I don't think Hull (in 8th) are there to make up the numbers any more than Catalans (in 6th) are. Both are well capable of producing a shock result along the line IMO.

I think the 8 is fine TBH, and will get better and better as seasons pass and (hopefully) more teams start spending full cap. I can see the issues you highlight, but I think to label the format "embarrassing" is to massively overplay them I reckon.

Will Hull win it from 8th? No. Could they have a major say in the play-off series? Yes.

But Hull have finished in the bottom half of the league. I personally don't think they should be rewarded with a shot at winning the Super League title after havign such a mediocre season. The reason we have a top 8 is to get more money into SL and I understand that but I don't agree with that.

I imagine speaking to someone who doesn't understand RL very well and explaining to them that yes, the team who finished 8th having lost as many games as thy have won, need to win 4 straight games and they are SL champions. As unlikely as it would be, I just don't think it should be allowed. Think about other sports that employ play offs to determine a Champion. 12 out of 32 teams qualify in the NFL. 4 out of 12 in the Guinness Premiership. 8 out of 30 qualify in baseball. I just think those numbers are more realistic that 8 out of 14 in SL.

I agree with you that over time, once clubs start spending up to the cap that it should turn out better, which is why I don't have as much a problem with the NRL play offs. This season must be one of the first for a while were the top 4 have all won on the opening weekend. It's much more unpredictable over there. Until we have a stronger more equal competition I'd suggest going back to 5 or 6 teams, but that's just my feeling.

Having only watched Rugby League since 1999 play offs is all I've known so I can really only comment from that side of it. I'm sure those fans old enough to remember the 1996 season and before will be able to compare winning the league from 1st and from Old Trafford better.

I have always liked the play off concept and have been in favour of it because, as I say, it's what I'm used to. When it was Top 5 or even Top 6 the league games still felt important enough and the play offs felt like huge games with a magnificent occasion at Old Trafford as the climax. Each league position had a clear advantage over the one beneath it, especially with the Top 5 so there was a desire to finish as high as possible in the regular rounds. Also the intensity and tension of the play offs themselves was great in my opinion.

However, with the move to Top 8 my opinion has begun to become less fixed. Although the games can still be tense and exciting its diluting of the league has made it have more of a detrimental influence than a positive one. Teams only have to finish in the Top 4 in reality to have a potentially good chance of reaching the Grand Final and a good side might still be able to do it from outside the 4. The league games are undervalued far too much with the present system. And that's not to mention Club Call which goes against the whole ethos of sport in my view.

I would still answer Yes I think play offs are a good way of deciding champions but only if the play off system is not seen to detract from the weekly round 'bread and butter' games we watch all year. The previou play off systems just about avoids doing this but the Top 8 does have a diluting effect in my opinion.

Winning the League has to be the Superior success of Champions, why should a team who can lose many more matches end up as Champions, it should be just end of season play off trophy! and a format which does not allow any teams a second chance if they lose in the first round, I agree the two tops teams should go straight through to the semi, but the other four teams should be straight knock out!

I get that people like the excitement of the play offs and I have no problems with that. As a PR spectical the playoffs are by far a superior product. However in terms of testing a club. NOthing beats the league system. You have to back up week after week. You have to cope with injuries but because its not knock out a period of injuries can be evened out.

During a four week knockout comp its too short to even out any injuries or suspensions.

Also you cant compare playoffs. Take the superbowl. The playoffs work there because the league system does not test all teams against each other.

If we had a divisional system then yes the playoffs is the only viable option.

The question is what do you wanty from yoursystem hype or a true test of the best team. You can call Catalans champs if you like if they wuin this year. Saints too. But it will just mean the best side is not he same as the champions.

Effectively the CC is a more validtest of who the champions than they playoffs as at leadst its an open competition to all comers.

Grand final is exactly the same as the premiership in years gone by. But are we going to take all those league wins off wigan and hand the champions tag to whoever won the premiership?

The fact that a team finishing below first place can then be classed as champions goes against what most sport is all about, unless it is part of different competition as in champions league.

The premiership didn't decide the league champions though, it was a competition on its own.

Ask the same poll question on the dire forum this week and it will be 100% = No!

Not for me, if I had my way Wire would now be Champions.

The top 8 is an absolute farce, you could lose more games than you win and technically become 'Champions'. On the other side you could be undefeated all season, lose the last game and end up with nothing.

The weekly rounds are worthless in the context of a top 8 play offs. Maybe the supporters should boycott the league games and just turn up for the last 3 weeks of the season, I think that would consign it to history.

Im not denying that the Grand Final is a great day out and fantastic when you win ( Can just about remember that now!) but top would be champions for me and that is a view I have consistently held even when we were winning the Old Trafford showpiece.

I'm undecided. On one hand the best and most consistent team should be regarded as the champions, but on the other the excitement and spectacle the grand final creates is a great advert for the game.

There's far too many teams in the play-offs, however. The absolute maximum for me should be 5, I though would prefer just the top 3, which is what I think they do in the Aviva Premiership.

The most fair system is undoubtedly first past the post, with round robin home and away fixtures. So in purely sporting terms, that is the right way to do it.

In terms of spectacle, however, I think the playoffs are great. You get some wonderfully intense matches when each side knows their whole season is on the line. Sometimes the outcome doesn't quite seem fair, but then that's part of the theatre of the whole thing. Thinking pragmatically, the Grand Final has also gone a long way, I suspect, to making the sport financially viable again. So the playoff system has got plenty going for it.

However, as people have already noted, the top eight system is an absolute farce. Besides rewarding mediocrity (over half of the clubs involved, FFS), the system doesn't provide sufficient incentive for finishing in as high a position as possible. In all reality, it made little or no difference to Wigan or Warrington whether they finished 1st or 2nd, and, similarly, while it was nice for us to secure 3rd, 4th would have been of pretty much equal value.

A top 5 (top 6 at a stretch) playoff is the way forward for me. Finishing 1st was a big deal when we had this system, as you only had to win one home game (and home advantage really mattered, as you would be playing your closest competitor) to get to OT. It was a better system, and it gave the league fixtures more meaning, as there was some genuine competition to see who was good enough to get into the top 5. Contrast that with the current situation, where we have a 7-month experiment to see who is sh*t enough not to make it into the top 8.

Anyone want to change their vote.

The same thread on the Cherry and white has now hit 14 pages.

I love the play off system but the 6 team format is the way to go with winner of top two playoff straight into the grand final.

The 8th team in SL had a final total of 13 wins, 1 draw and 13 losses.

The 8th team in the NRL (the best RL competition in the world) had a final total of 12 wins and 12 losses.

I don't hear complaints of that competition being a waste of time, lacking credibility, etc, etc.

I would however change the set up of the 8, I don't see how it is fair that Wigan who finished 2nd should have a harder play off series than Leeds who finished 5th.

Now this surprises me to see the poll so close. Play offs are a very good idea just the top 8 system is a bit of a farce. There are not enough exciting games to justify a top 8 system in SL. Think i rather see good quality games rather than some of the blow outs we had in the first 2 weeks of the playoffs. SL outside the top 5 is awful where the NRL outside the top 5 is more competative.

Grand final must be kept its a great occasion. Not only does it give RL some decent publicity but its usually a good game and RL is starved of mainstream media publicity.

The playoffs can decide the title next week. Any other time and they're an utter travesty and reduce the whole season to a never ending slog through tedious, meaningless, pointless friendly games until finally getting to the just 4 or 5 games a year whose results actually matter even a little bit. The Americans and Aussies might love it but I think the whole concept is essentially anathema to the soul of a UK sports fan - certainly an old git like me.

Hear Hear...

Top at the end of the weekly rounds are Champions, then have a separate top 6 playoff, knock out rugby, for a different trophy.

McClennan wrote a rather dramatic post about proving your might in the arena against the best, and how in ye olden times to become the champion at something you would have to seek out the current holder and beat them.

Whilst the league format seems a comprehensive examination, how many sports actually use it to decide trophies?
The American sports all use playoffs, but we know those guys are a bit zazzy, so perhaps we shouldn't look to closely. However, tennis, golf (i think), boxing, athletics and other olympic type events, hell - even snooker, their trophies are all decided by knockouts. Sure, there's seeding and ranking systems, but that could be deemed as the role of our league.

I'm not a fan of our playoff format, as too much dross got let in and to allow over half the league in seems to belittle the acheivemnt of qualifying, but doing it on GF night, on the biggest stage, against the best opposition is the mark of a real champion. The playoffs are a must.

Question, did any of you guys [ifeel[/i like champions the years we topped the league and then got bumped by Leeds when we had the chance to show who was the better team over 80 mins?

When the mighty Saints finished first, Certain club supporters (W) said we had only won the Hubcap, now they claim they are champions as they finished first

Like the Grand Final format and have done since their inception, however there is the contingent of fans that believe top spot should be champions... Why play in the Super League when you know that to be champions you have to be at Old Trafford in Early October?

au contraire

Most Wire fans like the playoffs as it usually presents our best chance of winning. This may be a brief oasis of us being top of the league, I wouldn't bet on this being a regular thing.

I like the playoffs as it exposes who can deal with the pressure.

I think the Saints need to take some lessons from Wire, we've been in 2 finals in recent years and won both of them - Saints have now lost 4 in a row... you are getting like the Bradford team of Brian Smith and Elliott.

Maybe Saints could ask Warrington for tips on how to stay composed and win major finals

Nice try but in some of those years that we lost finals, we also won them too, 3 cups on the bounce I believe.

Thank you sir, although I don't know where you get the dramatic from



Post [url=http://viewtopic.php?p=16472140#p16472140here[/url.



Superbly put.

Who were those finals against though....walk in victories against mid table sides

In 2009 we beat a team that finished 5 places above us in SL and in 2010 we beat the three times consecutive Super League champions. As for Saints in the Challenge Cup in those years, well knowing that the mighty Wire awaited them in the final I think the pressure was too much in the semis!