Should the AFL introduce a 8th vs 9th play-off before finals series?

Remove this Banner Ad

Juddernaut08

Norm Smith Medallist
Nov 8, 2007
9,981
13,491
Melbourne
AFL Club
Carlton
Excellent idea but doesn't go far enough. Let's extend the play in tournament to the top 18 teams.

1 week is a lot to base things on so we should make the tournament a bit longer, say 22 rounds. Then, we take the best performed 8 teams from the end of that extended play in tournament and play finals.

This play in tournament is so good that we could just do away with the h&a season.
 

Scythe94

100-7 🏆
Aug 12, 2017
5,253
13,188
Sydney
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Orlando Magic
Nobody wants that, which means it'll be introduced within two years.

Question – if Essendon wins a play-in from 10th but then loses the elimination final, does the count continue?
 

RonnieRaven

Mature age recruit
Jun 12, 2018
1,031
1,524
AFL Club
Fremantle
Why do we see the need to keep Americanising our game?

A club finishes 9th and is therefore not good enough to make finals.. so why give them any extra chance? Next thing you'll want a best of 5 game grand final series.

Where does it stop? A final 10?? Conferences; divisions??? Time outs during games?

Definitely a no from me.
I understand that thinking and I was a no.
But the 9th team getting a crack is no different to 8th getting a crack prior to the suns entry.
It would still be only rewarding the top half of the table.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Falcon3518

All Australian
Suspended
Mar 13, 2022
762
437
AFL Club
Richmond
As a Richmond supporter 100% yes, we’d have a chance to scrape in every year

But really no way
 

simba_

WHITE NOISE
Jun 2, 2009
14,681
11,823
50XX
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Liverpool, Utah Jazz, mew2king
yeah so hinkley can set another record losing the first playoff final
 

dylan93

Club Legend
Mar 16, 2011
2,342
1,737
Melbourne
AFL Club
Melbourne
No point fixing something that isn't broken.

When Tassie and a 20th team come into the comp within the next 5-6 years then they can work out some weird top 10 system (which will be a shame because the top 8 works so well IMHO).
 

nickcat0

Team Captain
Jun 22, 2007
360
343
Southport, Lancashire, England.
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Southport FC, St Helens RFC
No, the Finals should be reserved for the top performing teams.

I think the current status with 8 out of 18 qualifying is too many. Too often it rewards mediocrity, and teams get in when they've lost 9 or 10 games. Hell, Essendon got in last year with a record of 11-11.

If we're going to change it, I'd rather reduce it to a top 5 or 6 qualifying for the Finals, thus rewarding the teams who perform well all season, and removing the chance of an average team getting lucky in September. You don't deserve the chance to call yourself Premiers unless you've won at least 15 games during the regular season.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

deck

Premiership Player
Aug 7, 2004
4,258
2,260
Melburn
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Liverpool, SF 49ers, FSU
Can't see any downsides.
The fact 9 and 10 get to play finals is a downside that out weighs anything resembling a positive.

Maybe we should just give everyone a trophy.
 

Coolangatta

Premiership Player
Oct 27, 2007
4,177
3,529
Western Australia
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
No, because I prefer the pre-GF bye over the pre-finals bye due to the concussion rule. Imagine Petracca or Charlie Cameron missing the GF because of a concussion? Get. ducked. Keep it at the top 8; maybe when there are 20 teams, change it, but I don't know how a top 10 finals system would work.
 

emuboy

Premiership Player
Dec 17, 2006
3,794
3,658
The Southern Hemisphere
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
South Fremantle, Sturt
After seeing the bizarre finals series produced when there was a pre-finals bye from 2016-2020, I would definitely say no.

The season ends at Round 22, and the next week the Top 8 commence a 4 week finals series. Keep it simple.
 

mouncey2franklin

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 16, 2018
7,178
12,219
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Yes, of course, this must happen for the good of the game.

However it should only be introduced after more important changes are made first.

For instance, we need wildcard entries into the play-offs, chosen by the commissioner himself.

And multiballs.

Why is there still only one ball in play at any given time?

Massive ovals, 36 players running around, eight sticks to kick through, several field umpires, but only one ball?

They have heaps of spare balls laying around, you can see them on the TV, so don't use that excuse.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad