Good points in there..

Looking at the footy league, after Man Utd's last two losses there is pressure on them to win their next match...

If this was superleague with 8 games left and Leeds/Saints had just lost two on the bounce, would there be as much pressure to win the next to avoid losing top spot...well we know the answer cause it happened last year....

Therefore the build-up to the next games is virtually non existant...

Who would prefer a return to the old league system to see many more tighter games, were losing is unthinkable?

Which "old" league system? The old one, the old, old one, the old, old, old one, or the really, really old one? (currently our competiton is pretty close to that in operation in the 60's -early 70's prior to two divisions. A league leaders shield followed by a playoff to decide the Champions).

The only way we will return to tighter games is to have more than two competitive teams, and in any league system a win or loss 5 weeks in is not going to determine the outcome of the competition. Coaches don't want to pile undue pressure on their players when they still have 6 months footy to play.

Also worth pointing out what a tremendous success the GF has been for the sport. For once we saw what the Australians were doing (what we'd been doing in the 60's) and realised that having a big final to crown the Champions was the way to revitalise a flagging league system.
But hey, we wouldn't be having this discussion if Saints hadn't lost the last two GF's would we?

Nope, nor were we having it when Saints beat the Bulls in the GF from 2nd.

Typical Saints fans really. Must come from being in Wigan's shadow.

Ouch!

You're growing on me.

The system that provides a team with the most points the title....fair system and incourages more competitive games overall...

Even the Wigan fans aren't so arrogant as to want to change the competition because they can't win it. Neither were the Bulls fans when they lost from 1st place twice. Only you lot would scrap the showpiece event of the Rugby year, one of the greatest events in British sport, because you got totaly rolled over by a better big game team two years running.

Pathetic. There simply is no other word.

[uTRANSLATION[/u: We consistently collect hub-caps but consistently choke in the big games so lets move the goalposts so that people may call us Champions instead of chokers.

Give Bradford a chance to complain first. With Hood in charge it's pretty much a given.

The teams that have missed out on being Champions after finishing top are:

1999 Bradford (St Helens)
2000 Wigan (St Helens)
2005 St Helens (Bradford)
2007 St Helens (Leeds)
2008 St Helens (Leeds)

Actually talking about the old system, before 1998...games seem to be more competitive then..

OMG!!!!!

You have problems.

Glad to see Diskin is free to play Friday

How far before 1998?

Well as far back as I've been watching rugby so the early eighties, mind you the weather gave you some mudbaths, but even then the games were more entertaining and competitive.

I think we all know why the Grand final was introduced, Sky TV and money!!

If you think about it....the playoffs and Grand Final are how we find the champs. So it's the regular rounds that are the money spinning exploitation of fans and TV subscribers. It's just a way of guaranteeing fixtures.

Why hadn't English Rugby League thought of deciding its' champions by a playoff and championship decuider before Sky TV came along eh?

Oh hang on........

Isn't it strange how Saints fans never complained in 1999 and 2000?

Anyone with half a brain knows the GF series were nothing more than a money spinning initiative.

With regards to the format we have had, I knew Sainst would benefit just as much as they would suffer.

It was as inevitable as night follows day. I can't really say I was too bothered about the 'fairness' of the system, notwithstanding the fact that I thought Leeds were the best team in the competition in 2007 anyway, irrespective of League tables.

I notice how you dont mention last season in your last paragraph

Football is becomoing more and more of an outpost with regards to using a league system to decide the champions:

Rugby League
Rugby Union
Limited overs cricket
Basketball
Darts
Formula One
NFL
Basketball
the list goes on

have all moved away from a straight points system.

indeed even the champions league uses a league system to try to ensure that it gets the teamsthat it wants to qualify for the lucrative play off phase.

It's the weekly rounds that are the money spinning initiative.
Head to head playoffs are clearly the obvious and fair way to find which team is best. The drawback being that they don't give a regular set of home fixtures and severely limit the earning potential of the teams eliminated early in the competition.

You'll note that St Helens and Bradford have had a go on both the swings and the roundabouts here.

Any noises coming from there will almost certainly be hypocritical whining.

Wigan have come close to having a crack but obviously need a higher finishing spot to launch from. Leeds fans at this point just luv it but we'll be on the wrong end of it sometime (probably).

The first past the post system can only be put into place if all teams play each other only on a home and away basis, with none of the "extra fixtures"

As an example, last season in the "normal" Supersleague round Wigan played Saints 4 times, Leeds 3 times and Catalan 3 times.

That's almost 40% of their games against the top 3 teams.

If for example last seasons champions had been decided on the top of the league system they should have only been 6 games against those teams.