Hello, I am looking into writing a book about the idea of play-offs deciding the Champions in sport. I was wondering what the opinions are of fellow Rugby League fans on the play-offs. Do you think play-offs are the best way to decide the champions or do you prefer whoever finishes top being champions? And what do you think of the current format?
Personally I think play-offs are a great concept, sport is about peaking on the big occasion and beating your biggest rivals head to head when it matters.

It's a lucrative idea and a "good" idea in that respect...not so sure it's "good" in the moralistic sense. ...I mean we all remember the GF winners but who remembers the league leaders which is really the more praiseworthy achievement. I can't even remember where Leeds finished these last five years or so. It's become irrelevant.

I like the play-offs and the GF but this current format i.e top 8 is rewarding mediocre teams imo and should be reverted to a top 6.

No team should be in the Playoffs who finish in the bottom half of the league.

Interesting that the same poll on the Wigan board is against the playoffs. Perhaps they are nervous


The rest all seem in favour of the playoff concept.

As long as the league schedule continues to be unbalanced by the extra game for the Magic weekend, the playoffs are the only fair way of deciding the champions.

A return to a 26 game, home and away, league schedule makes the requirement for a playoff series to decide the champions harder to defend IMO.

Either system is acceptable as long as everyone knows the rules before a ball is kicked in pre-season and there is no changing the rules mid-season.

That way teams will approach every game working towards a fixed goal. That goal being to top the league or qualify well and peak in Sept/Oct.

The concept that every position on the league ladder matters and your next game is your most important right through to the GF in the play-off series works best for me. All the formats we've had during SL haven't quite worked, where there are second chances given and home advantage has been crucial but I still think the top 5 was the most credible of those we've seen.

Under the present system we could end up with a 7 V 8 final and given by definition the 8th placed team have to lose more Regular Round matches than they win their claim to being Champions would be pretty difficult to justify even though it was earned.

The regular rounds are just a money spinner for Sky.

A league schedule can never be entirely even. Head to head, with a suitable qualifying period to determine match ups, is the only way to decide the real champions.

Fantastic way to end any season in any sport, as regards all this about the team that wins the league been the best I dont think it holds up because that is not the aim of the season. In football the best team wins the league because that is the aim of the competition in our sport the aim is to win the grand final. Take away the playoffs and I think you would find more games of fuller intensity at the start of the season and the idea of peaking for the end would not exist.

I realise this could have been written in less words but if you cut through the waffle there is apoint in there

This.

It's the way we have decided our champions for the majority of the sport's history.

Good idea, but needs to revert to 6 (or preferably 5) teams. The team finishing 1st in the regular season deserves to only have to play 1 game in order to qualify for the GF, equally the top 2 deserve a 2nd 'bite of the cherry' at any stage of the knock-out stages.

Play-offs - Yes.
8 teams in it? - No, top four is about right.

imo the play offs have brought more meaning to all of the end of season matches.

for example,in seasons gone by the great wigan side of the 80's and 90's had already got the league title in the bag with still numerous league games still left to play,what else was was left for the other sides?
a shot at the old end of season premiership



taking last weekends fixtures into consideration saints and warrington were battling for 2nd and 3rd and thus the home tie

the rhino's secured 4th with an away win against hull fc,with the loser finishing 6th as a result

huddersfield won in france to secure 5th

whilst the crusader beat hull kr to secure 8th place

so only wigan and hull kr entered round 27 knowing their final sl places couldn't be altered

all clubs know the rules at the start of the season

Nail - head - hit

The top 5 was a copycat of the old Aussie system wasn't it? I preffered top 6 just to add c ouple more teams in the mix and make the end of season a bit more interesting for more clubs. I agree, top 8 with the quality we have is probably too many teams.

I agree with TVOC, you don't decide the best way to crown champions just before the playoffs start. This is a debate for the off season so everyone knows the score all year - whatever way is picked. I like the GF, I think it's a fantastic way to finish the season. A real success for the sport.

Make it an end of season KO comp . 1v2 . 3v4 , 5v6 etc If you are gonna include 8th place you may as well iclude everyone .

What a terrible format.

I think it was about 1903 when we first had a playoff system of some description.

My only stipulation would be in a 14 team league, to revert to a top 6 playoff instead of top 8. Other than that, as tvoc says, as long as everyone knows the rules at the beginning of the season I cant see why its a problem to some people.

Yep, a format whereby the 5th placed team gets the biggest advantage.

Scrap the playoffs? No thanks. This season would now be done & dusted and the off season's quite long enough (from a spectating POV at any rate).

I preferred the top 5 version. I think it was unique to the sport and gave fair advantage reflective of finishing position.

Baldrick its the worst plan since Abraham Lincoln said " I'm sick of kicking around the house lets go take in a show"