i think we might have to agree to disagree regarding the home final for the losing top four sides. i understand your pov, and i can see what you are saying, but my argument is that the current system skews it way to far in favour of the top 4. the old system rewarded winners, with a week off and a home final.

That's the whole basis of your argument!

Nihongo! - how about how the fact that both systems are massively skewed in favour of 8th over 9th?

Surely that must have you in tears?

deanox:

Don't confuse the responses for healthy debate, because they are simply the written forms of the bewilderment that everyone is experiencing when seeing your point of view.

Simply mind boggling.

The people are right to mock you.

yes i believe that after 22 weeks everything is thrown out the door come finals. in fact i reckon if you asked any of the coaches how much the previous 22 weeks meant they would say they counted for nothing now.

If what your propsing happened it would bloody well matter to any coach who finished top 4. If you took away that stuff from the Kanagas or the Eagles it would be the biggest controversy.

How about this? Get rid of the finals totally and whatever team comes first wins the flag. This is what they do in the northern hemisphere in soccer. But it seems to be the australian way to play finals

How about this? Get rid of the finals totally and whatever team comes first wins the flag. This is what they do in the northern hemisphere in soccer. But it seems to be the australian way to play finals

I don't think anybody would like that. Finals are wiked.

And it kills to not be apart of it.

Conversely, all or a lot of the NRL coaches are suggesting their code adapt the AFLs finals blueprint. They are using the old McIntyre Finals system that the AFl ditched some years ago. The Storm who finished games clear on top had to play the Broncos, 1 v 8, the Broncos lost more games than they won, yet the storm lost 3 all year, such was the gulf between 1st and 8th. And all weekend, there was uncertainty and confusion about who would survive the first weekend of results. Its just too confusing the old way and I think they now have it right...

How about this? Get rid of the finals totally and whatever team comes first wins the flag. This is what they do in the northern hemisphere in soccer. But it seems to be the australian way to play finals

Then this is what the premierships would be.

Carl 17

Coll 17

Ess 17

Geel 11

Melb 9

Rich 8

Haw 7

Syd 7

Bris 4

Kang 4

Port 3

West c 3

Stk 2

Adel 1

Dogs 0

Freo 0

Personally i think the finals setup is fine the way it is, but another option to make it fairer is if in the second week of the finals they play at a neutral ground, for example eagles v collingwood could be played in adelaide.

i prefer this system, in the nrl they have the 1 v 8 and 8 has never won so is pretty much a miss match, more interesting if 4 teams playing for 2 spots in 3rd week and 4 other teams playing for survival to next round, even the NRL want to change it to our system . the top 4 should always get advantage over bottom for ,thats the prize for having a great season

i dont know why you have to stoop to having pot shots at me.

i think my argument is pretty clear. you dont have to agree with it, as i dont have to agree with you. but my argument is as logical and rationale as yours just based on a different principal.

you want to reward teams that finish higher on the ladder. i want to reward teams that win finals games.

yes i believe that after 22 weeks everything is thrown out the door come finals. in fact i reckon if you asked any of the coaches how much the previous 22 weeks meant they would say they counted for nothing now.

the current system continually promotes top four finishes above the bottom four. it doesnt reward finals performance.

i agree to disagree, but i wont put up with you taking shots when my argument is put forward in this manner.

Have you ever played sport competitively? How would you feel if your team dominated for the entire season and then got eliminated or were given a huge disadvantage just based on 1 game, after 22 good ones.

What is the point of having 22 useless rounds and then a finals system? Why not just have a 4 week knockout tournament and decide the premiers just based from that? The reason why I (and others) are mocking you is because your point doesn't have any logic attached to it.

You also misquote coaches when they talk about finals. When they say that the past 22 rounds mean nothing when it comes to finals they are referring to the team's chances of winning the next game, as the intensity of the matches increase and teams/players react to situations differently because of the added pressure. They are not talking about which ranked team should be given an advantage over the others, because I reckon 99.9% of players & coaches of any sport will believe that advantages in finals games should be given to higher ranked teams (unless they believe that finals shouldn't happen at all, which is a completely different case).

Anyways, I'm going to give up on this, because there's no point going any further. To be 100% honest, this isn't a healthy debate because it isn't 2 sides being equally fought out. Instead, it's everybody laughing at you because of the point of view that you're trying to put forward. All I can advise for you is that you go & join some form of sporting club and get involved in a finals system. Then come back & tell us all whether you believe higher ranked teams should benefit from what happens over the course of a season or whether a team should be rewarded based on 1 game.

Have you ever played sport competitively? How would you feel if your team dominated for the entire season and then got eliminated or were given a huge disadvantage just based on 1 game, after 22 good ones.

After over 10 seasons playing division 1 footy.

8 Years playing basketball.

A few finals series and two grand final wins out of those combined 18 seasons.

I would have been livid. Particually with footy. My team had finished top 2. But finished 3 and 4 a fair bit. So I understand that it's like if position 4 ended up with a bigger advantage than we got when finishing 2nd, I would be FURIOUS.

In 10 seasons of footy we climbed ourselves to 2nd once, just trying to get that edge, and now 'Deanox'. You would want to have taken it away from us. Shocking idea.

i have played 7 seasons of rugby, 6 seasons of junior cricket, 6 seasons of senior cricket, 4 seasons of mixed netball, umpired afl for 5 years and played some indoor cricket along the way. i have coached junior cricket for 5 years. i have also been a melbourne member for about 13 years and attended pretty much every melbourne game, and the odd geelong or interstate game.

i understand competitive sport as well as anyone.

i have played in seasons where we won every game for the year then lost the semi final and was knocked out. i have played in teams where a school has dropped their 1st XV back into their seconds to knock us out of the semi final.

if this is a pissing contest, i have [censored] as much as anyone else who is my age, and the only reason anyone older has [censored] more is because they've been standing at the toilet longer.

if you lose a final you lose a final, imo. and if you win you should be rewarded, not punished.

im not interested in discussing this anymore, if you just want to attack me personally, which you have from the start.

i have played 7 seasons of rugby, 6 seasons of junior cricket, 6 seasons of senior cricket, 4 seasons of mixed netball, umpired afl for 5 years and played some indoor cricket along the way. i have coached junior cricket for 5 years. i have also been a melbourne member for about 13 years and attended pretty much every melbourne game, and the odd geelong or interstate game.

i understand competitive sport as well as anyone.

i have played in seasons where we won every game for the year then lost the semi final and was knocked out. i have played in teams where a school has dropped their 1st XV back into their seconds to knock us out of the semi final.

if this is a pissing contest, i have [censored] as much as anyone else who is my age, and the only reason anyone older has [censored] more is because they've been standing at the toilet longer.

if you lose a final you lose a final, imo. and if you win you should be rewarded, not punished.

im not interested in discussing this anymore, if you just want to attack me personally, which you have from the start.

I have no issue with sporting competivness. I just know I would be livid if some one tried to take awat the one year we got the second chace. I don't know about all this junior rugby stuff or cricket and if they base it like they do in footy. But home field advantage in footy is massive and the right to the second chance is what, I personally, as well as my team played for.

As long as you realise that you are wrong, deanox.

But home field advantage in footy is massive and the right to the second chance is what, I personally, as well as my team played for.

home field advantage in cricket is if anything more important. playing on turd, the home team controls the preparations of the pitch and the ground...

regarding rugby, i have played both senior and junior rugby, home ground advantage in rugby i assume would be similar to that of footy, with the exception of ground dimensions I would imagine...for rugby they are the same everywhere...

considering finals are knock out, i think what you are playing for is the double chance rather than the extra home final. but it doesnt matter anyway.

considering finals are knock out, i think what you are playing for is the double chance rather than the extra home final. but it doesnt matter anyway.

Most improtant thing is the second chance, but second chance is useless without home final.

In division 1 there are other advantages to that of a lower league. Not only do you get knowledge of pitch, but you are able to pick your final 22 on friday night. As an away side the team must be sent to officials ready at the home teams ground sat morning.

This allows much more prep time. Plus, Often the away side in a finals game to avoid to many people may only have a limited number of supporters although this usually gets thrown out the window. However with the distance in travel home side always ends up with home crowd.

Revenue to the club pays a big factor in getting the ticket price, food price, drink price.

However yes, still most important is knowing how your ground should be played. For example, my junior gound was by far the largest in the comp, so we always knew to pick our best running side. My seniors ground was quite long but not wide at all. Therefore we knew to have long kicking and to pick tall forwards, be it even bringing backmen up forward.

Home ground is incredibly important and I really believe teams that have earnt that throughout the season. deserve it.

You are not playing specifically for a home final, or for a double chance. Instead you play the regular season so that you can get high enough to get the easiest finals run.

I still like old55's comment. You must certianly find that the difference between 8th and 9th is too big.

i'll raise your hawthorn kangas story, one collingwood west coast story. west coast get done, but have somehoe 'earned' the right to a home final against collingwood who won their first final. i hate collingwood, but this doesnt seem fair to me...

If you want to reward week one winners, then you can't have higher seeds playing better teams than lower seeds!

Your assertion that WCE shouldn't have played at home vs Collingwood because of week 1 results (Eagles losing/Collingwood winning) ignores the fact that the Eagles were forced to play the third-ranked side, and the Pies played the 7th seed.