Should there be a pre-finals bye?

[Slats]

The merits of the pre-finals bye are likely to again be a discussion point when AFL senior coaches have their annual mid-season gathering later this month at the home of league chief Gillon McLachlan.

In what has become something akin to a state-of-the-nation address, McLachlan outlines what he feels is working, the feedback from supporters and broadcasters and asks coaches for their issues and concerns.

At the dinner last year, Essendon coach John Worsfold led concerns about the introduction of the post-round 23 bye and it's understood about 12 of the 18 coaches still hold those concerns.

The fixture tweak came a year after Fremantle and North Melbourne rested players en masse on the eve of the finals.

Then Melbourne coach Paul Roos expressed concerns about finals-bound teams potentially going "stale" with a week off before the finals and then another week off should they progress directly from a qualifying to a preliminary final.

As it turned out, fourth-placed Greater Western Sydney and second-placed Geelong, having won on the opening weekend of the finals, giving them two breaks in a three-week span, were each beaten in the preliminary final.

It was also felt the week off gave teams that finished fifth to eighth an unfair advantage, for they had the opportunity to refresh and even regain players because of the bye.

Bulldogs coach Luke Beveridge had been sceptical of the bye, fearing it could halt any momentum his team had generated. The bye would eventually allow the seventh-placed Dogs to make five changes before their elimination final against West Coast, including giving injured pair Tom Liberatore and Jack Macrae a crucial week off.

There would be no issues with the Dogs' momentum, for they would go on and celebrate a breakthrough premiership.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...er-with-gillon-mclachlan-20170613-gwq1u5.html

 

[DroopStDanny]

Yes. But only for the Bulldogs, same as last year.

 

[Ricky Vaughn]

I don't think so.

2 sets of byes.
Rounds 8-9 and Rounds 18-19. 24 Round Season.

The bye you get for winning a Qualifying Final should be a huge advantage.

 

[LoungeLizard]

If the coaches vote against it, then so be it.
But to say the week extra off to top sides makes them go stale is complete crap IMO.
This is a pro comp, surely they know how to keep the players in top shape, nothing stopping them having a full hitout in the week off.

 

[Dadda Dave]

As long as its fair for ALL teams either way for me ..

 

[Colonial]

2 sets of byes during the year with no pre finals bye

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

 

[JayJ20]

No

The bye for winning a qualifying final should be an advantage

 

[LoungeLizard]

I would like an explanation how the Bulldogs beat the minor premiers in the grand final, they seemed to get the same benefits.

 

[Jack Bradley]

No nonnonononon no.

It diminishes the benefit of finishing in the top 4.

 

[StillAtLarge]

If the coaches vote against it, then so be it.
But to say the week extra off to top sides makes them go stale is complete crap IMO.
This is a pro comp, surely they know how to keep the players in top shape, nothing stopping them having a full hitout in the week off.

You can't replicate the intensity of a h&a game at training, let alone a final. The bye is just a shoddy shoehorned attempt to placate the league's gaming partners who were reamed by the punters in round 23 two years ago

 

[boncer34]

My team won't make top 4 but could make the bottom of the 8 so I vote yes.

If that changes I vote no.

 

[JPetro83]

I don't think so.

2 sets of byes.
Rounds 8-9 and Rounds 18-19. 24 Round Season.

The bye you get for winning a Qualifying Final should be a huge advantage.

NO! That stuffs up supercoach/dream team haha id prefer 2 split rounds round 8 or 9 and rounds 18 or 19.. split rounds. I hate it how the byes are dragged on over 3 rounds.

 

[LoungeLizard]

You can't replicate the intensity of a h&a game at training, let alone a final. The bye is just a shoddy shoehorned attempt to placate the league's gaming partners who were reamed by the punters in round 23 two years ago

So why bring players back in that have been injured all year?

 

[didaksrightfoot]

I don't think so.

2 sets of byes.
Rounds 8-9 and Rounds 18-19. 24 Round Season.

The bye you get for winning a Qualifying Final should be a huge advantage.

This - and the 2 mid-season byes is what players, coaches and the AFLPA were all asking for before the pre-finals bye was brought in.
Although I would have the byes a little bit earlier than that, just to ensure teams can get a good run of footy/form leading up to finals.


The pre-finals bye was an over-reaction to something that isn't in reality a problem and has taken away a lot of the advantage of finishing top of the ladder (and no coincidence that the Bulldogs won from 7th last year), and in fact made things a whole lot worse.

If you are a couple of wins clear on top of the ladder you have earnt the right to start preparing for finals footy earlier than those clubs who are still battling for position... and that gives you the choice to start resting those guys who are playing at 85-90%. Why should that advantage you've built up over the whole season be completely nullified by just giving everyone that break? (I don't think there is much extra to be gained by giving these guys more than a weeks rest).

It's also opened up the shitty situation where teams finishing in the top 2, and winning their QF, end up playing a prelim after only having played 1 game of footy in the previous 3 weeks - you can't tell me thats good preparation? Also surely not a coincidence that both those teams lost their prelims last year.

Just listen to the players and coaches FFS.

 

[Rotayjay]

Note that GWS barely lost their preliminary final last year. Geelong barely won their qualifying final and got smashed by a superior team in the prelim.

 

[Mr Mediocracy]

No.

Simple answer.

 

[Herne Hill Hammer]

If the coaches vote against it, then so be it.
But to say the week extra off to top sides makes them go stale is complete crap IMO.
This is a pro comp, surely they know how to keep the players in top shape, nothing stopping them having a full hitout in the week off.

Geelong coming off a bye under Chris Scott are 2-8 during the h&a. Three or four of those are against Sydney. For whatever reason, Geelong are shit at it. iirc, their record off the bye under Bomber was almost the exact opposite.

As usual, the AFL overreacted to something that might 'tarnish' their image. For top 4 clubs it's shit, for bottom of the 8 clubs, it is generally good (WCE got ****ed over big time by it last year), for supporters of clubs that don't make the finals, it's probably great. For the AFL it's probably great.

 

[blitzer]

I think where the system is wrong is the timing of the bye. I think the players want 2 byes during the season. So I would put it after round 17 ie when all teams have played each other once. That would then leave 5 games pre finals. So once again the teams that have earned the top 4 bye during the finals period get the advantage which I reckon is fair enough.

Then an earlier bye at say round 8-9.

That said I don't think having 2 byes in a short period makes it impossible to win games of football. Teams probably haven't yet found out how to optimise their preparation so it doesn't negatively impact their performance. At least one thing you can say for sure - none of your best players are getting injured while you have a bye.

 

[deck]

Note that GWS barely lost their preliminary final last year. Geelong barely won their qualifying final and got smashed by a superior team in the prelim.

I agree the sample size is far to small to say it played a major part in the results last year. But you don't need that to tell you 1 game over 27 -28 days is not a good preparation going in to a prelim final.

 

[JackFlash]

Another one of Gil's knee jerk reactions because they didn't have the balls to tackle the final round tanking situation head on.

Finishing top 4 is now a problem....momentum is everything at finals time, you don't want 1 game in 28 days!

 

[Collins-Langford-Ayres]

No

The bye for winning a qualifying final should be an advantage

This.

 

[Herne Hill Hammer]

So why bring players back in that have been injured all year?

Can you give some examples in recent times of any players that have been injured all year then brought back in?

Ottens from Geelong was probably one at the backend of his career that used to miss a large slab of the season and play finals, but he was a ruckman, which is a bit different.

Cyril in either '13 or '14 when he was taken off at half time of the VFL gf. He'd had a lengthy stint on the sidelines.

 

[Sultan]

I like it.

I'm obviously in the minority, but I felt there was a greater intensity to the finals series last year, when compared to previous years. It may be a one off, but I'd like to see it tried again.

 

[Benny78]

NO.

Makes a flag worth so much less. A grand final berth should be decided over 22 games not 3/4 games.

 

[van peebles]

No..top 2 will always pay a penalty and bottom 4 will always get a better sniff..
Wonder what they will need to do when we get wildcards?