I seem to remember them doing the right thing in 2007 when the 'guilt' of getting to the GF Eliminator from [size=1506th[/size place was too much so they offered to resign from the competition as they thought it unfair that a team finishing [size=1506th[/size should get to the GF but it was rejected by the RFL. Oh wait - I'm mistaken. They didn't!

I hope they keep up the bleating as it is giving everyone else a good laugh. I don't know - maybe they could write some songs or create a flag about it. Laughing stock!




Must go as I need to create a new user so I can log on and say how great and 'well-endowed' my current user is! Another laughing stock.

Tschuss!

Th Wiganties

No excuses from me, every team knows the system at the beginning of the season, I dont agree with a top 8 along with thousands of others i expect, but everybody knows at the beginning of the season that that is how it is, the 2 teams that get to the final, deserve to be in the final and have peaked at the right time, fair play to both clubs and here's to a good final.

Well said 21-12 i agree top 8 is wrong especially in SL where the team finishing 7th and 8th can get rewarded for losing more games than winning top 5/6 for me with only the top2 getting a second chance and no club call.

I felt the need to post it after reading some of the pathetic posts by fellow Wigan fans. Good Luck in the Final.

Thankyou

And I'd like to stress "Some"!
I'm not going to go into my full thoghts on the subject but in short :-

The best 2 x equipped teams to make the grand Final have got there and whoever wins it will deserve it!
They've played the rules of this competition better than any other and good luck to em!

Is that "All of us"?
Why no mention of the 8 page thread on Wolfs.com debating the same issue?

Do I say it's "All of you"?



See thread title.

I should first point out that I have no problem with Leeds and Saints contesting the final. It is just an observation that under the old system when Leeds and Saints were regularly finishing 1st and 2nd in the league at least one of them was guaranteed a place in the final. It is now harder for the top two teams to make it to the final. That is the system and am not complaining, just pointing out a fact. It would have been interesting to hear Leeds and Saints fans opinions had they finished 1st and 2nd and then failed to make the final. I seem to remember Saints not making the final and there was much complaining to follow.
Under the old top 5 system I think Warrington would have probably reached the final. I don't think they would have lost two home play-off games on the trot. It is ironic that the system was changed because Sky and SL were tiring of the GF being a repeat of Leeds/Saints and then they are now benefiting from the new system.

There are two good teams contesting the GF on Saturday and so I am sure that the game will be a credit to RL.

Even better, top 3

Winner in final 2v3 at 2's ground minimum 1v3 final

or draw it out and make the 8th place team have to put in a monumental effort to get to the final

[u1st game[/u
7v8 and 1v2 winners of 1v2 in final
[u2nd game[/u
6v winnners of game 1 (7vicon_cool.gif
[u3rd game[/u
5 v winners of game 2
[u4th game[/u
4 v game 3
[u5th game[/u
3 v game 4
[u6th game[/u
game 5 winners v loser of 1v2
[u7th game[/u
final

When you finished 6th you had aspirations to get to the GF?

Of course. We are hardly going to say that we don't deserve to have a go. In any case the season Wigan finshed 6th we efrectively finished 3rd but had points deducted.

So how would that work in terms of week by week games.

If the winner of 1v2 has multiple weeks off, they'd be seriously disadvantages.

have 1v2 when ever they would prefer it, have 2 games a week, you want to win from 8th, earn it

we all know the reason that itd top 8 is that rightly or wrongly midtable teams have something to continue interest in their season.I think it should be top 5,but not more than 6.Maybe if the league leaders do not get to the GF,how about they have have an early season game against the SL winners to decide who plays in the WCC?

[size=1504th[/size

Just got banned for posting ''that's the way the cookie crumbles'' when they were questioning the carmont knock on decision.

No you didn't.

Well I got a PM from you saying you were stealing my cookies and now i can't post on the wigan board anymore.

You were banned for derailing at least 4 threads today, after being told to use the trolling thread as well as not taking notice of two very clear public warnings that such actions weren't going to be tolerated and bans would be handed out.

So you really don't have any excuses, and the boo hoo post on here really is pathetic.

the bans are pathetic, it's just people having a laugh on a forum.

I'd not read those warnings otherwise I simply wouldn't have posted it. Maybe you should warn via pm and not just as a reply to the thread as theres always the chance it will go unoticed. Derailed threads, that's a poor excuse.

And it was hardly a boo hoo post, simply a statement of what had happened.

If you don't bother reading clearly signed warning posts, highlighted troll threads - that's the way the cookie crumbles!

A hell of alot of cookies have done alot of crumbling today