Fixture structure (399th time!?) 2 conferences brings some fairness e.g. geelong get all home games and finals at kardinia

[Kwality]

you've got to assign the 9 double ups for each team for each year, so each team has a year A fixture and a year B fixture, but how do you do that? If you try and make them as equal as possible now, it's extremely likely that in 5 years, you may have an extremely unequal fixturing example like this

-Hawks year B assignment is playing GC, Melbourne, Saints, Dogs, Geelong, Freo, North, Port and GWS. Say we're in 2026 and that's 6 bottom 10 teams, and only 2 top 8 teams that Hawks are doubled up on, giving them an extremely easy fixture. 16/25 games against Bottom 10 teams

-Cats year B assignment is playing Hawks, Bombers, Collingwood, West Coast, Brisbane, Adelaide, Saints and Swans. In 2026 this could be 6 top 8 teams and only 2 bottom 8 teams that the cats are doubled up on, giving them a super hard fixture. 11/25 games against Bottom 10 teams

You either have the year A/B fixture style or you try to make the comp equal by putting in the FIX.
What are you trying to do?

 

[4THAWN]

You either have the year A/B fixture style or you try to make the comp equal by putting in the FIX.
What are you trying to do?

I still lean towards the the current style over a 26 round A/B style, because the fix offers a lower range of variability and a more equal spread of fixture difficulties.

If you set the A/B fixture style, you've got to keep it that way so teams always double up every second year.

I guess you could reset the bi-yearly double-ups every 10 years, which would mean there'd be times where teams aren't doubling up every second year but it could lead to better equalisation of fixtures in the long run for a 26 round A/B style set-up.

 

[Pessimistic]

Playing each other once is not fair, despite what people think.

Issue 1: half the teams get an extra home game.
Solution1: Non-Victorian teams get the extra home to account for - travel, less "away" games at home, less games for supporters to watch live.
Solution2: Rotate from year to year.
Solution3: Play 1 extra 'rival' match up (ie Derby) for even H/A.

Issue 2: who you are drawn where will have a massive affect on where teams finish.
Example1: A medium quality WC play hard teams away, easy teams at home - finish middle of ladder.
Example2: A medium quality WC play easy teams away, hard teams at home - finish bottom of ladder.
Example3: A good WC play hard teams away, easy teams at home - finish middle of ladder.
Example4: A good WC play easy teams away, hard teams at home - finish top of ladder.
Solution? None

I did say that in line you quoted. It wouldnt be any more or less unfair than current, but has the potential to be more fair. Less games in a season make each one less of a dead rubber

Having 10 finalists wit the first week played over two weeks levels that unfairness

 

[kreglze]

Just play a 17 round season where you play 8 home games, 8 away games and you have to play 1 game at regional venue Cairns, Ballarat etc. You play everyone once and no-one has less home games than someone else.

You can extend the final series if you need to have more footy going on.

 

[Seeds]

Current system is fine, not perfect but nothing ever will be realistically

System is not fine. It is one of the most biased draws in world sport. Its far from fine.

 

[Seeds]

Just play a 17 round season where you play 8 home games, 8 away games and you have to play 1 game at regional venue Cairns, Ballarat etc. You play everyone once and no-one has less home games than someone else.

You can extend the final series if you need to have more footy going on.

17-5 has all the same advantages as a 17 round season with 22 rounds.

 

[Hallstrom]

While we're throwing around crazy fixture ideas; how about not having the football season line up with a calendar year. Play from the beginning of April until the end of September but don't have finals until everyone has played home & away. Trading can occur at anytime and a draft happens after any given finals series.

 

[Kwality]

System is not fine. It is one of the most biased draws in world sport. Its far from fine.

Its not been a draw for a long, long time ....

 

[Mr north man]

If you are going to do conferences it should'nt be Melbourne teams in one and the rest in another, it should be:

Conference A-
5x Victorian clubs
2x WA clubs
2x NSW Clubs

Conference B-
5x Victorian clubs
2x SA clubs
2x QLD clubs

This at least evens out the travel factor somewhat.

but, no need for conferences. 18 is a good number for a sole division.

Which teams from Victoria would play in conference A
The AFL supporters of the following clubs Pies,Blues,Bombers and Tigers would want to play each other every year would effect Conference B as lower based Victorian clubs would suffer.
If you want a fair system to work would be is to have the following.
Conference A
1,3,5,7,9,11,13,15,17 teams play each other every year
Then
Conference B
2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18 teams play each other every year
Only thing Derbies and special event games EG: Anzac Day Dream time may have new teams each other every year.

 

[Hallstrom]

Which teams from Victoria would play in conference A
The AFL supporters of the following clubs Pies,Blues,Bombers and Tigers would want to play each other every year would effect Conference B as lower based Victorian clubs would suffer.
If you want a fair system to work would be is to have the following.
Conference A
1,3,5,7,9,11,13,15,17 teams play each other every year
Then
Conference B
2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18 teams play each other every year
Only thing Derbies and special event games EG: Anzac Day Dream time may have new teams each other every year.

Maybe the Vic teams don't need to be static, always have 3 of Carlton, Essendon, Collingwood, Richmond, Hawthorn, Geelong in each conference and 2 of St Kilda, North Melbourne, Melbourne and Footscray. That would even out the higher drawing clubs with the lower drawing ones.

 

[Da Main Man]

each team has 11 home state games, 11 away state games

so what if geelong plays richmond in perth or brisbane plays adelaide at the mcg.

(yes sh!t idea, but meh)

 

[Steven Gerrard]

Physical demands of the game could not allow teams to be playing 30 H&A games per season.
An extended season may actually harm the game. People lose interest. Especially if your team cannot make finals after 20 games in, with another 10 rounds to follow.

You know what, tough T**ty. Every league in the world is going to have teams that do poorly where it is evident two-thirds in that they won't be featuring towards the business end. We need to get over this "oh but people will lose interest" It happens. I think the problem is, the AFL is not as popular as everyone makes it out to be. Half empty stadiums every week, and when clubs start falling off the trophy-radar, certain stadiums become even emptier.

Compromising a competition's competitive spirit for the sake of keeping as many people interested for as long as possible is indication the AFL is not what it's cracked up to be. A club in the Premier League which is on the brink of relegation will still sell out 98% of its games and there's probably a 2-3 year waiting list behind that. Yes England has far more people but it also has far more clubs and the system over there is not closed shop like it is here. The AFL is a closed shop.

Next we will be bringing in some stupid Americanised wildcard system where teams ranked 9th to 17th fight it out to be the 9th team into the finals. If you want to keep interest, there's your system. But is that in the spirit of competition?

 

[Back One Out]

—even home and awy fixture
—correct seedings in finals
—teams wanting home finals get them

So

2 conferences. One is the 9 teams sharing MCG or Docklands, the other is the teams with home grounds not in melbourne (yes including Geelong)

Home and away season - teams play other eight teams in their conference twice, and the teams in other conference once makes 25 games
Alternate home and away between the conferences. The final order in each conference

Finals - top three in each conference go into their own pool finals. The grand final (at the MCG sorry) is between the winners of each conference finals series. To avoid the situation we had with aflw conferences, two further places in each finals series are filled by the next best four teams

So theres five in each finals series, which is played off as the old final five, one of the best finals series versions ever

In the finals:
The Melbourne pool plays all the finals at the MCG, a neutral ground for melbourne teams. It want a problem to anyone for decades.
For the Australa pool. The higher team plays the final at their home ground whather it be kardinis, gold coast, homebush, brisbane, SCG adelaide oval or perth stadium. Each pool is completely fair and let there be no arguments, they get what they have been asking for

Disadvantages:

Theres plenty, but arent people saying fairness should be the over riding imperative?

By the way, l dont like the conference idea

No

 

[Kwality]

We need to get over this "oh but people will lose interest" It happens.

spot on .... exactly how fabricated are we prepared to allow this comp to be?

Time we addressed the game as a national comp not a 'cut & shut' version of the State League days. Start with the H&A concept that underwrites membership.

Gil has an aspiration for each team to win, too what extent is our game manipulated to achieve this?