The fierce rivalry between the Perth Wildcats and the New Zealand Breakers may be heading for its strangest chapter yet, courtesy of the amazingly even 2016-17 NBL season.
Heading into the final round of the regular season, seven of the league’s eight teams remained in play-off contention, with six of those sides jostling for the three remaining spots behind league leaders Adelaide. Only cellar dwellers Brisbane were certain of missing post-season action. The various permutations of the final make-up of the league ladder were almost too numerous to list.
Talk NBL in our NBL 2016-2017 Season Thread
With the first handful of games going largely according to script and the race now down to five, one of the most controversial results remains (as of Saturday morning) well within the realms of possibility. That potential outcome involves wins for the home side in each remaining contest – Illawarra, Adelaide and Melbourne – resulting in a four-way tie for third spot between Perth, New Zealand, Cairns and Melbourne, all of whom would finish the season with 14-14 records.
The rules
Under the league’s tiebreaker rules, those four sides would be placed into a “mini-ladder” based on the combined results in matches between the sides throughout the season. Under that system Cairns, with a combined 7-5 record in games involving the other tied sides, would take third spot, and Melbourne (5-7) would be relegated to sixth. It is the question of how to split the Wildcats and Breakers, each of whom recorded 6 wins and 6 losses in the mini-ladder contests, in the battle for the all-important fourth spot that would be the cause of controversy.
The NBL has stated on its website that New Zealand’s series win over Perth would see them take fourth spot, bringing the Wildcats’ 30-year play-offs streak to an end. However, that appears incorrect on a careful reading of the league’s own rules. Those rules state as follows:
“61.2.2 Should two or more teams be tied on game winning percentage at the conclusion of the home and away fixture, final placings shall be determined by the win/loss ratio in only those games played between the tied teams.
61.2.3 Should there still remain a tie; rankings shall be determined by the difference between total points scored for and against each team in only those games played between the tied teams.”
The problem
The ambiguity here lies in the final words in rule 61.2.3, “those games played between the tied teams”. It may refer to either the teams that were originally tied on game winning percentage – in this example the four teams on 14 wins – or the teams that remain tied after the mini-ladder exercise undertaken in rule 61.2.2 – i.e Perth and New Zealand.
In the latter case, New Zealand would take fourth spot based on the result of their head-to-head series with Perth, which they won 3-1 with a points differential of +15. However, it would appear to be only the points differential in that series, not the win-loss record, which is relevant under rule 61.2.3.
Say New Zealand had beaten Perth only once, but recorded a blowout win in the match by 30 points, against three relatively close Perth wins by, say, 5 points each. The Breakers would still hold a points differential of +15 in the head-to-head and would progress to the finals under rule 61.2.3 despite having lost the series. That result cannot be correct.
Therefore, the points differential criteria applied in that rule should include the games played between all the originally tied teams, not just Perth and New Zealand. That would result in the following ‘mini-ladder’:
Cairns 7-5 +22
Perth 6-6 -1
New Zealand 6-6 -26
Melbourne 5-7 +5
Unless they suffered a big loss to Melbourne of 25 points or more, this would see Perth move through at New Zealand’s expense.
Lest it be said that the author, who readily admits to being a passionate member of the Red Army, be accused of bias, it should be pointed out that another combination of results could see the Wildcats benefit from the league’s current interpretation of the rule. Should Brisbane, Cairns and Melbourne win the final three regular season games, there would be another four-way tie for third, this time between Perth, New Zealand, Melbourne and Illawarra. The mini-ladder would look like this:
New Zealand 8-4 -9
Illawarra 6-6 +20
Perth 6-6 -1
Melbourne 4-8 -10
If Perth and Illawarra were split by their head-to-head series result, then the Wildcats would take fourth spot, having split the series 2-2 but holding a +6 point differential. However, if the points differential from all mini-ladder games are considered, it would be the Hawks going through.
The ambiguity in the league’s rules should be resolved prior to the next season, but that will not help right now if either of the above outcomes arises and two sides attempt to lay claim to one finals berth.
Of course, Perth, and for that matter Illawarra, can avoid any uncertainty simply by winning their remaining game.
