How to Improve the Draw

[mattmooney]

There's been a lot of talk about "Draw Inequality" lately so how about this option:

Break the teams into three tiers based on final ladder position from previous season

• 1-6
• 7-12
• 13-18

Play every team once = 17 games
Play every team in your tier a second time = 5 games for a total of 22 games.

I think we end up with closer games and a more even draw.

Thoughts?

 

[gPhonque]

You're doing it wrong.

Play 2 teams from EACH group again. 23 round season. But fair.

All you're doing is punishing higher placed teams and rewarding lower placed teams.

Not sure how that makes things more "equal" for all teams... which is what we're trying to achieve, isn't it?

 

[mattmooney]

My idea assumes we have to keep the 22 round H&A season. Obviously the fairest way is to play each team twice (1 home 1 away), but that is unrealistic.

I agree the top teams would have a tougher draw, but all of the top teams would have the tough draw. They are equal among their tier.

This idea promotes parody just as the draft does. The last thing the AFL wants to see is the same teams in the basement year after year.

If adding an extra round to the H&A was an option than I think your idea is also a good one.

 

[Kwality]

My idea assumes we have to keep the 22 round H&A season. Obviously the fairest way is to play each team twice (1 home 1 away), but that is unrealistic.

I agree the top teams would have a tougher draw, but all of the top teams would have the tough draw. They are equal among their tier.

This idea promotes parody just as the draft does. The last thing the AFL wants to see is the same teams in the basement year after year.

If adding an extra round to the H&A was an option than I think your idea is also a good one.

where is the parody?

 

[final fight]

Easy. A 17 round season. The game is so hard on bodies and there are already so many injuries that 17 games makes sense.

Or

Make it a 10 team competition. Only the best of the best players and all teams play each other home and away.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

where is the parody?

Umpires, match review panel, I could go on ... but I'll leave it to the experts.

On the opening post, why give 7th a theoretically easier draw than 6th.
I don't think the fixture has too much of an effect over the year normally. The best couple of teams generally finish in the top four where they can have a genuine shot at the flag, the next tier either make up the numbers in finals or finish just outside, and the lesser teams (whether rebuilding, tanking or crap) fill out the bottom few places. I don't think any team has gained or lost a premiership because of the fixture.

I would like to see some open-ness in the fixture though. Whether that is through some sort of formula that says "these are the ladder positions that will play each other twice" or a random draw to determine pools on who plays each other twice that year doesn't really matter much.
Break lengths, back to back travel, etc, often end up being as important as who plays who a second time.

 

[slashin_velvet]

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=883367

 

[smasha]

Easy answer.
Sack Greedy D.

It's obvious he hates our club.

 

[Kwality]

Umpires, match review panel, I could go on ... but I'll leave it to the experts.

The experts & most amateurs are on about parity, not parody mate.

A parody (

/ˈpærədi/; also called pastiche, spoof, send-up or lampoon), in current use, is an imitative work created to mock, comment on, or trivialise an original work, its subject, author, style, or some other target, by means of humorous, satiric or ironic imitation.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

The experts & most amateurs are on about parity, not parody mate.

A parody (

/ˈpærədi/; also called pastiche, spoof, send-up or lampoon), in current use, is an imitative work created to mock, comment on, or trivialise an original work, its subject, author, style, or some other target, by means of humorous, satiric or ironic imitation.

Which is why I should leave it the experts, my point (in reference to the parody commet) was that the match review panel and co parody themselves quite adequately.

 

[mattmooney]

where is the parody?

I'm an idiot, meant to say the idea promotes "parity".

 

[McCrann]

My idea assumes we have to keep the 22 round H&A season. Obviously the fairest way is to play each team twice (1 home 1 away), but that is unrealistic.

I agree the top teams would have a tougher draw, but all of the top teams would have the tough draw. They are equal among their tier.

This idea promotes parody just as the draft does. The last thing the AFL wants to see is the same teams in the basement year after year.

If adding an extra round to the H&A was an option than I think your idea is also a good one.

Its very easy to add an extra round into the season. I don't know if you noticed, but last season we had 24 rounds (2 byes), this season we have 23 rounds (1 bye) so we could easily go to 24 rounds (1 bye).

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

Its very easy to add an extra round into the season. I don't know if you noticed, but last season we had 24 rounds (2 byes), this season we have 23 rounds (1 bye) so we could easily go to 24 rounds (1 bye).

The AFLPA have made it clear in the past that 22 H&A games and 4 weeks of finals is as many as they will stomach. It would probably take a big payrise to get agreement beyond that.

 

[McCrann]

The AFLPA have made it clear in the past that 22 H&A games and 4 weeks of finals is as many as they will stomach. It would probably take a big payrise to get agreement beyond that.

I'm sure that can be worked out. Just cut the pre-season by 2 weeks. Voila.

 

[Perry Pie]

There are core requirements the AFL and most clubs will want from any fixture system.

1. at least 22 rounds (there is a five year TV contract in place).
2. Non - Vic teams MUST play the other team in thier home state twice a season (minimises travel & cost).

So given those two core requirements is it possible to have a fairer draw? Yes.

1. Pair each team (for the non Vic teams its obvious, Vic teams can rotate)
2. Based on previous season final ladder seed each pair of teams into three groups of as equal strength as possible.
3. Every team plays the teams in its own group twice, all other sides once.

Depending on who gets paired with who, most "premium" games can be accomodated. Really its not that hard.

 

[Kwality]

There are core requirements the AFL and most clubs will want from any fixture system.

1. at least 22 rounds (there is a five year TV contract in place).
2. Non - Vic teams MUST play the other team in thier home state twice a season (minimises travel & cost).

So given those two core requirements is it possible to have a fairer draw? Yes.

1. Pair each team (for the non Vic teams its obvious, Vic teams can rotate)
2. Based on previous season final ladder seed each pair of teams into three groups of as equal strength as possible.
3. Every team plays the teams in its own group twice, all other sides once.

Depending on who gets paired with who, most "premium" games can be accomodated. Really its not that hard.

How do you propose dealing with travel? Its an example of real inequality - are the favoured clubs like the Pies going to travel like the non Vic teams or are they travelling just 50% of those who travel. Will your proposal apply to all Vic clubs?

 

[Perry Pie]

The non-Vic clubs have to travel 10 times a year, that is unavoidable. The Vic clubs will travel between 4 and 6 times each season - it will depend on what clubs end up in the same fixture groups.

 

[Kwality]

Why dont you want Vic based teams to share the travel?

 

[Perry Pie]

They will share the travel. I am not sure want your point is.
If a pair of vic clubs end up in a group with 4 non-vic clubs they will play 6 games interstate (4 against group teams/2 against non group teams). In a group with 2 non-vic clubs they will play interstate 5 times (2 against group teams/3 non group). In a Vic only group they will play inerstate 4 times. The point is that the groups are based on seedings derived from the previous season, not location.

There is nothing that can be done regarding how many times a non Vic plays interstate.

 

[Buzz/Sticks/bryce]

I'd go with rounds 1-17: play all sides once(rotating annual home-away)
rounds 18-22- club requested fixtures- this way a club is responsible for its own draw.

 

[Kwality]

They will share the travel. I am not sure want your point is.
If a pair of vic clubs end up in a group with 4 non-vic clubs they will play 6 games interstate (4 against group teams/2 against non group teams). In a group with 2 non-vic clubs they will play interstate 5 times (2 against group teams/3 non group). In a Vic only group they will play inerstate 4 times. The point is that the groups are based on seedings derived from the previous season, not location.

There is nothing that can be done regarding how many times a non Vic plays interstate.

In this FIXture, why cant Vic clubs share the travel?

They can chose to play home games interstate, why cant the FIX include home games interstate?

 

[Perry Pie]

In this FIXture, why cant Vic clubs share the travel?

They can chose to play home games interstate, why cant the FIX include home games interstate?

It is an absurd suggestion that Vic teams should play home games as away games.

You ask why? Well the loss of money for a start.

 

[Kwality]

As with other FIX games, its easy enough to negotiate a different financial deal, e.g clubs share gate as happens often enough so as to make your objection just a bump in the road.
Didnt Eddie threaten to remove such a deal with Melbourne for them thinking for themselves & in contravention of the Pies Song Book? Need more examples?

Melbourne clubs lose money on games when only one team is Melbourne based - why lose money if it can be played elsewhere at a profit.

Remember West Coast & North were going to play a North game @ Subi for big pay day but the AFL rejected it - there is a WA based Commissioner now, well able to demand equity in the FIXture.

Blinkers off !!

 

[daffo]

1. You play each team once in the first 17 rounds.
2. If you finish bottom 8, you only play bottom 8 sides twice the following year, (top play top)
3. Each team needs to travel interstate at least 5 times through the year
4. No team can sell home games anymore (Darwin games to be in NAB Cup)
5. In 20 years time push for 20 team league (one in Tassie, another maybe in Perth), each team plays each other once (19 rounds), then extended six week finals system

 

[gPhonque]

2. If you finish bottom 8, you only play bottom 8 sides twice the following year, (top play top)

Oh God....

Some people just don't get it, do they?

So your solution to correct an unequal fixture is to create an even more uneven fixture?

Well done.