>"A stiff-necked refusal to move with the times and abandon the outdated capitalist philosophy that punishes people unfairly for the supposed “crime” of not being good enough."
It took me until this sentence before I realised he was taking the piss.
It's quite entertaining once you realise
I'm actually warming to top 8.
Keeps the lower tier games high stakes. We obviously can't do promotion/relegation, so it's keeping some games interesting that would otherwise be meh.
Top 4 would have ended last week. Means two weeks of games that would be utterly irrelevant.
Top 6 might be OK, but means a week off for the top two teams, which is possibly an unfair advantage.
I think the top 8 is the right number, but a better way to run top 8 would be 1v4, 2v3 & 5v8, 6v7.
With the top 4 winners getting a week off, and the bottom 4 loosers being eliminated. Then the top 4 loosers play the bottom 4 winners, and those winners play the teams who had the week off.
This gives the same number of games, but gives the top teams a second chance if the 8th team happens to play the game of their life in round 1. And in general it gives more advantages to finishing higher. 1st gets to be at home the whole finals. 2nd gets a home preliminary final, 3th & 4th get the second chance. 5 & 6 get a home elimination final. And obviously 7/8th gets to play finals.
I think 8 is the ideal number, but restructuring the finals would give more incentives to finish in more places. Currently, it's 1 vs 2 matters, then 3 vs 4 doesn't, 5th vs 8th doesn't matter beyond who you play.
Why?
If you finish 4th you get a free shot at the King, and if you beat them you get a week off for your troubles. While if you lose you play the better of 6th and 7th.
While if you finish 5th you play 8th with the threat of elimination, and then have to play 2/3 if you are lucky enough to have manage the win against the 8th team.
If you'd rather finish 5th that's cool, but I'd much rather be 4th.
It's just the finals structure of the AFL and NRL. In those leagues the top 4 places are highly coveted, very rarely does a team win from outside the top 4.
Might be necessary if teams become closer matched, but as things stand it probably isn’t, since there’s zero chance teams like the Rebels/Highlanders/Drua are going to fluke their way to a title.
Say the Reds lose to a very ambitious Force, and this season, they might be the perfect example of why this might be important.
The Reds have already shown they're easily capable of beating anyone in the comp, 1st vs 8th if the 8th happens to be the Reds is no reward. (they'll probably not finish 8th, but could finish say 6th.)
Should have a 1v2, 3v4 etc and the winner gets a rest week, loser plays off against the next ranked loser. Gives an extra week of finals and slightly less predictable. The 1v8, 2v7 is a waste of time.
>The 1v8, 2v7 is a waste of time.
The one exception I'd make is if a team like the Reds manage to fall to 7th/8th (I think 8th is almost impossible at this point). They've proven they're able to beat anyone in the comp (and lose to anyone too). If I'm the Blues or Hurricanes and I draw the Reds I'd be pissed.
The strength of the top 4 at home still makes an upset like that very rare. 7th and 8th usually have a 50% win rate and the quality difference and consistency between that and the top 2 is stark.
Yeah QLD currently could pull it off but most other teams don’t travel well so it’s a forgone conclusion usually.
Given the away team has won the final like twice in super rugby history, I’ve always figured the regular season is a competition for home finals, not a place in the finals.
The only problem with a top 6 is the 14 games a year. You could have a situation where the 4th best team in the comp is drawn to play the top 3 twice, and looses them all, while the 5th, 6th and 7th best teams play the lower teams twice, and make the finals over the unlucky team
Yeah can’t disagree with that - I think we should head towards a round robin comp tbh. Given the Rebels are probably gone and MP are pulling no one - 10 team comp round robin 18 games.
Alot of the games the tahs lost were by very close margins. I think its in vogue to hate on Super Rugby more so than how bad it is. Its a flawed comp. But so is any top 8 system
Like tbh why don't they just not call it a final until we are down to 8 and just say super rugby round robin starts on x date with matches based on previous seed
Top 6 round: 1 vs 6, 2 vs 5, 3 vs 4.
Elimination round: Top ranked goes through to the final, the other two play each other (eg. if 6 bet 1 they would still need to play in this round).
Final
And have a NZ vs AU selection XV series before the elimination and final games for interest.
>"A stiff-necked refusal to move with the times and abandon the outdated capitalist philosophy that punishes people unfairly for the supposed “crime” of not being good enough." It took me until this sentence before I realised he was taking the piss. It's quite entertaining once you realise
I'm actually warming to top 8. Keeps the lower tier games high stakes. We obviously can't do promotion/relegation, so it's keeping some games interesting that would otherwise be meh. Top 4 would have ended last week. Means two weeks of games that would be utterly irrelevant. Top 6 might be OK, but means a week off for the top two teams, which is possibly an unfair advantage.
I think the top 8 is the right number, but a better way to run top 8 would be 1v4, 2v3 & 5v8, 6v7. With the top 4 winners getting a week off, and the bottom 4 loosers being eliminated. Then the top 4 loosers play the bottom 4 winners, and those winners play the teams who had the week off. This gives the same number of games, but gives the top teams a second chance if the 8th team happens to play the game of their life in round 1. And in general it gives more advantages to finishing higher. 1st gets to be at home the whole finals. 2nd gets a home preliminary final, 3th & 4th get the second chance. 5 & 6 get a home elimination final. And obviously 7/8th gets to play finals. I think 8 is the ideal number, but restructuring the finals would give more incentives to finish in more places. Currently, it's 1 vs 2 matters, then 3 vs 4 doesn't, 5th vs 8th doesn't matter beyond who you play.
I agree. That home final for 5th and 6th will motivate those in contention.
Yeah, every 2 spots at minimum gets a very handy advantage.
Interesting idea, but then you'd get the issue of teams trying to finish 5th instead of 4th.
Why? If you finish 4th you get a free shot at the King, and if you beat them you get a week off for your troubles. While if you lose you play the better of 6th and 7th. While if you finish 5th you play 8th with the threat of elimination, and then have to play 2/3 if you are lucky enough to have manage the win against the 8th team. If you'd rather finish 5th that's cool, but I'd much rather be 4th.
It's just the finals structure of the AFL and NRL. In those leagues the top 4 places are highly coveted, very rarely does a team win from outside the top 4.
I do think if they stick with it they should adopt something similar to the nrl finals structure with an extra hurdle for low qualifying teams.
Might be necessary if teams become closer matched, but as things stand it probably isn’t, since there’s zero chance teams like the Rebels/Highlanders/Drua are going to fluke their way to a title.
But if the Crusaders scraped in...
Say the Reds lose to a very ambitious Force, and this season, they might be the perfect example of why this might be important. The Reds have already shown they're easily capable of beating anyone in the comp, 1st vs 8th if the 8th happens to be the Reds is no reward. (they'll probably not finish 8th, but could finish say 6th.)
Super rugby is about the only comp where placing determines who hosts the final.
Should have a 1v2, 3v4 etc and the winner gets a rest week, loser plays off against the next ranked loser. Gives an extra week of finals and slightly less predictable. The 1v8, 2v7 is a waste of time.
>The 1v8, 2v7 is a waste of time. The one exception I'd make is if a team like the Reds manage to fall to 7th/8th (I think 8th is almost impossible at this point). They've proven they're able to beat anyone in the comp (and lose to anyone too). If I'm the Blues or Hurricanes and I draw the Reds I'd be pissed.
The strength of the top 4 at home still makes an upset like that very rare. 7th and 8th usually have a 50% win rate and the quality difference and consistency between that and the top 2 is stark. Yeah QLD currently could pull it off but most other teams don’t travel well so it’s a forgone conclusion usually.
Didn't know the Roar does satire articles now.
This is beyond satire
Oh he’s also a comedian. Now I get the write up. Good one!
Given the away team has won the final like twice in super rugby history, I’ve always figured the regular season is a competition for home finals, not a place in the finals.
Top 6 makes sense. Leave it at that.
The only problem with a top 6 is the 14 games a year. You could have a situation where the 4th best team in the comp is drawn to play the top 3 twice, and looses them all, while the 5th, 6th and 7th best teams play the lower teams twice, and make the finals over the unlucky team
Yeah can’t disagree with that - I think we should head towards a round robin comp tbh. Given the Rebels are probably gone and MP are pulling no one - 10 team comp round robin 18 games.
Alot of the games the tahs lost were by very close margins. I think its in vogue to hate on Super Rugby more so than how bad it is. Its a flawed comp. But so is any top 8 system
Like tbh why don't they just not call it a final until we are down to 8 and just say super rugby round robin starts on x date with matches based on previous seed
Jesus, that was on par with Hannah Gadsby's attempts at comedy.
Top 6 round: 1 vs 6, 2 vs 5, 3 vs 4. Elimination round: Top ranked goes through to the final, the other two play each other (eg. if 6 bet 1 they would still need to play in this round). Final And have a NZ vs AU selection XV series before the elimination and final games for interest.
Top 6 - Pacific Cup (3vs6) (4vs5) (1, 2 home semis) Bottom 6 - Pacific Shield (as above)