Opinion

The Eels shouldn't be in the grand final

The fact that Parramatta is in the grand final on Sunday is proof to me that the NRL's finals system is wrong.

Put simply, the Eels shouldn't even be there. And the reason they are is because of a big fault in the McIntyre Top Eight.

The McIntyre system has been hit with criticism this season, all of which misses the point. It's not the "Top Eight" part that's the problem.

That's just too many teams.

Read more Try Hard blogs

I know why it exists - and it's everything to do with revenue and nothing to do with what's best for footy.

It exists because it keeps more fans interested in the finals chase for longer. Then, once the final placings are decided, it means there are eight groups of supporters to sell finals tickets, T-shirts and whatever else to.

But a top eight means that, in any given year, half of the competition makes the finals (or more than half in years we only had 14 teams).

The finals are supposed to limited to the best of the best. They're supposed to be something to strive for and it cheapens that aura somewhat when the league lets in half the teams.

It cheapens it more when some teams who make the finals have an ordinary win-loss record. By ordinary I mean a team that lost as many games as it won. I think we can agree that a team with a 50-50 record or worse has no business even thinking they deserve to be in the finals.

Yet, since we got rid of the top five in 1995, an ordinary team has made the finals in nine of the 15 seasons. Even worse, a team with a losing record played finals footy in six of those seasons.

Particularly embarrassing was the 2002 season, where three teams - Canberra, St George Illawarra and Parramatta - all had losing records yet all made the finals.

What a joke. The finals shouldn't be about rewarding mediocrity, letting teams stumble into eighth spot like a drunkard trying to make their up the front steps to their front door.

What we should have is a top five - make a finals position actually mean something rather than giving them away to any team that wants one. It used to be good enough for the league - from 1988 to 1994 we had a top five with a 16-team comp.

And I bet it's no coincidence that that brief six-year window gave us arguably the two greatest grand finals ever - 1989's Canberra-Balmain match-up and the 1991 Canberra-Penrith game.

So, if we'd done the right thing and had a top five this year, the Eels wouldn't have played finals footy.

But there's another reason to punt the top eight. It rewards hot streaks over consistency.

The Dragons and Dogs were the two most consistent teams all season, yet they dropped a few games and they're gone. But a team who was absolutely bloody awful for most of the year, who was in 14th spot going into Round 18 on five (yes, FIVE wins) is playing in the grand final.

Jeez, if a grand final berth is the reward for stringing together a few wins late in the season, what's the point in anyone busting their backsides between March and June?

Might as well start the comp in July.

Page:

single page

Posted By: By GLEN HUMPHRIES on 30/09/2009 4:01:00 PM | Comments (14)

Share on
Facebook

Tweet on
Twitter

Email to
a friend

comments

Date: Newest first | Oldest first

Any Team that can eliminate teams 1, 2 and 3 in the finals deserves to be there. If parra were as awful as you suggest they would be gone in week 1. Based on your argument you might as well award the premiership in July. Congrats on the Minor premiership, it should be worth more. Look at 2005, Parra were 1st but teams 4 and 5 were in the GF.

Posted by Parra81, 30/09/2009 4:23:11 PM, on Illawarra Mercury

If you think Parramatta's performance in the first half of the season wasn't awful, you're dreaming.

But by them making the grand final means they've been rewarded for playing well for less than half the season.

The finals should be made up of the best teams over the course of the entire season, not those who came good at the last minute.

Posted by Glen Humphries on 30/09/2009 5:08:58 PM

This article is pathetic, eels still would of made the grand final with the afl style finals system. They have knocked out 1st, 2nd and 3rd.

Posted by brendan, 30/09/2009 5:26:10 PM, on Illawarra Mercury

Did you even read the story?

It says nothing about the AFL system.

What it does say is an eight-team finals is three too many.

Posted by Glen Humphries on 30/09/2009 5:30:00 PM

Sounds like words from a sore loser,GO THE EELS

Posted by burnsy71, 30/09/2009 5:39:21 PM, on Illawarra Mercury

Nothing like it at all.

We lost under our own steam and probably wouldn't have made the grand final no matter what system was in place.

My point is simple - eight teams in the finals is too many.

Posted by Glen Humphries on 1/10/2009 9:25:04 AM

I agree, the Dragons definitely deserve to be the the Grand Final after losing 5 of their last 6 games.

Posted by andrew057, 30/09/2009 6:02:43 PM, on Illawarra Mercury

I never said they did.

What they - and teams like the Dogs and the Gold Coast - deserved was some sort of reward for their consistency over the course of the whole season.

Any team - no matter who they are - who only makes an effort in the last third of the season shouldn't be in the finals.

Posted by Glen Humphries on 1/10/2009 9:22:39 AM

Whinge Whinge 'My dragons arent in the grand final this year yet again' Choke Choke. Get over it Glen.

Posted by John, 30/09/2009 6:04:33 PM, on Illawarra Mercury

I don't disagree that Parra's form was awful in the first half. But The benefit of learning is great.

Was St George any better in rounds 22-finals week 2?

Going into this Week Parra has won 15 games contested and St.George 17(How many in a pressure situation?).

It is not Parra's fault St George stopped contesting. I do agree that a 5 team finals is the way to go. But Honestly if you are the most consistent team all year (Team 1, 2 or 3) you surely would expect to beat team 8 at least in weeks 1 2 or 3 of the finals.

Peace Out...

PS. Not the last Minute but an entire 800 Minutes....(Of Football)

Posted by parra81, 30/09/2009 6:25:22 PM, on Illawarra Mercury

This blog isn't about defending the Dragons or finding a way they could have been in the grand final.

Even with a top five they probably wouldn't have been playing on Sunday.

But the finals as they stand offer no reward for a team who plays well for the bulk of the season only to have a few bad games at the back end.

it does, however, reward a team who played terribly at the start and came good in the last third of the competition.

And I just don't think that's fair - even if the former team was the Storm (who I loathe).

Posted by Glen Humphries on 1/10/2009 9:18:44 AM

Gee Glen why didn't you have the bravery to spruik this one last year when the Saints came in 7th??? I'll tell ya why, because the saints got flogged by 2 better teams, yes 2 better teams & were already in the GF before the finals started. (so they thought) Parramatta have fought a long road of must win games to make it & quite simply have out performed every team above them since they finally clicked.

The saints on the other hand strung a few wins together when all the other teams were just getting started & you now can't handle the facts. Parra are there, they beat the Saints, so get over it!

Posted by Minnamurra Russ, 30/09/2009 9:44:27 PM, on Illawarra Mercury

I could hardly "spruik" last year seeing as how I didn't have this blog.

But if the Dragons were to finish sixth by a point in for-and-against, it wouldn't change my opinion about having the top five. (and, if we had it this year I don't think it would have made a lick of difference to the fate of the Dragons).

You say the Eels ''finally clicked'' - why should they be rewarded for taking two-thirds of the season to "click" when other teams did it right from the start?

If the Eels win on Sunday, they won't be the best team of the year. They'll be the best team from the months of July to October.

And that would be incredibly sad to have as premiers a team that was awful for two-thirds of the year.

Posted by Glen Humphries on 1/10/2009 9:10:25 AM

Good article and how very true. The Storm will prove your point on Sunday,when they,as true top five contenders all season will beat the last-minute blow-ins,namely Parramatta, by 20 plus.

Yes all you Parra supporters I have put my money where my mouth is and have placed a good bet on the above happening. Never seen a bigger certainty in my life.

Posted by Rusty Nail, 30/09/2009 10:28:05 PM, on Illawarra Mercury

Actually Glen, Parra had 12 wins, 11 loses and 1 draw during the regular season, which means they lost 45% of their games, not quite the 50% or more that you claim. But ultimately, Parra are there after beating 1st, 2nd & 3rd whether you like it or not and you're living in fantasy land if you think its going to change in the future for the simple reasons that you yourself identified (plus the fact that its critical to the NRL's finances and its competition with other sports like AFL). Cut out the caffeine and have a good lie down while thinking of next year, it'll do you lots of good.

Posted by Moh, 1/10/2009 11:42:37 AM, on Illawarra Mercury

Moh,

I know I have Buckley's of making the NRL change their mind. If David Gallop at al are listening to bloggers before making decisions, the game's in a whole lot of trouble.

I just like talking about footy.

Posted by Glen Humphries on 1/10/2009 11:55:19 AM

Glen, what the NRL should do is the same as most other football competitions in the world and have separate league and cup competitions.

There will still be the same marketing opportunities and maybe a few more games but this way everyone can play in the cup and the best, luckiest most injury-free team will win it and the league winner will then have a trophy that's not immediately forgotten about.

AND before anyone comments - I agree the Dragons didn't deserve to be minor premiers either!

Posted by Steeler, 1/10/2009 1:17:24 PM, on Illawarra Mercury

1 | 2 | next >