The McIntyre system

[JoffaMan]

Can somebody thorougly explain how that worked?

Cheers!

 

[ManWithNoName]

1v8
2v7
3v6
4v5

Two highest placed winners go through to the prelim. Two lowest placed losers eliminated. Two highest placed losers host the other two winners in the Semis the next week. In theory it was possible for 5th and 6th to go through to the prelim and 3rd and 4th to be eliminated in the first week.

 

[mighty tiges]

Can somebody thorougly explain how that worked?

Cheers!

Week 1:

Qualifying Final 1: 1st v 4th
Qualifying Final 2: 2nd v 3rd

Elimination Final 1: 5th v 8th
Elimination Final 2: 6th v 7th

Winners of Qualifying finals through to Week 3.
Losers of Elimination finals eliminated.

Week 2:

Semi Final 1: loser of QF1 v winner of EF1
Semi Final 2: loser of QF2 v winner of EF2

Winners go on to week 3. Losers eliminated.

Week 3:

Preliminary Final 1: winner of QF1 v winner of SF2
Preliminary Final 2: winner of QF2 v winner of SF1

Teams that met in week 1 can't meet again in week 3. Eg. West Coast won't play Sydney nor will Adelaide host Freo.

Winners through to Grand Final. Losers eliminated.

Week 4:

Grand Final: winner of PF1 v winner of PF2.

Winner is the premier.

 

[banzai]

It usually means that 1st def 8th, 2nd def 7th and the other two finals in week one dont mean anything.

 

[magilla]

Can somebody thorougly explain how that worked?

Cheers!

see nrl finals system. they use it

 

[Chewy]

The league officials have used a few of Ken McIntyre's systems.


Top Four (1931-1971)
1st Semi Final: 3rd vs 4th, winner into the PF, loser eliminated
2nd Semi Final: 1st vs 2nd, winner into the GF, loser into the PF
Preliminary Final: loser of 2nd Semi vs winner of 1st Semi
Grand Final: winner of 2nd Semi vs winner of PF



Top Five (1972-1990)
Qualifying Final: 2nd vs 3rd, winner into 2nd Semi, loser into 1st Semi
Elimination Final: 4th vs 5th, winner into 1st Semi, loser eliminated
1st placed team rests.
1st Semi Final: QF loser vs EF winner, winner into the PF, loser eliminated
2nd Semi Final: 1st vs QF winner, winner into the GF, loser into the PF
Preliminary Final: loser of 2nd Semi vs winner of 1st Semi
Grand Final: winner of 2nd Semi vs winner of PF


Top Six (1991)
Qualifying Final (a) 1st vs 2nd, winner into 2nd Semi, loser into 1st Semi
Qualifying Final (b) 3rd vs 4th, winner into 2nd Semi, loser eliminated
Elimination Final: 5th vs 6th, winner into 1st Semi, loser eliminated
1st Semi Final: QF(a) loser vs EF winner, winner into the PF, loser eliminated
2nd Semi Final: QF(a) winner vs QF(b) winner, winner into the GF, loser into the PF
Preliminary Final: loser of 2nd Semi vs winner of 1st Semi
Grand Final: winner of 2nd Semi vs winner of PF

The public was outraged when St Kilda (4th) were defeated by Geelong (3rd) in a thriller and eliminated.
McIntyre claimed this system provided the fairest opportunity to win the flag, based on where each team finished.
The AFL disagreed, bowed to popular opinion and changed his system


Top Six (1992-1993)
Qualifying Final: 1st vs 2nd, winner into 2nd Semi, loser into 1st Semi
Elimination Final: 3rd vs 6th, loser eliminated
Elimination Final: 4th vs 5th, loser eliminated
The highest placed winner of either EF goes into the 2nd Semi
The lowest placed winner of either EF goes into the 1st Semi

1st Semi Final: QF loser vs low EF winner, winner into the PF, loser eliminated
2nd Semi Final: QF winner vs high EF winner, winner into the GF, loser into the PF
Preliminary Final: loser of 2nd Semi vs winner of 1st Semi
Grand Final: winner of 2nd Semi vs winner of PF


Top Eight (1994-2000)

Qualifying Final (a) 1st vs 8th
Qualifying Final (b) 2nd vs 7th
Qualifying Final (c) 3rd vs 6th
Qualifying Final (d) 4th vs 5th
the two lowest ranked losers are eliminated
the two highest ranked winners get the next week off and go into the Preliminary Finals
the two lower ranked winners meet the two higher ranked losers in the Semi Finals

1st Semi Final: 3rd highest QF winner vs 1st highest QF loser
2nd Semi Final: 4th highest QF winner vs 2nd higherst QF loser
winners into the Preminary Finals, losers eliminated

Preliminary Final: 1st highest ranked QF winner vs winner of 2nd Semi
Preliminary Final: 2nd highest ranked QF winner vs winner of 1st Semi
winners into the Grand Final, losers eliminated

Grand Final: winners of both Preminary Finals

 

[Chewy]

Top Eight (1994-2000)

Qualifying Final (a) 1st vs 8th
Qualifying Final (b) 2nd vs 7th
Qualifying Final (c) 3rd vs 6th
Qualifying Final (d) 4th vs 5th
the two lowest ranked losers are eliminated
the two highest ranked winners get the next week off and go into the Preliminary Finals
the two lower ranked winners meet the two higher ranked losers in the Semi Finals

1st Semi Final: 3rd highest QF winner vs 1st highest QF loser
2nd Semi Final: 4th highest QF winner vs 2nd higherst QF loser
winners into the Preminary Finals, losers eliminated

Preliminary Final: 1st highest ranked QF winner vs winner of 2nd Semi
Preliminary Final: 2nd highest ranked QF winner vs winner of 1st Semi
winners into the Grand Final, losers eliminated

Grand Final: winners of both Preminary Finals

Example from 1994

1 West Coast
2 Carlton
3 North Melb
4 Geelong
5 Footscray
6 Hawthorn
7 Melbourne
8 Collingwood

(winners in bold)

West Coast vs Collingwood
Carlton vs Melbourne
North Melb vs Hawthorn
Geelong vs Footscray

Carlton vs Geelong
Melbourne vs Footscray

West Coast vs Melbourne
North Melb vs Geelong

West Coast vs Geelong

 

[Father Jack]

Example from 1994

1 West Coast
2 Carlton
3 North Melb
4 Geelong
5 Footscray
6 Hawthorn
7 Melbourne
8 Collingwood

(winners in bold)

West Coast vs Collingwood
Carlton vs Melbourne
North Melb vs Hawthorn
Geelong vs Footscray

Carlton vs Geelong
Melbourne vs Footscray

West Coast vs Melbourne
North Melb vs Geelong

West Coast vs Geelong

I must say it was lol @ Carlton that year. Altho I had better not tempt fate ...

 

[Ronin]

Can somebody thorougly explain how that worked?

Cheers!

The NRL system sucks compared to the AFL version. As has been pointed out on this thread, 1v8 and 2v7 are meaningless games.

 

[mrbehemoth]

It usually means that 1st def 8th, 2nd def 7th and the other two finals in week one dont mean anything.

Although since the NRL has started using it, 7th has actually beaten 2nd, I think, at least half the time. Strangely enough.

The trouble with devising a "fair" finals system is that finals are in themselves inherently unfair, as they do not reward the best team of the year. Finals are designed to create interest and excitement, not fairness in determining superior teams. Overall, I prefer the AFL system to the NRL one, because as quoted, 3 v 6 and 4 v 5 are menaingless if results go according to script, and the teams simply swap and go again the next week. If the winners of these games got a home final in week 2, it might improve it, but in the NRL unfortunately, after week 1, finals are played at the same place no matter who's playing.

 

[mrbehemoth]

The NRL system sucks compared to the AFL version. As has been pointed out on this thread, 1v8 and 2v7 are meaningless games.

No, it's the other games that are (often, but not always) meaningless. in 1 v 8 and 2 v 7, there is always significance to the results: 7 and 8 are definitely out if they lose, and 1 and 2 definitely get a week off if they win, while if there are upsets, both will be playing next week.

But in 3 v 6 and 4 v 5, whether they are knocked out, get a week off or play next week depends on other results. If the 1 beats 8 and 2 beats 7, it means that 3 will play 5 and 4 will play 6 for the right to play 1 and 2 in the prelims, thus rendering the 3 v 6 and 4 v 5 meaningless, since the winners get no advantage and the losers no penalty.

 

[mrbehemoth]

It's an interesting thing that 1998 is often brought up as an example of a time that the GF winner came from outside the top four. But of course back then they played under the McIntyre system, and Adelaide lost in the first week, but survived. No double chance for anyone in possies 5-8 now, so it's harder to win from there. Adelaide's win isn't valid as an example of how a team can do it these days, but people keep bringing it up.

 

[Ronin]

No, it's the other games that are (often, but not always) meaningless. in 1 v 8 and 2 v 7, there is always significance to the results: 7 and 8 are definitely out if they lose, and 1 and 2 definitely get a week off if they win, while if there are upsets, both will be playing next week.

But in 3 v 6 and 4 v 5, whether they are knocked out, get a week off or play next week depends on other results. If the 1 beats 8 and 2 beats 7, it means that 3 will play 5 and 4 will play 6 for the right to play 1 and 2 in the prelims, thus rendering the 3 v 6 and 4 v 5 meaningless, since the winners get no advantage and the losers no penalty.

I can see what you mean, but where I was coming from was that 8th had never beaten 1st, and I think 7th has only won once (could be twice).

The AFL system ensures that the top 4 get a second week, even though it is unlikely that they would be eliminated in the NRL finals.

 

[Didaics]

It was changed after the Crows won the flag from 5th after losing their first final in 1998, and Carlton went all the way to the Gf from (I think) 5th as well after being belted first up in Brisbane in 1999. It was too much advantage to the 5th and 6th teams (especially when the MCG deal was in place which saw Carlton get a home semi against the Eagles in 99 after finishing lower and losing their first final away.)

Ironically all 5th placed teams have lost to the 8th placed team since they changed it to the current system.

 

[Chasing the Dream]

The NRL system sucks compared to the AFL version. As has been pointed out on this thread, 1v8 and 2v7 are meaningless games.

The irony is that the NRL swapped to the McIntrye system the very same year we ditched it. The NRL started their top 8 the way we have it now.

FWIW the system that we now use is by far better than the NRL rubbish. Can someone tell me why the Bronco's played St George and Manly played Newcastle last weekend?

 

[johnnyhoward]

It was changed after the Crows won the flag from 5th after losing their first final in 1998, and Carlton went all the way to the Gf from (I think) 5th as well after being belted first up in Brisbane in 1999. It was too much advantage to the 5th and 6th teams (especially when the MCG deal was in place which saw Carlton get a home semi against the Eagles in 99 after finishing lower and losing their first final away.)

Ironically all 5th placed teams have lost to the 8th placed team since they changed it to the current system.

It was introduced in 2000 wasn't it?

1 v 8 can be a meaningless game, but Brisbane in '95 must have really been hurting after they got into the finals and had to face one of the great teams in Carlton, and they only lost by a couple of goals.

 

[Snuka]

Although since the NRL has started using it, 7th has actually beaten 2nd, I think, at least half the time. Strangely enough.

The trouble with devising a "fair" finals system is that finals are in themselves inherently unfair, as they do not reward the best team of the year. Finals are designed to create interest and excitement, not fairness in determining superior teams. Overall, I prefer the AFL system to the NRL one, because as quoted, 3 v 6 and 4 v 5 are menaingless if results go according to script, and the teams simply swap and go again the next week. If the winners of these games got a home final in week 2, it might improve it, but in the NRL unfortunately, after week 1, finals are played at the same place no matter who's playing.

Generally, I disagree. I never buy this theory that 'the best team didn't win the premiership' in certain years and that it someone affects the fairness of the competition. Most codes of football and other sports in Australia at all levels use finals to decide the winner of the competition. So to be ajudged the 'winners' in a certain competition, you have to win finals. It is not a new concept, and Aust Rules football competitions have had finals for a century. Fact is, to be the best, you have to win on the big day(s) because thats what it's all about.

As for which system is the best...I have no idea.

 

[Vader]

Can somebody thorougly explain how that worked?

Cheers!

Put bluntly, it doesn't!

Which is why the AFL abandoned it after the 2000 finals series.

 

[evertonfc]

Top 6 from 1991 was possibly the worst system of all time.

St Kilda finishes fourth, is eliminated after playering 3rd (Geelong). Yet 6th (Essendon) is rewarded with a match against 5th (Melbourne)!

Certainly, Geelong benefited enourmously by winning and heading straight into the 2nd Semi, but death for the losing team was a terrible outcome.

 

[Otiman]

I like the idea of the top 5 system outlined there, surely having a top 8 is just a money grabbing opportunity for the AFL and to keep fans of teams 6,7 and 8 interested for longer in the series.

 

[JPetro83]

Why was this this ditched in the year 2000?

 

[crows dude]

Why was this this ditched in the year 2000?

Cause it was shit

But we did get two flags out of it. Wed be out in the first week in 98 under the current system. al though we would have played Essendon at homeand not Melbourne at MCG. Also wouldnt have had a home final in the first week in 97. We would have played St Kilda at the dome or MCG first week.

 

[Purple Suit]

Why was this this ditched in the year 2000?

It didn't reward your season enough. If you finished top 2 and lost the first final plus some other upsets, you could not even get a home final the next week. 3rd or 4th could be eliminated week 1 too. Historically, the ladder was more spread than this year so it seemed unfair that you could dominate the season but stuff up one game and be completely on the back foot, maybe travelling interstate to stay in it in week 2.

In the seasons that everything went to plan, the 2nd chance would go to 5th and 6th and they would just swap opponents and get pumped by the opposite 3rd and 4th team. So the 2nd week of semi's was boring rather than the current system where the better teams are coming off loses against the winners so it at least seems like a decent contest,

It was also a bit annoying waiting to see the pathway to the GF rather than the current system where you know which side of the draw you are on and the choice of 2 opponents the whole way through.

 

[catstorm]

 

[Blackas87]

Cause it was shit

But we did get two flags out of it. Wed be out in the first week in 98 under the current system. al though we would have played Essendon at homeand not Melbourne at MCG. Also wouldnt have had a home final in the first week in 97. We would have played St Kilda at the dome or MCG first week.

Is the current system better?

Adelaide finish 1st and play Collingwood 4th.
Adelaide get a home final, beat Collingwood, Collingwood get a 2nd chance and Adelaide and Collingwood can meat again in the Grand Final, this time at Collingwood’s home ground.

Is finishing higher on the ladder and beating a lower ranked opponent enough to say you’re the superior team that year. Or do we need a rematch in the Grand Final?