WHAT? Say that again.

[Old S.M.Blood]

? Sides ranked 1-6 on the ladder will have a minimum of two double-meetings with other top six sides and a maximum of three meetings with sides ranked 1-6. They will have a minimum of one double-meeting of sides ranked 7-12 and a maximum of two double-meetings of sides in the 7-12 range. They will have either no double meetings or a maximum of one double meeting with a side ranked 13-18.

? Sides ranked 7-12 on the ladder will have a minimum of one double-meeting with sides ranked 1-6 on the ladder and a maximum of two meetings with sides ranked 1-6. They will have a minimum of two double-meetings of sides ranked 7-12 and a maximum of three double-meetings of sides 7-12. They will have a minimum of one double-meeting of sides ranked 13-18 and a maximum of two double-meetings of sides ranked 13-18.

? Sides ranked 13-18 on the ladder will have either no double meeting or a maximum of one double meeting with a side ranked 1-6. They will have a minimum of one double-meeting with sides ranked 7-12 and a maximum of two double-meetings of sides ranked 7-12. They will have a minimum of two double-meetings of sides ranked 13-18 and a maximum of three double-meetings of sides 13-18.

?The weighting of second-time match ups for clubs enables the AFL to better deal with the key requirement of equality, as well as continuing to ensure that our venue obligations and our broadcast obligations can be met,? Mr Lethlean said.

[dimelb]

There is one basic mistake fuelling all this rigmarole: the notion of "the key requirement of equality".
Equality of opportunity is a good ideal, making sure that (for instance) being richer doesn't mean constant dominance. Equality of outcome is a bad ideal for football (and in education, but that's another matter).

[magic.merkin]

I'm reasonably happy with the announcements, especially the bye structure for late in the season. Better player management and also helps fantasy footy coaches out (minimise random restings pre finals)

[erica]

So does that mean we won't have to play GWS twice next year?

[MadCanuck]

Not necessarily. GWS could be the "maximum of one double meeting"

[CJK]

Would be a shame if we do only play them once for two reasons

1. A gimmie 8 points

2. One ANZ games gets used up as a GWS home game

[jono2707]

I think we are always down to play GWS twice so the AFL can continue to push the make-believe "derby" we are all meant to get all excited about....

[ShockOfHair]

I hope we get the 'soft draw' quinella again, for Eddie's sake.

[707]

So if you are beaten into the lower half of the top eight, it's better to finish 7th rather than 6th or if you are down the table it's better to finish 13th than 12th.

Worse we can finish this year is 6th :-( so we'll get one of the tough draws for next year. All one can hope for now is not to have to go to Perth to play Freo and not to have to go to Geelong - again!

GWS will be our double up from the bottom six.

In an anomoly in the 2013draw, North Melbourne who finished 8th last year got the hardest draw and Adelaide who finished 3rd last year got the 15th hardest draw - go figure. BTW we the Premiers had the 7th hardest draw this year.

[R-1]

Formalised version of the current approach. Leaves the derbies in place. Probably advangages 7/8/9 the most.

[wolftone57]

I think if a side is continually down the bottom and in trouble financially then those sides need to disappear. This evening things up by the draw is crap. Leave the draw alone and let it be random with the few bits of fixing like the derbies. Catering to the needs of the under achieving just downgrades the footy comp more. If those sides are to improve they have to play the best sides. Could you imagine next years GF under this system and Gold Coast, GWS & Melbourne and Bullies all make the finals. Melbourne & GWS are in the bottom of the eight but because of the easy draw Bullies and Suns are in the top 4. They have to play us, Hawks, Freo or Cats in the first week. The main story after is Suns & bullies Destroyed. The other two get knocked out with record finals margins. Bloody stupid in my opinion, you end up with teams in the top 8 who should not be there.

[Triple B]

I think if a side is continually down the bottom and in trouble financially then those sides need to disappear. This evening things up by the draw is crap. Leave the draw alone and let it be random with the few bits of fixing like the derbies. Catering to the needs of the under achieving just downgrades the footy comp more. If those sides are to improve they have to play the best sides. Could you imagine next years GF under this system and Gold Coast, GWS & Melbourne and Bullies all make the finals. Melbourne & GWS are in the bottom of the eight but because of the easy draw Bullies and Suns are in the top 4. They have to play us, Hawks, Freo or Cats in the first week. The main story after is Suns & bullies Destroyed. The other two get knocked out with record finals margins. Bloody stupid in my opinion, you end up with teams in the top 8 who should not be there.

So far off the mark you're not even in the same postcode....

[Doctor]

So far off the mark you're not even in the same postcode....

Yup. Every team plays every other team once. We are talking about the extra 5 games only here. Of those five, you're likely to play one from each of the three categories above so it's only 2 other games we're talking about here in essence.

And yes we play GWS twice every year. I can't see why that's not a good thing. There's no real rivalry now but I'm sure there will be. It already exists at junior level with the Academies playing each other. It also gives us the benefit of playing 12 games in Sydney instead of 11. We only travel 10 times, which is still far more often than most Victorian clubs but isn't too bad over a 25 week season.

[stellation]

I don't mind the idea, and I don't really know that it will matter that much in the end. It looks like they're trying to just lock in some equity for the double ups based on the standings of the previous year; I honestly thought they had that as a consideration already, this just seems moving it from being a consideration in principle to a formula in practice.

I think if a side is continually down the bottom and in trouble financially then those sides need to disappear. This evening things up by the draw is crap. Leave the draw alone and let it be random with the few bits of fixing like the derbies. Catering to the needs of the under achieving just downgrades the footy comp more. If those sides are to improve they have to play the best sides. Could you imagine next years GF under this system and Gold Coast, GWS & Melbourne and Bullies all make the finals. Melbourne & GWS are in the bottom of the eight but because of the easy draw Bullies and Suns are in the top 4. They have to play us, Hawks, Freo or Cats in the first week. The main story after is Suns & bullies Destroyed. The other two get knocked out with record finals margins. Bloody stupid in my opinion, you end up with teams in the top 8 who should not be there.

It's an 18 team comp, so in 22 games you're going to have 5 potential double ups- then on top of that for most teams there's going to be a lock of 1 due to derby/cross town/whatever you want to call it. So 4 potential games per season impacted. I honestly can't see GWS or Melbourne (or their equivalents in future years) making the 8 because of that.

[Triple B]

Could you imagine next years GF under this system and Gold Coast, GWS & Melbourne and Bullies all make the finals. Melbourne & GWS are in the bottom of the eight but because of the easy draw Bullies and Suns are in the top 4.

This years double-ups:

Dogs - Melbourne, Brisbane, Richmond, Adelaide, West Coast
Suns - StKilda, Brisbane, Port, Melbourne, GWS
Melbourne - GWS, Brisbane, Suns, Freo, Bulldogs
GWS - Suns, Swans, Port, Melbourne, Essendon.

So with the above 'scary' draws those sides managed to finish 14th, 15th, 17th and 18th.

Next year with 'easy' draws they will finish Top 4, Top 4, Top 8, Top 8.

Okay then.....