How about the team's name their squads on the Thursday and then all the team's are drawn out of the hat to see who will play who on the Friday night.

The unfairness that the magic weekend has on the league table is removed by the playoffs.

you still get a wee bit of money for finishing minor premiership winners.

Try telling a non-RL fan about magic weekend and watch their face as you get to the bit where you tell them it's an EXTRA league fixture meaning you play one particular team three times.

They'll love it won't they? The chance to play the most meaningful league fixture an extra time.

Which is better than the days we used to get extra games against teams based on the previous season's table.

My wife has absolutely no knowledge of RL or sport in general.
She asked how they decided which of the teams who play each other have the 'home' game at their stadium.
When I explain that it was an 'extra' fixture she said she didn't realise we played every team three times in a season.
I explained that it was only one team you played against three times in a season.
She just shook her head.

I love it when people make up stories.

Even if there was any truth in this 'event', the opinion of your wife - who has absolutely no knowledge of RL or sport in general - is about as consequential as a Kris Welham tackle.

And here lies the problem with RL attracting new supporters - if they don't already follow the sport their opinion (that they think the rulea are stupid) is laughed at.

Glad to see Thaler initiated the Powerplay option to make it slightly fairer.

Not really. More that our current supporters want to constantly complain. We've just seen a fantastic weekend of rugby league, and people find something to not be happy about.

The teams play each other an uneven number of times - you don't have to "find" that.

Why is that a problem?

How isn't it?

Because you haven't given a reason for it to be a problem

Make it a one off competition, 16 teams, 9 a side cup knockout over 2 days with SL teams being forced to play a percentage of A team players to level up the odds from the championship.

Day 1 = 8 games in initial play off
Day 2 = 4 games in 1/4 final in the morning, 2 semi-games and 1 final.

All of them 2 x 20min halfs to keep it quick an turn around the games quickly.

I believe Electroslideywiganer is an adherent to the great Roman concepts of symmetry and proportionality. This exposes a great flaw, not uncommon in Wigan fans. For it fails to understand that Rugby League is not a conformist sport - it is, indeed, anything but. The staunch adherence to the number 13 should have given that away from the start. To try and apply such an unimaginative mindset to such a renegade sport is, frankly, lunacy.

Okay, I'll explain why the concept is unfair and illustrate it with an example.
Sport is based on fair competition. Teams play with the same number of players and within the same set of rules, both on and off the field. When a league system is used, to remain fair, teams must play to a fair system - ie playing each other team on the same number of occasions (usually twice).
So as an example.
This weeked Warrington played Windes - they won easily as they are a title-contending team against the team currently propping up the league.
Saints had to play Wigan - who are also a top team.
IF Warrington finish 1 point ahead of Saints at the end of the season, it's fair to say that the 'easier' extra game they had unfairly affected the league positions.
Anyone who can't see why that is unfair is beyond help.

Quote ="nottinghamtiger"Okay, I'll explain why the concept is unfair and illustrate it with an example. Sport is based on fair competition. Teams play with the same number of players and within the same set of rules, both on and off the field. When a league system is used, to remain fair, teams must play to a fair system - ie playing each other team on the same number of occasions (usually twice). So as an example. This weeked Warrington played Windes - they won easily as they are a title-contending team against the team currently propping up the league. Saints had to play Wigan - who are also a top team. IF Warrington finish 1 point ahead of Saints at the end of the season, it's fair to say that the 'easier' extra game they had unfairly affected the league positions. Anyone who can't see why that is unfair is beyond help.'" So, you would regard this sport www.nfl.com/ Where teams play some teams twice and some not at all, as being unfair to the point of not being a sport at all? What about the RL Challenge Cup? That doesn't seem a fair competition at all either. BTW, a team finishing one point ahead of another at the end of the season, doesn't win them the title.

Quote ="nottinghamtiger"Okay, I'll explain why the concept is unfair and illustrate it with an example. Sport is based on fair competition. Teams play with the same number of players and within the same set of rules, both on and off the field. When a league system is used, to remain fair, teams must play to a fair system - ie playing each other team on the same number of occasions (usually twice). So as an example. This weeked Warrington played Windes - they won easily as they are a title-contending team against the team currently propping up the league. Saints had to play Wigan - who are also a top team. IF Warrington finish 1 point ahead of Saints at the end of the season, it's fair to say that the 'easier' extra game they had unfairly affected the league positions. Anyone who can't see why that is unfair is beyond help.'" So, you would regard this sport www.nfl.com/ Where teams play some teams twice and some not at all, as being unfair to the point of not being a sport at all? What about the RL Challenge Cup? That doesn't seem a fair competition at all either. BTW, a team finishing one point ahead of another at the end of the season, doesn't win them the title.

Quote ="Richie"So, you would regard this sport www.nfl.com/ Where teams play some teams twice and some not at all, as being unfair to the point of not being a sport at all? What about the RL Challenge Cup? That doesn't seem a fair competition at all either. BTW, a team finishing one point ahead of another at the end of the season, doesn't win them the title.'" Don't follow the NFL but yes it seems unfair to me. The challenge cup is a completely different concept to a league competition. I know it doesn't win the title, but it can make the difference between playing home or away, and the significant advantage this brings.

Quote ="Richie"So, you would regard this sport www.nfl.com/ Where teams play some teams twice and some not at all, as being unfair to the point of not being a sport at all? What about the RL Challenge Cup? That doesn't seem a fair competition at all either. BTW, a team finishing one point ahead of another at the end of the season, doesn't win them the title.'" Don't follow the NFL but yes it seems unfair to me. The challenge cup is a completely different concept to a league competition. I know it doesn't win the title, but it can make the difference between playing home or away, and the significant advantage this brings.

You should take a look at the NFL. Try boxing too, for a completely different way of deciding champions.
Don't know if you've noticed, but for the last few years, SL has been more than just a league competition.

If the difference is one point between us and Saints, Saints will have ample opportunity to put that right in the playoffs, which determine the champions (for more details, ask your wife).

On tonight's showing, however, I suspect the difference between us and Saints will be a bit more than one point come the end of the season.

Great idea, would definately give more teams a chance of becoming champions. Could the winning team then choose their challengers, or would this be too much like 'club call'?

Would your wife shake her head at Wladimir Klitschko?

My wife shakes her head at most things.