I'm a proud Dewsbury supporter despite our results. As you'll no doubt guess I'm very much in favor of the bonus point system, as it is currently working in our favor and did so a few years back while Andy Kelly was in charge.

I can honestly say we have in most cases worked hard for the bonus points we have earned for example when playing against the likes of yourselves Barrow and widnes we and other lower positioned teams try to lift our game ensuring we get something from it a win a draw or a BP.

I ask a question and please be honest if you were at the foot of the table trying to survive would you still disagree with it?

I personally don't mind the bonus point but I think it could be refined as a scoring system.

I think there should be a winning bonus point as well as the losing bonus point so there is four points available in every match.

Win 3pts. lose by 12 or less 1pt = 4pts

Draw 2pts each = 4pts

Win by more than 12 or above = 4pts

There are points for losing by 12 or less but I think there should be points for winning by a certain margin too so you are not just rewarding the losing team battling but the attacking team too.

Don't you mean:-

Win by more than 12 = 4 pts ?

i.e. 3 pts for the win plus a winning margin bonus point.

Yeah sorry.. typooooooooooooooooo

That sounds far too sensible and fair to be adopted by the RFL.

I believe it was justified to address some of the drubbings that were being handed out by teams selecting which games they could/would compete in.

The rationale being that teams would compete hard in every game because they had a chance of a point even though they knew they were highly unlikely to win. This was intended to make all games competitive and therefore entertaining and retain crowds for those games considered "no contests".

Personally, I don't care what the points system is as long as its the same for everyone.