New fixture solution based on previous season finishing positions

NoobPie

Premiership Player
Joined
Sep 21, 2016
Posts
3,883
Likes
2,508
AFL Club
Collingwood
Thread starter #1
This is a model in part lifted from a thread on the main board

Under this model all teams will play each-other once in the first 17 rounds

In the last 5 rounds teams will play repeat matches based against teams in the same third they finished in the previous season

The key is that matches would be worth different points depending on the third.

Possibly:

  • Top 3rd games for 8 points
  • Middle 3rd for 6 points
  • Bottom 3rd 4 points
The top 3 teams in each third would get the 3 home matches in the last 5 games (where points are worth more)

This model overcomes some of the "flaws" (perceived or real) in the "17-5" model while getting much of the same benefits

I.e.

Flaws (real or perceived) overcome compared to "17-5" - keeps single ladder; 11 home games still guaranteed; fixture set at start of the season; bottom 6 not eliminated before end of season;

Benefits of 17-5 retained (at least to some extent) - removes "fixturing" problem; greatly increased high stakes games in the last 5 weeks; greatly reduced competitively unbalanced games in the last 5 weeks; ability to fixture big Thursday (as well as Friday) night games in the last 5 weeks

I guess the main criticism of the 17-5 that it would retain (and would probably be more valid) is potentially giving one contending team an easier lead in to the finals cos they finished lower in the previous season

I suspect many would also be affronted by the idea of games with different points on the line...
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

jatz14

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Dec 13, 2011
Posts
5,131
Likes
4,944
Location
WA
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Perth Glory W-League
#2
This is a model in part lifted from a thread on the main board

Under this model all teams will play each-other once in the first 17 rounds

In the last 5 rounds teams will play repeat matches based against teams in the same third they finished in the previous season

The key is that matches would be worth different points depending on the third.

Possibly:

  • Top 3rd games for 8 points
  • Middle 3rd for 6 points
  • Bottom 3rd 4 points
The top 3 teams in each third would get the 3 home matches in the last 5 games (where points are worth more)

This model overcomes some of the "flaws" (perceived or real) in the "17-5" model while getting much of the same benefits

I.e.

Flaws (real or perceived) overcome compared to "17-5" - keeps single ladder; 11 home games still guaranteed; fixture set at start of the season; bottom 6 not eliminated before end of season;

Benefits of 17-5 retained (at least to some extent) - removes "fixturing" problem; greatly increased high stakes games in the last 5 weeks; greatly reduced competitively unbalanced games in the last 5 weeks; ability to fixture big Thursday (as well as Friday) night games in the last 5 weeks

I guess the main criticism of the 17-5 that it would retain (and would probably be more valid) is potentially giving one contending team an easier lead in to the finals cos they finished lower in the previous season

I suspect many would also be affronted by the idea of games with different points on the line...
Is there any real point to playing the bottom third games? Just give them the position they are at with 5 games to go, call it a day. The games mean nothing at all. Why have an important player do an ACL in an end of season practice match?
 

NoobPie

Premiership Player
Joined
Sep 21, 2016
Posts
3,883
Likes
2,508
AFL Club
Collingwood
Thread starter #3
Is there any real point to playing the bottom third games? Just give them the position they are at with 5 games to go, call it a day. The games mean nothing at all. Why have an important player do an ACL in an end of season practice match?
This is a different system
 
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Posts
51,560
Likes
63,423
Location
SE Oz
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
The Mighty Blacks
#6
Not in the suggested system. Please read the system
If you have 6 teams in a third of the comp and the top 4 have played 9 home games out of 17 and 2 have played 8 then your

"The top 3 teams in each third would get the 3 home matches in the last 5 games"

Means 1st 2nd and 3rd team get to play 12 home games, 4th team 11, and teams 5th and 6th play 10
 

NoobPie

Premiership Player
Joined
Sep 21, 2016
Posts
3,883
Likes
2,508
AFL Club
Collingwood
Thread starter #7
If you have 6 teams in a third of the comp and the top 4 have played 9 home games out of 17 and 2 have played 8 then your

"The top 3 teams in each third would get the 3 home matches in the last 5 games"

Means 1st 2nd and 3rd team get to play 12 home games, 4th team 11, and teams 5th and 6th play 10
Not sure you’ve grasped the proposed system yet.

1st 2nd and 3rd would have played 8 home games after 17 rounds

The three teams they will play at home in the last 5 weeks they would have played away in the first 17

The fixture is set at the start of the season based on the previous seasons finishing position
 
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Posts
51,560
Likes
63,423
Location
SE Oz
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
The Mighty Blacks
#8
Not sure you’ve grasped the proposed system yet.

1st 2nd and 3rd would have played 8 home games after 17 rounds

The three teams they will play at home in the last 5 weeks they would have played away in the first 17

The fixture is set at the start of the season based on the previous seasons finishing position
You cant guarantee that the top 3 sides have only played 8 games at home by the end of Rd 17.

Nothing in your original post says its guaranteed they have played 8 games at home. You dont know who is going to finish where at the end of Rd 17.
 

NoobPie

Premiership Player
Joined
Sep 21, 2016
Posts
3,883
Likes
2,508
AFL Club
Collingwood
Thread starter #9
You cant guarantee that the top 3 sides have only played 8 games at home by the end of Rd 17.
I feel I'll just keep repeating myself ad nauseum here and, when you finally click, instead of just apologising (I am not asking for an apology) you'll just tell me you don't like the proposal or other criticise some element of it!

The repeat matches are based on the previous seasons finishing positions not the positions after round 17 as is the case with the commonly known as "17-5" system.

Nothing in your original post says its guaranteed they have played 8 games at home. You dont know who is going to finish where at the end of Rd 17.
Both the thread title and the OP clearly state it is based on previous seasons finishing positions.
 
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Posts
51,560
Likes
63,423
Location
SE Oz
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
The Mighty Blacks
#10
I feel I'll just keep repeating myself ad nauseum here and, when you finally click, instead of just apologising (I am not asking for an apology) you'll just tell me you don't like the proposal or other criticise some element of it!

The repeat matches are based on the previous seasons finishing positions not the positions after round 17 as is the case with the commonly known as "17-5" system.



Both the thread title and the OP clearly state it is based on previous seasons finishing positions.
Ok so you are coming up with a FIXture on 31st October, that is only marginally better than we have now, and doesn't really do anything that Gil wants to do on 27th July, when Rd 17 is finished, and he wants to put the sides in 3 groups of 6 to play each other. got it.
 

NoobPie

Premiership Player
Joined
Sep 21, 2016
Posts
3,883
Likes
2,508
AFL Club
Collingwood
Thread starter #11
Ok so you are coming up with a FIXture on 31st October, that is only marginally better than we have now, and doesn't really do anything that Gil wants to do on 27th July, when Rd 17 is finished, and he wants to put the sides in 3 groups of 6 to play each other. got it.
And there you go....what a guy!
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

greatwhiteshark

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Oct 3, 2007
Posts
9,266
Likes
8,158
Location
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
West Perth
#12
Got some merit this idea.
The issue I have is that if my side is in the top 3 after 17 rounds I don’t want to play all top sides for the last 5 games, for the top 6 the finals are starting 5 weeks before they should.
As a coach I would hate it also.

As the AFL love money so much here is what I would do.

Make a televised event of the last 5 round draw, completely draw it out of a barrel and where it sits it sits, some will get easier draws than others but at least it would be random.
I can just picture AFL fans sitting in front of their tv waiting with baited breath at who will come out of the barrel, the AFL would get a lovely little sponsor bonus for this as well.
 

DERIBERATE

Premiership Player
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Posts
3,367
Likes
5,584
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Adelaide United, Leeds, Bohemians
#13
A system without each team playing the other twice home and away is fundamentally broken. We have expressions - "not playing with a full deck", "one short of a 6 pack","lift doesn't go to the top floor". "10 short of a home and away season" is the same thing.
 

NoobPie

Premiership Player
Joined
Sep 21, 2016
Posts
3,883
Likes
2,508
AFL Club
Collingwood
Thread starter #14
A system without each team playing the other twice home and away is fundamentally broken. We have expressions - "not playing with a full deck", "one short of a 6 pack","lift doesn't go to the top floor". "10 short of a home and away season" is the same thing.


So the soccer world cup and uefa champions league are "fundamentally broken"?? :drunk::drunk::drunk:

Run along now, you have nothing to add here
 

NoobPie

Premiership Player
Joined
Sep 21, 2016
Posts
3,883
Likes
2,508
AFL Club
Collingwood
Thread starter #15
I like it that even though I said you'd behave exactly as you did, you were still couldn't help yourself!


Ok so you are coming up with a FIXture on 31st October,
It is not a "FIXture", if by FIXture you mean the AFL arbitrarily determining who plays who. The fixture would be completely determined by the previous season's finishing position

that is only marginally better than we have now,
It doesn't involve the AFL arbitrarily determining who plays who twice and achieves a more competitive fixture so I would say it is much better....but "better" is intrinsically a subjective term

and doesn't really do anything that Gil wants to do on 27th July, when Rd 17 is finished, and he wants to put the sides in 3 groups of 6 to play each other. got it.
Uuuummmm, yeah the OP clearly set out that it wasn't the much discussed "17-5" it was an alternative system. You'd have to ask Gil his opinion on it

I personally still prefer a version of the 17/18-5 (I have presented it here several times previously). This system in this thread is just another concept for discussion that has the advantages of overcoming some of the criticisms of the "17-5" systems that the 3 groups are qualified into based on the first 17 games.
 

DERIBERATE

Premiership Player
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Posts
3,367
Likes
5,584
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Adelaide United, Leeds, Bohemians
#16
So the soccer world cup and uefa champions league are "fundamentally broken"?? :drunk::drunk::drunk:

Run along now, you have nothing to add here
Why bring soccer into it? Oh that's right - you are petrified of soccer.

In the Champions League group stages all teams in the group play each other twice. They qualify for the competition by winning their respective leagues where they play all their opponents twice.

World Cup group teams don't play their opponents twice because all games are neutral fixtures (with the exception of the host nation).
 

NoobPie

Premiership Player
Joined
Sep 21, 2016
Posts
3,883
Likes
2,508
AFL Club
Collingwood
Thread starter #17
Why bring soccer into it? Oh that's right - you are petrified of soccer.
Haha....smell the fear! Classic

I brought soccer into it because you are clearly a soccer head.

I am an Australian football fan contributing to an Australian football forum.

I quite like soccer but I don't much like the obnoxiousness and absurd sense of entitlement that flows from the persecution complexes and massive anti-AFL shoulder chips of many Australian soccer fans. If you need tell yourself it's because I'm "petrified" of soccer to console yourself than eat your heart out

In the Champions League group stages all teams in the group play each other twice. They qualify for the competition by winning their respective leagues where they play all their opponents twice.

World Cup group teams don't play their opponents twice because all games are neutral fixtures (with the exception of the host nation).
Both of those competitions are broken into smaller groups before knockout phases. Every US sport uses a conferencing system. In none of those competitions does every team play each-other twice home and away. They all imperfectly sort teams on merit

Ultimately the solution to the AFL fixture isn't a double round robin. TO call anything that doesn't involve a double round robin "fundamentally broken" and introducing weird euphemisms suggests you have nothing to add to a discussion about AFL fixture solutions
 
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Posts
51,560
Likes
63,423
Location
SE Oz
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
The Mighty Blacks
#18
I like it that even though I said you'd behave exactly as you did, you were still couldn't help yourself!

It is not a "FIXture", if by FIXture you mean the AFL arbitrarily determining who plays who. The fixture would be completely determined by the previous season's finishing position
A draw is random. A FIXture is manipulation. This still involves manipulation.

It doesn't involve the AFL arbitrarily determining who plays who twice and achieves a more competitive fixture so I would say it is much better....but "better" is intrinsically a subjective term
The AFL isn't going to give up its blockbusters when its so paranoid about crowd figures, ratings etc. You still have some arbitrary valuation of prior season placings pretty much like the AFL has its 3 bands arbitrary allocation of many teams you play from those bands, so that it allows for it program in as many blockbusters as it can.

Uuuummmm, yeah the OP clearly set out that it wasn't the much discussed "17-5" it was an alternative system. You'd have to ask Gil his opinion on it
My mistake, I clicked on the alert, skim read post, got a call went and did a couple things and then come back to it about 2 hours later forgot and didnt read the thread heading, so I concentrated on your comment about the weakness of the 17-5 model. Yes I should have re read the thread title, and therefore I probably would not have commented on your post. The 17-5 fixture idea Gill has talked about is fundamentally flawed around number of home games each team gets.
 

NoobPie

Premiership Player
Joined
Sep 21, 2016
Posts
3,883
Likes
2,508
AFL Club
Collingwood
Thread starter #19
A draw is random. A FIXture is manipulation. This still involves manipulation.
Strawman / false dichotomy fallacy.

There is no manipulation. The fixture is determined endogenously in that it is totally determined by ladder finishing positions.



The AFL isn't going to give up its blockbusters when its so paranoid about crowd figures, ratings etc. You still have some arbitrary valuation of prior season placings pretty much like the AFL has its 3 bands arbitrary allocation of many teams you play from those bands, so that it allows for it program in as many blockbusters as it can.
This provides more "blockbusters" while removing the arbitrary determination (manipulation) of the double up games

Clearly the AFL (or atleast Gill) are up for this kind of model because they have tried unsuccessfully to get a similar model up (ultimately resisted by the clubs)
 

DERIBERATE

Premiership Player
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Posts
3,367
Likes
5,584
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Adelaide United, Leeds, Bohemians
#20
Haha....smell the fear! Classic

I brought soccer into it because you are clearly a soccer head.

I am an Australian football fan contributing to an Australian football forum.

I quite like soccer but I don't much like the obnoxiousness and absurd sense of entitlement that flows from the persecution complexes and massive anti-AFL shoulder chips of many Australian soccer fans. If you need tell yourself it's because I'm "petrified" of soccer to console yourself than eat your heart out



Both of those competitions are broken into smaller groups before knockout phases. Every US sport uses a conferencing system. In none of those competitions does every team play each-other twice home and away. They all imperfectly sort teams on merit

Ultimately the solution to the AFL fixture isn't a double round robin. TO call anything that doesn't involve a double round robin "fundamentally broken" and introducing weird euphemisms suggests you have nothing to add to a discussion about AFL fixture solutions
Why are you always so aggressive?

I think you're a bit lost on the difference between a knock out competition and league season. The Champions League is only a league in name - it's a knockout tournament. The group stages are designed to reduce the field to a manageable number for the knockout stage to take place (and also to determine entrants to the Europa League finals).

If a cup were the same thing as a league, as you seem to think, then a competition like Australia's FFA Cup contested by over 800 clubs in Australia would never end. 1,598 matches per club? Might want to brush up on that one mate.
 
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Posts
51,560
Likes
63,423
Location
SE Oz
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
The Mighty Blacks
#21
Strawman / false dichotomy fallacy.

There is no manipulation. The fixture is determined endogenously in that it is totally determined by ladder finishing positions.
Of course its manipulation. You are manipulating the points teams get, so that is manipulation in your total package. Why change the points unless you are trying to manipulate the situation.

This provides more "blockbusters" while removing the arbitrary determination (manipulation) of the double up games

Clearly the AFL (or atleast Gill) are up for this kind of model because they have tried unsuccessfully to get a similar model up (ultimately resisted by the clubs)
Blockbusters aren't determined by last year's ladder positions. They are built up over years of rivalry and a degree of spite, hatred etc.

Gil has looked at it because he knows its correctly perceived as a fixture. He isn't going to make it much better. Its finessing around the edges.
 

NoobPie

Premiership Player
Joined
Sep 21, 2016
Posts
3,883
Likes
2,508
AFL Club
Collingwood
Thread starter #22
Why are you always so aggressive?
Serious? You accused me of being petrifried of soccer after making a completely obnoxious contribution to a thread I started


I think you're a bit lost on the difference between a knock out competition and league season. The Champions League is only a league in name - it's a knockout tournament. The group stages are designed to reduce the field to a manageable number for the knockout stage to take place (and also to determine entrants to the Europa League finals).

If a cup were the same thing as a league, as you seem to think, then a competition like Australia's FFA Cup contested by over 800 clubs in Australia would never end. 1,598 matches per club? Might want to brush up on that one mate.
I know the difference between a cup and a league.

You said...

A system without each team playing the other twice home and away is fundamentally broken.
That was an absurd statement and now you are just shifting the goal posts

Barely any professional sport, has a simple double round robin to determine the champion. Mostly they don't because, like the AFL, there are too many teams (given the nature of the game) to have a double round robin system.

That's not to say the current system isn't flawed and a better system within similar constraints (ie season length) cannot be adopted.

Which is, of course, the point of this thread.
 

NoobPie

Premiership Player
Joined
Sep 21, 2016
Posts
3,883
Likes
2,508
AFL Club
Collingwood
Thread starter #23
Of course its manipulation. You are manipulating the points teams get, so that is manipulation in your total package. Why change the points unless you are trying to manipulate the situation.
No, you are designing a system that eliminates manipulation....unless you a confusing "design" with "manipulation"?


Blockbusters aren't determined by last year's ladder positions. They are built up over years of rivalry and a degree of spite, hatred etc.
Blockbusters are big games. Rivalry games tend more likely to be "blockbusters" if they are playing for something

I deliberately put "blockbusters" in scare quotes because I don't much like the term

The reality is that having the last 5 weeks of the season have 3 match ups between the top 6 from the previous season playing for, say, 8 points would mean you would likely have huge games every week during that period. All the better if they are traditional/modern rivals.
 

BobbyMorri

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
May 4, 2009
Posts
6,127
Likes
4,351
Location
Tasmania
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Scunny, Furth
#24
So the soccer world cup and uefa champions league are "fundamentally broken"?? :drunk::drunk::drunk:

Run along now, you have nothing to add here
what a top quality post..........

seriously, most country AR leagues have/are home and away. The VFL used to be before it become to big. It is not a foreign concept. But instead of just stating that, you become a troll and attack soccer/the poster for no reason. And you look like a fool in the process. A cup is different than a league.
 

NoobPie

Premiership Player
Joined
Sep 21, 2016
Posts
3,883
Likes
2,508
AFL Club
Collingwood
Thread starter #25
what a top quality post..........

seriously, most country AR leagues have/are home and away. The VFL used to be before it become to big. It is not a foreign concept. But instead of just stating that, you become a troll and attack soccer/the poster for no reason. And you look like a fool in the process. A cup is different than a league.
You completely miss the point as usual

Double round robins are an excellent system for sporting leagues. Most professional sports use other systems, primarily because they have too many teams to make it work. National soccer leagues overcome this by having pro/rel.

I clearly think the current AFL system is sub optimal otherwise I wouldn't have started this thread

DERIBERATE said

A system without each team playing the other twice home and away is fundamentally broken.
He then went on to make some weird association with euphemisms for people with mental illness

He made no distinction between a cup and a league (or a league that is really a cup :drunk::drunk::drunk:), just that any system that didn't involve everyone playing each-other twice was "fundamentally broken". But apparently I'm the fool!

The reason I raised soccer competitions as counter-examples was I have only ever seen this poster contribute either to troll football or to defend soccer against imagined attacks....his avatar and three "other teams" are all soccer teams.

The fact that you have identified me as the "troll" and the "fool" speaks volumes. Anyway, if you've nothing to add to this thread than to call me names perhaps you should run along too..

...hark, do you hear that? I think soccer is being persecuted somewhere
 
Top Bottom