Since our GF defeat i have heard it stated that it is 57 years since we won the title. What exactly do they mean. Surely in the last 57 years we have won every domestic honour barring the Superleague GF, which has only been around for 18 years.

If the title is based on final league position, then we have done this twice to my knowledge, last year and in the 70's when I first started watching the Wire.

If it is based on the winning of a top finishing play-off competition, then we have done that in 1988 and again in the 70's.

57 years since we were champions......

I'm guessing this thread is going to descend into another tedious debate about the various methods in which RL has found to crown its champions??....

I was at Elland Rd in 1986 and we beat Halifax in "what" I don't know the "title" but it must have been the GF equivalent in those days AND we lost the following year at Old Trafford to Wigan in the same format ...
But sky seem oblivious to these games

But they do say that history is written by the victors..well I suppose sky won the media war and can put whatever slant they wish on our games history

Why do people insist on blaming Sky? Little tip for you - Sky didn't exist in 1955, the last time we were crowned champions, after winning the Championship Final that followed a playoff system, which has been the most common method of finding the champions in the whole history of RL. NOT just SL and NOT just since Sky.

"after winning the Championship Final that followed a playoff system, which has been the most common method of finding the champions"

Why didn't our Prem win at Elland Rd in the late 80s count then?

....Jesus wept....You really need it explaining???

Quote ="TF and the wire""after winning the Championship Final that followed a playoff system, which has been the most common method of finding the champions" Why didn't our Prem win at Elland Rd in the late 80s count then?'" Because that year the champions were decided using the league table. The top 8 played off for a seperate trophy called the Premiership. That ran from 1975 to 1997. The Championship Playoffs ran from 1907 to 1974. SL Playoffs started in 1998. RL started in 1895. So I make that 113 Championships in all, with 32 decided using the league table and 81 using playoffs and final. So playoffs and a final is a very traditional method in RL. Quite a bit of history at: www.rugbyleagueproject.org/

Quote ="TF and the wire""after winning the Championship Final that followed a playoff system, which has been the most common method of finding the champions" Why didn't our Prem win at Elland Rd in the late 80s count then?'" Because that year the champions were decided using the league table. The top 8 played off for a seperate trophy called the Premiership. That ran from 1975 to 1997. The Championship Playoffs ran from 1907 to 1974. SL Playoffs started in 1998. RL started in 1895. So I make that 113 Championships in all, with 32 decided using the league table and 81 using playoffs and final. So playoffs and a final is a very traditional method in RL. Quite a bit of history at: www.rugbyleagueproject.org/

So basically in the past we have won the title necessary to be called champions but in the wrong years.

Oh and Dita's slot meter......do one will ya

In that case Leeds want at least 6 leaders from 60s and 70s and at least two premierships from 70s an 80s,but thats not the way it works.

Although there has been some differences over the 117 year history of rugby league about how the champions are decided, the one consistency has been the fact that at the start of every single season every club in the game has known what they will need to do to win the championship that season.

Warrington RLFC last succeeded in doing this in 1955.

Simple as that really innit?

I'm sure if we fail to do it again next season at least ten more threads like this will crop up once our season is over mind. If we win the LLS another ten will be posted before the play offs even start by people wanting us to be crowned immediately rather than risk losing out again which will of course be Sky's fault.

No, basically we haven't been champions since 1955.....We've won play off competitons when they were a Cup comp, and topped tables when it meant zilch.

.... though of course when we won the 86 premiership we did beat (let the record show that we stuffed em m'lud) the champions (and table toppers) Halifax in the final.

So on that basis we were like Leeds.

Does it still not count?

You can claim the 1986 one to Aussies because if you tell them we "won a Premiership" in 1986 they will think that means the Grand Final, so our barren streak is only as long as Parramatta's.

.

I reckon it's Casual Des the Stupid Postman or whatever.

No it does not count. The 'premiership' was one thing, the Championship is another.

Please can we have a 'sticky' on this as it's getting tedious?

Ok I will desist from mentioning it again ,if someone will explain one simple fact to me.

The Premiership was a knock out competion at the end of the season played between teams in the upper part of the final league table.

The Championship is a knock out competion at the end of the season played between teams in the upper part of the final league table.

WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE (baring a subtle change in name) ??????

Well, the main difference was that, back in 1986, the sport denoted that the winner of The Premiership were not Champions where as the sport now denotes that the winner of The Superleague Playoffs (assume that's what you mean by Championship) are the Champions. It's absurd to suggest that, simply because there was a similar competition a few years back that had different implications you can somehow superimpose that on today's competition.

The Premiership was an end of season cup comp. The championship was decided by a league format. We don't operate that way any more and I simply don't understand the confusion.

I would think that the main difference is that RL now has a showcase event to end their season and decide the ultimate champions in a winner-takes-all match....The Premiership we won in 1986 was basically a two-bit comp, which was of little interest to anybody outside of the two clubs taking part in the final.

Can anybody remember the crowd for that Wire v Halifax game and compare it to this year's GF?.....I was there and remember a mainly empty ground - Was probably no more than 15,000 there, which straight away demonstrates the difference between the two events, seeing has the GF now gets 70,000 and a decent amount of media attention.

Whatever people's thoughts and opinions on how we decide our champions, it has to be said we have created a pretty good sporting event, which is often of a high quality and a decent amount of drama for the neutral to enjoy....Its definitely one of the best things that has come from our sport in recent times and it would be silly to abandon it, just because some short sighted people have a problem with it.

in 1986 Halifax were crowned Champions and won 19 games over the League season.
Warrington won 20 games and finished in fourth...

how can that be fair that the Champions can actually win less games than the teams in second,third and fourth positions? If only we had a play off system back then to sort out the champions from the chancers..........


whats this thread about again.........

I agree that it is a pretty good sporting event and thereby I have a problem with it, (sorry for being "tedious" and "short sighted"icon_wink.gif. The GF is a one off, a cup competition IMO and for those 'historians' that claim for a majority of years that's how RL has crowned its Champions and therefore its sacricsanct I will offer a different view and point out that for many years the play offs were taken from a large league format where teams were part time and due to travel and costs not everyone played everyone else in an equal home/away format. your fixtures were organised along county divisions and the play offs therefore regularised the seasons' campaign.

Now in SL we have 14 teams and all working from a similar cost base, income and restraint and apart from Magic Weekend, (another farce), we play all the other teams twice thanks to the M62 and the invention and availabilty of a team sharrah. I just don't understand the lack of appeal in a first past the post system when the set up is clearly designed to equalise a professional competition.

Not a problem with we all knew the rules argument, a sincere well done to Leeds they were the best team on the day

Crowds for Warrington's last three appearances in end-of-season finals:

Championship Final 1955 - 49,434
Premiership final 1986 - 13,683
SL Final 2012 - 70,676

That's because Halifax drew 6 games that season. They won 19, drew 6 = 44 points. Warrington won 20, drew 1 = 41 points. Halifax only lost 5 games, we lost 9. Perfectly fair really?

And a few more facts
That give the following years Play off details
Yes they really did happen
just been totally forgotten/disregarded by all and sundry

Semi Final May 10th St Helens 8 Warrington 18 R. Whitfield Knowsley Road 12,828

T: B. Ledger
G: B. Ledger
P. Loughlin

T: D. Drummond
B. Johnson
J. Ropati
G: P. Bishop (2)
F: P. Bishop (2)


Semi Final May 10th Wigan 18 Halifax 10 G. Kershaw Central Park 22,457

T: A. Goodway
S. Hampson
J. Lydon
D. Stephenson
G: J. Lydon

T: G. Eadie
S. Wilson
G: C. Whitfield


Final May 17th Wigan 8 Warrington 0 K. Allatt Old Trafford 38,756

T: J. Lydon
G: H. Gill
D. Stephenson