based on each team playing every other team an equal amount over the period.
A new concept for the AFL fixture
- Thread starter MarkCatsFan
- Start date
-
- Tags
- fixture
- Tagged users None
It's all bullshit. Just an arbitrary allocation of teams under the guise of some misplaced idea of fairness...
A team could have scored Gold Coast in 2014, Freo in 2015, and GWS twice each for a 0-6 record. Another could get GWS in 2014, GC in 2015, and Freo this year for 6-0...a perfect rolling draw, the teams are on a cyclical order, and yet it's as unfair as the weather can be for a farmer...
If you play 34 rounds and limit the player appearances and boost the squads, then what happens in February will have no bearing on what November looks like (that's how long the season would take)...the side that raced to a 5-0 start might share only a few of the players limping across the line nine months later, or vice versa. It might as well be two separate teams playing in two separate comps. We get this inflated idea of the worth of soccer comps, when the reality is that soccer as a competition with integrity anywhere in the northern hemisphere is fundamentally flawed...actually, totally f###ed ever since the first player got paid for kicking a ball way back in the Victorian era...
And conferences - fixes every flaw in some way when you really get down to it, but...
How about we just turn up and play...?
A team could have scored Gold Coast in 2014, Freo in 2015, and GWS twice each for a 0-6 record. Another could get GWS in 2014, GC in 2015, and Freo this year for 6-0...a perfect rolling draw, the teams are on a cyclical order, and yet it's as unfair as the weather can be for a farmer...
If you play 34 rounds and limit the player appearances and boost the squads, then what happens in February will have no bearing on what November looks like (that's how long the season would take)...the side that raced to a 5-0 start might share only a few of the players limping across the line nine months later, or vice versa. It might as well be two separate teams playing in two separate comps. We get this inflated idea of the worth of soccer comps, when the reality is that soccer as a competition with integrity anywhere in the northern hemisphere is fundamentally flawed...actually, totally f###ed ever since the first player got paid for kicking a ball way back in the Victorian era...
And conferences - fixes every flaw in some way when you really get down to it, but...
How about we just turn up and play...?
Actually the other way around. We have two premierships and have only finished top once.
Here's a good idea. Which won't happen because we don't really want "fair" because we really want "attendances" and "viewers" and "TV revenue" and "sponsorships".
Eliminate the "fix"-ture.
Introduce a random "draw".
Introduce home finals including the GF.
Only non random element is the 11 home and 11 away.
Eliminate the "fix"-ture.
Introduce a random "draw".
Introduce home finals including the GF.
Only non random element is the 11 home and 11 away.
- Jun 22, 2008
- 24,580
- 21,290
- AFL Club
- Geelong
I've just had a look at it as per your suggestion to me on the 17-5 thread.
The only thing I like about the proposal is resetting the conferences each season. The rest not so much.
imo it still doesn't address the inequities of the current fixture and mentions allowances for games such as ANZAC day. You play every side once, which is good but then you play 5 other sides from your own conference twice, not so good. In a 17-5 at least for those final 5 rounds of the h&a you are grouped with other sides who on exposed form for the first 17 rounds are closer in ability which may not otherwise be the case under the conference system, so you are still going to have sides with softer draws.
I also don't like the proposal for the selection of the last 5 places in the top 8. You may have sides making it that, due to playing in a weaker conference for the season, are inferior to a number of sides in other conferences that will miss out.
In a 17-5 system, they can keep ANZAC day, Queens Birthday, Dreamtime, Derby, Showdown, Q Clash, Sydney Derby ect by just fixturing those opponents play each other for those rounds. They just don't get guaranteed double ups unless they end up in the same group after the first 17 rounds.
For me, the biggest hurdle for the introduction of a 17-5 fixture is the draft order. I've stated previously that the bottom 6 should play for the number 1 draft pick. If a side is truly awful, the AFL can award a priority pick if needed. I think something should be looked at with regards to draft order for the middle 6 sides from 7th-12th. Them playing for the final 2 spots may not be enough to keep all teams motivated for that last 5 weeks before finals start, that's where the draft can be used.
For me the 17-5 is very simple and as fair as you're going to get as far as the actual fixturing goes. It's the draft which can be manipulated to provide extra motivation for sides from 7th through to 18th if need be.
- Jun 22, 2008
- 24,580
- 21,290
- AFL Club
- Geelong
I'm strongly in favour of the 17-5 system, with qualifications but as an arm chair expert who wouldn't have to play all the extra games, I quite like the idea of a 34 game season too, it would be the fairest after all.
There was a little discussion of it in the 17-5 thread. Have shorter breaks between games and limit each player to how many games they can play during the h&a, say 25 + finals.
I did a quick calculation at the time and I think that if each club plays 3 games in 2 weeks then the h&a would still run for around 22 weeks. You could get rid of the byes and just have individual player byes. If a player has to miss 9 games per season you could also mandate that either 4 or 6 of them have to be taken consecutively ie a player must have at least 2 games off in a row at least 2 or 3 times a season to give them a decent break, or with 3 games in 2 weeks you could make them take 3 x 3 off.
Imagine if that came into play, this place would melt down every time a player took their compulsory break because the supporters of the opponent/s would take it as a slight against their club.
Cleavy
Hall of Famer
Just do 17-5, and then 17-6 the next 2 years. Repeat.
18 rounds - 1 return game being local derbies for the non Vics, while a scheduling formula is put in place for the Vic sides so they all play each other twice over 9 years
Top 8 play a round robin over 7 weeks
Top 2 in the GF
Top 8 play a round robin over 7 weeks
Top 2 in the GF
Last edited:
The fairest system is not the one linked, the fairest system is one where over a 6 year period (23 rounds in 4 years, 22 rounds in the other 2) you play each other team 8 times with 4 against each team at home and 4 away. It takes no account of ladder position or blockbuster/traditional rivalries which by definition compromise fairness. It's purely mathematical to achieve the fairest outcome based on the current number of teams and season length. Any system which introduces any factor of any sort is not truly fair, it's man made and open to flaws.
How is that more fair? So many changes happen across 6 years to teams that you will have much larger differentiations in "tough" vs "easy" fixtures. If the teams stayed the same over the 6 year period, then it would make sense ... but it doesn't, because they don't.
The fairness is that it ignores how much or how little certain teams may change over time. People seemed obsessed with manipulating the draw based on a myriad of factors, none of which has any true guarantee of being "fair" because as you say, "many changes happen across 6 years". Any system that artificially arranges the draw will still garner complaints because nothing is 100% predictable. My proposed system may still end up with a draw someone doesn't like, but that is purely by chance, not by a system with flaws.
Any of the various proposals will still end up with some people saying some teams have a too favourable draw and some teams a too tough one. It's impossible to get totally right. Why not simply use the most logical way of setting up a draw given the team numbers and ideal season length? There is no perfect solution, but I'd prefer a neutral setup rather than some of the convoluted suggestions I've seen.
So when all is said and done it is simply handicap system.
Yeah, nah, in the bin with it.
Cos that is a crap idea. The only reason you don't want change is because you are scared of change. It is in our animal nature to be scared of change. But rationalise. Be better than a chimp and don't just act by your wimpy gut.
So will the fans. To many pointless games. By finals time most teams will have half their players on the sidelines.
Weeks 1-18 : Home and Away Season
Every side has one rival they play twice.
"Return" Games
West Coast v Fremantle - Western Derby
Adelaide v Port Adelaide - Showdown
Sydney v GWS - Sydney Derby
Brisbane v Gold Coast - QClash
Carlton v Richmond - Season Opener
North Melbourne v Bulldogs - Good Friday
St.Kilda v Melbourne - Easter Sunday ???
Hawthorn v Geelong - Easter Monday
Collingwood v Essendon - Anzac Day
Week 19 : Playoff and Bye
8th v 9th, 1st-7th have the bye
Weeks 20-25 : Group Stage
Top 8 split into 2 groups of 4 - Group A: 1 4 5 8, Group B: 2 3 6 7
Home and Away Round Robin for each Group.
Week 26: Preliminary Finals
1st of Group A v 2nd of Group B
1st of Group B v 2nd of Group A
Week 27: Grand Final
Every side has one rival they play twice.
"Return" Games
West Coast v Fremantle - Western Derby
Adelaide v Port Adelaide - Showdown
Sydney v GWS - Sydney Derby
Brisbane v Gold Coast - QClash
Carlton v Richmond - Season Opener
North Melbourne v Bulldogs - Good Friday
St.Kilda v Melbourne - Easter Sunday ???
Hawthorn v Geelong - Easter Monday
Collingwood v Essendon - Anzac Day
Week 19 : Playoff and Bye
8th v 9th, 1st-7th have the bye
Weeks 20-25 : Group Stage
Top 8 split into 2 groups of 4 - Group A: 1 4 5 8, Group B: 2 3 6 7
Home and Away Round Robin for each Group.
Week 26: Preliminary Finals
1st of Group A v 2nd of Group B
1st of Group B v 2nd of Group A
Week 27: Grand Final
Last edited:
I think the Footy Maths solution does this already - without the ability for teams to plan years ahead for a certain fixture.
True.
CD__
Formerly 1990Swan.
- Nov 2, 2015
- 4,372
- 8,273
- AFL Club
- Sydney
- Other Teams
- Melbourne Stars
I'm not scared of change, it just isn't necessary at all.
No you are scared. All humans are scared of change. We are evolutionary programmed to be scared of change. The fact you are framing your argument in terms of change rather then evaluating the pros and cons of what you think is the best system shows that you are simply reverting to your pre programmed instinct of change is bad.
No, the Footy Maths proposal has conferences and includes taking into account a team's previous performance. I'm trying to avoud all of that meddling for a truly fair system.
Most people equate "fair" to mean equitable, and equitable based on some sort of formula. Instead of the many concoted arrangements, all of which inevitably involve some unfairness, I'm for a purely neutral draw, and that is the only truly fair setup.
Sorry - but I completely disagree. Your idea is not neutral at all, playing team A in year 1, and team A in year 6 could be as disparate as playing the top team and the bottom team ... I don't see any advantages in a 6 year spread of "equity".
- May 13, 2012
- 15,812
- 5,968
- AFL Club
- GWS
- Other Teams
- Brumbies, Socceroos
It may not sound like much, but I think it's unrealistic that the AFL would add an additional H&A game.
Crhferrari
All Australian
I come up with a solution: to reduce the game time to 52 mimutes, which is 13 minutes a quarter.
The current rule is 20 minutes a quarter and 80 minutes a game. With 22 home and away games to play the total clock time is 1760 minutes. If expanding the season to 34 games and reduce the clock time to 52 minutes, the total is 1768 minutes. It is indeed a longer season, but in terms of fierce contests and effortless runs and execution for disposals, the players do not contribute extra energy and effort into it (well 8 minutes in fact).
With 52 minutes of clock time the actual playing time is about 88 to 90 minutes. Adding some pre and post game discussions the coverage time will be 2 hours. People might think it too short but this will be welcomed by TV networks. They can either show other programs or finally bring us double headers.
Here is a draft weekly schedule:
Game 1: Friday 7:00-9:00
Game 2: Friday 9:00-11:00(most likely Perth or Adelaide game, or Queensland games during summer)
Game 3: Saturday 2:00-4:00
Game 4: Saturday 4:00-6:00
Game 5: Saturday 7:00-9:30
Game 6: Saturday 9:00-11:00
Game 7: Sunday 1:00-3:00
Game 8: Sunday 3:00-5:00
Game 9: Sunday 5:00-7:00
The biggest probles are that finals have to be cancelled to make the league a European soccer style. And most people are likely to boycott a footy league without grand final. Even the proposal is agreed, the games of the last or last two rounds must start simultaneously. I think the current available stadiums can not cope with this condition.
fmd, some dumb ideas get in people's head.
