in until early July, and thus make it tougher to organise.
 

Underarm

Norm Smith Medallist
Feb 13, 2011
8,127
9,103
AFL Club
Richmond
Alternatively you can roll with something like:

8 home games
8 away games
1 home derby (every team needs an assigned 'rival')
1 away derby

That takes you up to 18 games and 17 opponents. Then each year you play 4 of the 16 teams that aren't you or your rival twice, balancing out over a 4 year period.
This is the best alternative. Though I think hand picking the double-ups to ensure the top teams have a harder fixture is better than pick those 4 at random.
 

Top Bottom