Finals or not?

**yianni** · 01-05-2007, 02:39 AM

This is a general sporting question cos I know of a few sports that have finals systems at the end of the normal regular season, and others that don't. My question is do you prefer - for your sport - a situation where you have a regular league season with the team on top at the end declared the champions...OR...having the top half of the ladder play off in a finals series post-regular season to determine the champion?

Here in Australia many if not all the sports from what I gather employ a finals system at the end of the year. I am personally against this, because the team that has been the most consistent over the course of the season does not necessarily win the championship. This year the system benifited my team in soccer because we finished 3rd but won the Grand Final after having a 100% record in the finals system, but other years my team has finished outright first but underperformed in the finals and been knocked out.

The most farcical thing I have ever heard in my life is in one year in the 1940s only 4 teams competed in the Aussie Rules league because other teams pulled out due to the World War. One team (Fitzroy) finished DEAD LAST and won something like 2 games all year, but because there were only 4 teams, there was still a top 4 finals series so Fitzroy qualified. They then went on to become the champions because they won their finals game. Absolute farce!

My personal preference for not only soccer but other sports be the team on top at the end of the season being rewarded the championship (first past the post system) and instead of a finals series perhaps introduce a knock-out Cup competition or add another one in.

What are people's preferences? People I have spoken to about it are very mixed in their opinions, some like finals others don't. What is everyone's thoughts?

01-05-2007, 02:39 AM	#1
yianni FOC Posts: 18,042	Finals or not? This is a general sporting question cos I know of a few sports that have finals systems at the end of the normal regular season, and others that don't. My question is do you prefer - for your sport - a situation where you have a regular league season with the team on top at the end declared the champions...OR...having the top half of the ladder play off in a finals series post-regular season to determine the champion? Here in Australia many if not all the sports from what I gather employ a finals system at the end of the year. I am personally against this, because the team that has been the most consistent over the course of the season does not necessarily win the championship. This year the system benifited my team in soccer because we finished 3rd but won the Grand Final after having a 100% record in the finals system, but other years my team has finished outright first but underperformed in the finals and been knocked out. The most farcical thing I have ever heard in my life is in one year in the 1940s only 4 teams competed in the Aussie Rules league because other teams pulled out due to the World War. One team (Fitzroy) finished DEAD LAST and won something like 2 games all year, but because there were only 4 teams, there was still a top 4 finals series so Fitzroy qualified. They then went on to become the champions because they won their finals game. Absolute farce! My personal preference for not only soccer but other sports be the team on top at the end of the season being rewarded the championship (first past the post system) and instead of a finals series perhaps introduce a knock-out Cup competition or add another one in. What are people's preferences? People I have spoken to about it are very mixed in their opinions, some like finals others don't. What is everyone's thoughts?