Qualifying Finals Fixtures

[Darren]

Final Standings
1 South Africa: Stormers (66)
2 New Zealand: Chiefs (64)
3 Australia: Reds (58)

Wild Cards
4 New Zealand: Crusaders (61)
5 South Africa: Bulls (59)
6 South Africa: Sharks (59)

Qualifying Finals
Saturday, 21st July
Crusaders -v- Bulls
3:35 PM, Christchurch

Saturday, 21st July
Reds -v- Sharks
5:40pm, Suncorp Stadium

Go Reds!

Don't forget to get your tips in!

[slomo]

if queensland win (if) how do the semis work, who do they play next?....

[Tonkar]

I think the Bulls and the Sharks will topple the Cru sad sacks and the wow full reds

Just sheer strength and brute force will take them thru

[Sheikh]

if queensland win (if) how do the semis work, who do they play next?....

My understanding is:

If the Reds beat the Sharks they'll remain 3rd seed and play the Chiefs (2nd seed). The Stormers would play the winner of Crusaders-Bulls.

If the Reds lose, the Sharks will be the lowest seed and they'll play the Stormers, while the Chiefs would play the winner of Crusaders-Bulls.

[shasta]

Although I'm pleased the Reds made it, the fact that they can host a final after finishing with the lowest points shows the flawed nature of the current system. The AFL and NRL have bigger flaws in their fixturing but that anomaly in the finals is a doozy.

[Sheikh]

Just looked at the ladder. The Stormers have won 14 games - 2 more than the next best side. They've scored the fewest tries and only the Tahs, us and the Lions have scored fewer points. But they've allowed only 254 points in 16 games - the next best defence has been the Brumbies who allowed nearly 80 points more.

[Burgs]

Fair enough the ladder system, but then when distributing finals they should revert to the full traditional ladder, ie

Final Standings
1 South Africa: Stormers (66)
2 New Zealand: Chiefs (64)
3 New Zealand: Crusaders (61)
4 South Africa: Bulls (59)
5 South Africa: Sharks (59)
6 Australia: Reds (58)

Stormers v (Crusaders v Reds)
Chiefs v (Bulls v Sharks)

[jono]

X 2 ^
Posted via Mobile Device

[AndyS]

My understanding is:

If the Reds beat the Sharks they'll remain 3rd seed and play the Chiefs (2nd seed). The Stormers would play the winner of Crusaders-Bulls.

If the Reds lose, the Sharks will be the lowest seed and they'll play the Stormers, while the Chiefs would play the winner of Crusaders-Bulls.

It is going to be interesting. The wording on the ARU site is that the Chiefs will play the "Winner of match A or B with highest playoff ranking". Whether that is the same as ladder position for the purposes of the qualifying finals...?

[stewev]

I would assume they would use the playoff ladder so the Reds would stay the 3 seed the entire way. I think it is about the only way to do a post season if you have a conference system. If you seed based off of points, then what is the point of winning your conference? They system does break down occasionally, like a few years ago when a team in the NFL with a 7-9 record hosted a playoff game simply because they won their awful division. It was actually hilarious to watch, since they would have needed to win the Super Bowl to get above .500.

If you don't play everyone in the league an equal number of times it is impossible to truly tell who is best based on the results. Conferences or divisions can play each other enough for a clear winner to rise above the rest.

[jargan83]

I think it'd absolutely ridiculous that the Reds are seeded above teams that finished with more competition points.

But it is also amusing given that the South Africans argued for it and it has cost two of their three sides in the finals home ground advantage which could be crucial. As well as possible veiwers in South Africa because a South African derby for a final probably would have rated it's ass off in SA

[Alison]

Why did the SARU argue for it Jargs? Money-related?

Why not have 8 teams in the finals, based simply on who's scored more points throughout the season, rather than the current conference system? What am I missing?

[GIGS20]

SARU were all bitchy about saving 'the integrity of the Currie Cup' ie no changes in formatting timing or structure to the national competition, preferring to make the international competition more of a horse designed by a committee.

Funny that they are now lying in the bed of their own making.

[jargan83]

SARU were also worried about their teams potentially missing the finals hence the conference system where the top team in the conference qualifies for finals

[Alison]

Ah okay. Thanks guys. Can't say I like the conference system much. At least not the way it is at the moment. Finals should always be contested by those who scored the most points during the season. Geography should have no place in it.