A noble enough intent, but one that could only be achieved at the cost of any credibility. Any change from what we have now, would have zero credibility with me, none, nada, zilch.
So the AFL are in the cliffhanger business.
Just a thought, but how about getting back to running a sport.
2 Likes
i haven’t read one bit of this theory, but it’s the afl’s so i’ll assume it’s complete and utter ■■■■.
Think this is the appropriate thread for this article.
(whoever would have thought the AFL could be so shifty 
)
Major league thieves at AFL and NRL stole my ‘Final 8’ idea: inventor
December 23, 1999. Kim Crawford remembers it like it was yesterday.
The sports-loving PE teacher picked up his Hobart Mercury newspaper and, like he always did, went straight to the back pages.
Waiting there for him was a story on the AFL’s ‘new’ Final 8 system, one that he says he devised and proposed to the competition in 1994, only for the League to then reject it on the basis it was “flawed”.
There was no doubt in Crawford’s mind: this was his system, which mapped out how the finals series would work.
For the Tasmanian, it was a case of déjà vu. He had presented the same system to the NRL in 1995, which he claims they were, initially at least, very interested in.
Discussions between Crawford and the NRL stopped, though, before they introduced it for just one season in 1996, out of the blue.
The AFL have stuck with the system Crawford says he created since introducing it, while the NRL returned to the same formula in 2012 and have stayed true ever since.
Fed up with the failure of both the AFL and the NRL to recognise his work and re-name it the ‘Crawford Final 8 System’, he is now speaking out in a bid for justice, and is hopeful that the fact the issue was recently raised in Federal Parliament by Labor MP Brian Mitchell will help his cause.
“I was shocked and disappointed to see the AFL using it, without credit,” Crawford told The New Daily.
“National sporting leagues should be behaving a lot better.
“They expect high standards of players and clubs and we expect high standards of them.
“I don’t think the AFL and the NRL should be able to go on with the lie … there’s a lot of frustration.
“The AFL stole my system, dishonestly claimed it as their own, used it without permission, ignored my copyright, bullied me with threats of legal costs and continue to falsify their own history in regards to this matter.”
Crawford said he came up with the concept relatively quickly, and was motivated to do so because the AFL’s existing finals system, the McIntyre System, “looked a mess”.
It “failed badly in 1997”, he said, and he was buoyed by the “number of AFL clubs” who returned his letters and spoke favourably of his proposal.
Some clubs spoke out publicly, too, like Adelaide, with chief executive Bill Sanders describing the Crawford system as “much easier to understand” and “ideal” in the same Hobart Mercury article that then-AFL boss Wayne Jackson acknowledged a “system being proposed in Tasmania”, which was Crawford’s.
But in 1999, when the AFL introduced their new system, there was no credit for Crawford, who complained to the AFL, only to be told that if he pursued legal action, he would be liable for all costs if he lost, a statement that put him off.
‘This is just not right’
“He proposed this formula, they (the AFL) didn’t use it, and then out they come with an identical system,” politician Mitchell told The New Daily.
“A coincidence? What a crock of s**t. This is just not right.
“It’s a classic case of a powerful organisation sticking up its middle finger to a little bloke.”
In response to Crawford’s claims, the AFL told The New Daily: “There were multiple suggestions on this finals format to be introduced before it was eventually adopted when the AFL moved away from the McIntyre System.”
The NRL did not respond to requests for comment.
Crawford says the AFL is wrong – and he has “evidence to show I was the first to send it to them in 1994″.
Mitchell has called on the AFL to “swallow their ego” and fix the dispute, “ideally this year”, but Crawford, who just wants recognition, is not holding his breath.
“I just want both leagues to tell the truth. They need to do the right thing.”
http://thenewdaily.com.au/sport/afl/2017/04/27/afl-nrl-final-8-system/
1 Like
IIIITTTTTSSSSS BBBBAAAACCCCKKKKK
And lo and behold, as the coach of a now struggling team clarko supports the model
Get farked clarko
At the AFL’s meeting with club CEOs on Thursday, there was also some support to replace the pre-finals bye with wildcard play-offs that would determine the last two places in the finals.
Clarkson told reporters on Friday he felt the 17-5 model was the best of the proposed new fixtures, saying it was time to put fairness ahead of commercial interests.
“I think the AFL and the footy community need to make a decision on what their actual intent is with adjusting the current system,” Clarkson said.
"(The) 17-5 (model) is all about making it more equal, breaking the competition after round 17 into three groups. If that’s their intent for equity, which I think is a good intent, then the wildcard (games) become part of that.
"If they’re looking to commercialise and make it 18-4 and have two rivalry rounds and that sort of stuff, it’s about commercialisation and money.
“And if you’re after that then keep the current draw because that’s what has driven that. If we want equity, go 17-5. If you don’t, just leave it alone, just keep it as it is now.”
When making its decision, the AFL should put what was best for the game ahead of the clubs’ financial interests, the Hawks coach said.
“If the (club) CEOs have got a choice of two rivalry rounds, what do you think they’re going to take? Because it means an extra half a million dollars in the bank for their bottom line,” Clarkson said.
"It’s what the philosophy is of the game: what’s best for the game, not what’s best for each individual CEO and his (or her) bottom line.
"If what’s best for the game is equity, then that should be what drives this decision, not money. Our game needs to have a balance between what’s best for the game and the spirit of the game and what’s best in terms of the commercialisation.
“We need both, but let’s not have a bias too heavily (weighted) towards one. And if we go to 18-4 l feel like it’s a bias too heavily (weighted) towards one.”
“LOOK OVER THERE!”
9 Likes
I would just get the bottom 8, put their names in a hat and allocate draft position for each name drawn out. It is called a draft lottery. No reason to tank then.
1 Like
Bad news around the corner for the AFL so they’ve created a distraction?
2 Likes
Still creates a problem - creating an arbitrary point at which it’s pointless winning more games. Ie, why on earth would anyone want to finish 10th and be locked into getting pick 9 - when you could ‘manipulate’ your way to finishing 11th instead and have an even chance of getting pick 1??
If a club’s going to tank for 18th rather than 17th, they’re going to tank for 11th instead of 10th.
The existence of arbitrary lines is the problem IMO, not where the lines fall.
Whether it’s cutting the comp into 3 or stopping the lottery at a certai point. What we want is a system where there’s only incremental differences.
2 Likes
Fans of next year’s 7/8 place sides are gonna be fun for the AFL to deal with if they put this in place.
I just can’t bring myself to get worked up about them adding another couple of teams to the finals. I’m not sure how you can argue that a team finishing 7th on the ladder winning the flag is a great feel good story but if a team did it from 9th it would be rewarding mediocrity and damaging the integrity of the competition.
Here was my idea to fix tanking a while ago.
Pick 1: Coin flip between bottom two teams. Award pick to 1 winner.
Pick 2: Coin flip between loser and third bottom team. Award pick 2 to winner.
Pick 3: Coin flip between that loser and 4th bottom team… etc.
It still means 7th bottom will never be pick one but just eliminates that certainty which incentivises tanking. To me it fixes it without reinventing the wheel. Not perfect, but better IMO.
1 Like
oh man imagine Darcy and Brian Taylor commentating coin flipping? Be still my beating heart
7 Likes
Glad to see that all those mid and end of season junkets to the US, in recent years for the AFL Executive, are finally coming to fruition after watching how the NFL runs things.over there.
Farking wildcard games…Really!?
Fark off idiots.
2 Likes
Can we just coin-flip for the flag?
1 Like
Is it just the name people hate, or is there some functional difference between Elimination Finals and wildcard matches that I’m missing?
1 Like
You’re right. They should be “Super Elimination Finals”.
Isn’t the top 8 usually decided before the mid point of the season most years? So really there’s already half a season that’s dead weight but this will spice it up one extra week?
I got an idea. Confect a controversial saga, then kick someone out of the finals. There’s ya wildcard right there
9 Likes
I’m all for the wildcard round. A no-brainer even
I think everyone one should be a finalist.
1 Like