Jeez no, i hate the idea of bonus points.

I like the idea, simply because it gives teams losing by 50-60 points (Wakefield) a chance of at least a point.

SL don't have this system, reserve grade don't, U-18's don't, Conference don't, amateur leagues don't etc etc.

It has been in place in the 2 Championship leagues for 5 years now. If it works, then why hasn't it been introduced into SL (and the rest) sooner. If it doesn't, why hasn't it been scrapped before now ?

Again, why should they be rewarded for losing?

I can't think of a game where bonus points are given out bar Union and Cricket and in both of those, bonus points are given to reward teams for scoring x number of tries (union) or getting over a certain amount of runs/bowling someone out for less than a certain amount of runs.

Yes, so reward them for scoring more than 4 tries, and losing.

I was in two minds when this was introduced in NL1: I could see an argument in favour - it would encourage tighter games and give losing teams something to play for in the last quarter of a game, but I can't say I noticed any real difference when we were playing under the system in 2007. But then, it wasn't really an issue for us

If it were introduced into SL i'd like to see it to within 6 points say.

You mean apart from making Wigan sixth and Leeds joint first ?

I suggested bonus points a while ago but based on losing by 6 points or less. The reason was because of the standard of refereeing and the outcome of games is gradually being influenced by a bad referee decision(s),

Considering - if you read that post - that table was from 2007 when Leeds finished 2nd on 37 points and Wigan finished 6th on 27 points, then yes.

The table for this year is in Bilko's post.

Trust me - you won't like it. 3pts for a win, 1 BP for >/=12 score difference.


You're two points behind your closest rivals but with an inferior points difference.
You win by 40 on Sunday, they lose by 12 on Sunday.
In the papers on Monday you're still behind them in the league table.


Cack.

No thanks, we/they don't deserve the chance of a point.

Well get used to it, its the system Wakey will be using after the next round of franchises...

I wasn't sure about this at first and thought it was the precursor to merging both Championship divisions by giving an incentive to lower teams. But it did come across as rewarding loosers.

One thing is for certain, some teams do fight to earn bonus points, you can actually hear players geeing each other up to make that final effort. Didn't Sheffield survive their first year in the championship by earning bonus points?

However, I think the RFL should be consistent in their approach across all divisions and it would not bother me if it was removed next year.

As a supporter of one of the lower end CC1 clubs i think bonus points are a good idea. This season we had no chance of promotion but this system has given us a chance to build a mini league to guage our progress against similar opposition. Fair enough if you are losing by 20,30,40 points then you get nothing but if you are building a team from scratch it's good to get some reward for pushing a top team all the way for a win.

I've been dead against it since it was first introduced into the Championship although hearing Champ club fans saying it doesn't make much difference watching games suggests it isn't so big an issue when you are playing under it. But I would not like to see it introduced to SL, I don't think it's necessary and I remember when Barrow I think it was who played for a loss last year to come top of the league. That should never, ever happen in my opinion.

Quote ="Dreamer"Didn't Sheffield survive their first year in the championship by earning bonus points? '" Er, no. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Rugby ... al_Leagues

Quote ="Dreamer"Didn't Sheffield survive their first year in the championship by earning bonus points? '" Er, no. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Rugby ... al_Leagues

Quote ="tim2" Quote ="Dreamer"Didn't Sheffield survive their first year in the championship by earning bonus points? '" Er, no. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Rugby ... al_Leagues'" Thats quite interesting, BP didn't make a dramatic difference in any division. The comment re Sheffield came from something said during the Sky Thursday night televised match a few weeks ago.

Quote ="tim2" Quote ="Dreamer"Didn't Sheffield survive their first year in the championship by earning bonus points? '" Er, no. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Rugby ... al_Leagues'" Thats quite interesting, BP didn't make a dramatic difference in any division. The comment re Sheffield came from something said during the Sky Thursday night televised match a few weeks ago.

Bonus points would work well because they could either encourage close games, or reward winning teams for winning in style.



The French RU Top 14 system seems to work very well.
4 points for a win
2 for a draw
0 for a loss. However:
1 BP for winning by a margin of 3 tries or more than the opposition.
1 BP for losing by 7 points or less. Given that is the margin of a converted try in RU, the equivalent would be 6 in League.

There is little chance of both teams scoring a bonus point with this system.

How about;

2 points for a win,
1 for a draw,
0 for a loss.

Bonus point for losing by 6 points or less.
Bonus Point for winning by 30 points or more?

I wouldn't bother with it myself. It seems wrong to reward losing sides. If a team turns in a 50-point hammering, surely that would be more worthy of a BP.

Not sure about that, I have seen on several occasions a team losing taking 2 to get a bonus point which just doesn't seem right, I'd prefer they scrapped it just so that teams go for the try instead of a kick from a penalty!

Let's have a BYE week too?

That would be a high scoring game if Wakey still got a bonus point after letting in 60.

Doh