I must say I've read this forum for many years and you've always come across as one of the most conceited people on here. I'm sure you're a nice guy in person but I'm afraid the above post has only confirmed my opinion.

There are a number of positive aspects to the play-offs, which I didn't name one-by-one because I actually thought you'd done a decent job in your opening post (

). Namely, these are:

- Creating an additional set-piece occasion in the GF which is vital for the finances of the game and supports RFL grassroots investment. The game puts RL in the spotlight nationally (although not nearly as luch as it deserves) for one day in the year in a way that a FPTP system almost never does.
- The play-off games generate excitement and additional revenue as mentioned, and although crowds drop off slightly from the weekly rounds (because season tickets aren't included), Sky figures are excellent at this time of year.
- The play-off system keeps the season alive for far more clubs and gives smaller clubs an objective and incentives throughout the season.

You should have explained to these people that it isn't a 'sudden death knock-out' competition - er, because it isn't. For some reason people seem to be embarrassed of our game's traditions in a way that fans of other sports never are. Maybe Wimbledon should be decided on a league basis, or the football world cup? After all, that would surely show the 'best' sides who had been consistent, rather than the result of a tie-break or a penalty shootout.

Shooting itself in the foot commercially? That's certainly a well-worn platitude on RL forums but what is a better alternative system? Super League attendances are as high as they've ever been for top-flight RL and certainly the game is in better health commercially than it was in the 80s and 90s (incidentally, when we had FPTP).

If we're completely honest, so many of us are so desperate to see Wire crowned champions for the first time in our lives, that after finishing top we wish that was it and we could celebrate properly without the fear of it not actually happening after all.

To finish top but then not win the final after so many years without the biggest honour of them all would be the equivalent of scoring a try under the sticks in the last second of a game we were four points down in, then slicing the conversion wide and having to settle for the draw instead of victory.

Finishing top is harder than winning a play off series, but as far as I'm aware - and I'm saying this from memory not from research so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong as I may well be - the only team to finish top and not reach the Grand Final were an injury ravaged Saints in 2005, and the only team to finish outside the top two and win it were Bradford from third the same year.

That suggests the odds are heavily stacked in our favour, and we all knew the rules at the start of the season, so lets go out and do it.

Spot on. I would contend that every winner of a Grand Final we have had has proved themselves worthy champions.

As a die hard Hull FC supporter, I was there on Friday of course and although disappointed that after 25 mins of battle from us in the end your class was their to see and you rightly finish as champions. I was pleased to be there to watch a champion team in action against a Hull team that are no mugs, albeit I do feel that our next generation of Halcyon days maybe just around the corner.
So my point is, .......What real recognition do you get as League Champions ?

Yes it used to be the big thing, and I do believe the "full course" truly decides the best team in the league. Yet as the RFL want the season to end in a blaze of glory we have now adopted the Oz style play offs which do indeed spread excitement through the game in a way Super League games perhaps do not. They have the ability to generate cash for the successful clubs and the league, and there is the Glory of the showcase grand final to put the Winners on a pedestal.

Because the "organisers" market their nest egg which is play offs and the grand final and not the "League Champions" it means this, one of the greatest of feats in our great game, is lost to History with hardly a mention. This I find so sad, and wrong.
Clearly the RFL do not show any sign of protest at the BBCs total ignorance of a performance such as winning a league where bodies are truly put on the line. In fact it appears they welcome the BBCs lack of coverage. Whether this is on the BBC Rugby League Website or the mickey Mouse Super League show, or BBC Breakfast, this feat goes without a mention. ( BBC Breakfast often showcase national sporting success- but never our sport)

I believe this is wholly wrong. I believe the winners, should be given a big mention on the BBC and that prize monies should be raised to recognise the feat that it is. OK the Grand Final is now the main event but the League Champions should not wallow in media obscurity without barely a mention.

Yes you do as champions have the reward(and rightly so) of an easier passage to the Grand Final. but it guarantees you nothing and that just can't be right. We should celebrate our League champions.
Their should be greater recognition of a fantastic winning season were you are the best. But that may all yet be forgotten as some other side may yet be crowned at Old Trafford. It is unlikely to be us from 8th, but it's possible.
However it could very easily be someone else.
I do hope you go on to take the trophy, but of course you may yet be bridesmaids who like other champions before you simply can't be found that easily in the record books.
Should winning the championship be marketed better by the league ?
Should then the BBC and Sky showcase the champions as true league champions are in football and Union ?
Should there be a greater financial reward for the League champions ?

You're entitled to your opinion - I prefer to say that I argue my points of view with clarity and reasoning, just because I don't agree with you doesn't make me conceited, but whatever, I won't lose any sleep over it.



There are, and I will never argue that there aren't - however, my key concern is to see RL grow and the only way in which to do that is to get more people through the turnstiles and spending money at the clubs (which includes merchandise revenues as well as turnstile clicks). My frustration is born from the fact that I continually face the same problem year on year that people see the main competition with derision, and yet are happy to get behind the idea of the Challenge Cup (and I have convinced many of the years to come to cup games, less so SL games because they see them as superfluous as the regular season league games simply aren't that important).



Very true. We do of course have the Challenge Cup which does the same job, but it can never hurt to have additional show piece events.



And here's another point I find myself having to argue - it's difficult to argue with the national media who wonder why they should be obliged to over coverage to a sport that can't even sell-out it's small stadia for show piece games at the most critical time of the year. There are many reasons why people don't turn up to these games, much in the same way many people don't bother turning up to watch the early rounds (and in some cases, the QF/SF stages, too) of the competition-proper, but ultimately, the game could be so much more commercially successful and generate more revenue if it could sell tickets to these games, I don't claim to know the answer as to how to get more people through the turnstiles though, beyond increasing the sports' credibility in the eyes of the uninitiated.



It does give the mid-order teams something to aim for, but can you honestly say that a team that won less than half it's regular season games ought to be in the mix-up for the final prize? I'm much more comfortable with, and would protest far less, the idea of a top 5 playoff system that we had in 1998 when it was re-introduced.



No, but that's how the neutrals see it, and apart from the teams higher in the order having a 'second chance', let's be honest, it IS knock-out, it's this very fact that generates the intensity and atmosphere that the playoffs provide (and, I might add, which I love).



I would say I [iwould be[/i embarrased if a team that won less than half of it's regular season games were crowned champions, not that I [iam[/i embarrassed.



Don't be stupid - these are knock out competitions. Interesting to note that, in tennis for example, the "world #1" slot is decided on a league points system, and not a playoff at the end of the regular season





A system which the sporting public of the country you're in can get behind. Playoffs are not controversial in Aus or America for example, the current Super League system would seem to be perfectly natural in these countries. I challenge you to convince the sporting public of GB&I that a team finishing 8th being crowned 'league' champions is morally justifiable, you will find it incredibly difficult.



And yet we still have clubs going in to administration. All is not exactly rosy in RL, we are currently pandering to the wishes of Sky in order to generate more revenue through the TV contract, because, let's face it, that's the easier money. Football isn't rich simply because advertisers and sponsors want to throw money at it, these people throw money at football because it has a huge target audience for them. Rugby League needs more people through the gates, Warrington's attendances are up right now, but that's on the back of success, I wonder what our crowds will be once we return to mid-table standing or worse?

Let's face facts. The play offs generate money from increased interest throughout the season - Hull KR V Cas would have been meaningless instead of a nail biter if there wasn't a defeat to Catalans next week on offer to the winners for example - increased fixtures of importance after the season, a second major showpiece to add to the Challenge Cup Final, and TV revenue.

Money talks. The play offs are going nowhere. Now let's go out and win them like most teams who finish top do.

But yet look at how many people, even in this country, watch the superbowl... People may be confused by the play-off system, but if it's exciting, they'll watch. I don't think these people have a problem with RL simply because they play-offs are a 'joke', more that we are portrayed as unimportant by the media.
I think they play offs are a must, especially since there is no relegation... Otherwise how boring would this season have been? It was obvious from very early on that Wigan and Wire would dominate.

I haven't read the whole thread but a skim over one post said something about being embarrassing if the eighth placed team are crowned champions.

Does anyone REALLY think Hull FC are gonna win the Grand Final?!

Technically I suppose they can though, so IF they do - meaning they will have beaten four teams that finished above them in the league in consecutive weeks, three away from home - would that in itself not be an incredible achievement that would deserve great reward?

The play offs are fine, and comparing it to football isn't a valid argument in my opinion.

That's a valid argument. I do wonder though what the reaction would be from the people in this country if the PL suggested having an end of season playoffs to decide the champions to stop teams with enough players for 3 squads such as Utd/Chelsea/etc running away with the title every year

I'm afraid the way RL is presented in the media is a chicken and egg situation, until we have more people turning up to games, we'll find it harder to bring in bigger name sponsors, and until we have that, we'll find it difficult to get better exposure in the national media... And when it comes to generating interest, the national media is incredibly useful. I'm damned if I know the answer, if I did I'd be working at the RFL already.

I dont think anybody has a problem with the ply-off compeition and I dont think anybody has a problem with the Grand Final. Where I think people have a problem (and it happened last year as well) is that the current structure does not reward the most consistent teams. SuperLeague is effectively a two part competition.

Storm the first part and you can still walk away with nothing, whether it be due to "choking", the luck of a bounce or a single bad referring decision, whereas a "medicore team" can raise their game for 4 matches and be "the best in the country".

All I have been advocating (this year and last, so its not just because of where we are) is that the team that wins the league element get the credit it deserves rather than just some token acknowledgement from the RFL/Sky.

Wigan Warriors -- Challenge Cup Final winners
Warrington Wolves --"League" champions
Grand Final Winners and SUPERLeague champions......to be decided

Seems to me the majority of this argument is down to wording and people misunderstanding what each other mean.

I think that the fact that RL has traditionally decided its annual champions by a knock-out competition [iis a very good reason[/i for keeping a play-off format. Tradition is at the heart of the success of long-term major sports, and ditching tradition quite often looks just 'gimmicky'. There are many major wordwide sports that use a play-off system so I do not believe ours needs defending. The sort of people who '[ithink Super League is a joke[/i' probably think that anyway because they don't like our sport. No amount of tinkering will persuade them.

Mid 80s to mid 90s when we had the champions decided by league position was an era where ALL the glamour, focus and media coverage for RL was on the Challenge Cup Final. How many times does the media refer to the many championships that the Pies won in that period, compared to the frequent recall of / references to the eight Challenge Cups? Whilst the game has a higher profile now I reckon the champions tag [isans [/iplay-offs would be devalued in the media again. The old 'Premiership' end-of-season knock-out comp was fun but would look redundant, too, nowadays.

Leave well alone, I say.

I just dont like the system we have atm. Think its unfair on Wire if you lose as we did last season and then have to go away for technically a semi final. Rather see the old system where Wigan and Wire play eachother as HJ with the winner going through and then have the other sides play eachother to face the loser.

Finishing top 4 is more important than finishing top spot as in football for champions league i feel its the same for SL. As if the Giants beat you then you face going away if you win the next game. Sorry its not enough reward for finishing top.

I for one in my post am not suggesting we ditch the Play Offs, its a great concept, great money generator etc. and it should deffo stay, it's part of the fabric and traditions of RL. and has grown incredibly during the Super League era.
and its success is largely due to very good Marketing.

So all I'm saying is the same can be done for the League itself. So there are 2 very prestigious parts to the end of season and the play offs.

And part of the marketing of League competition should be that real recognition is given to the winners.

That would be by A bye straight through to the Grand Final, a real and just reward for being the best team over the full season and finishing first.
Prize money that makes it a financial attraction.
And finally the The RFL/Super League ensuring that promotion of the contest matches that of the Grand Final and Challenge Cup and that winners are given the due accolades of , visible presentations of the trophy, ample TV exposure etc. To ensure that the League winners are really seen as doing something and winning something special.

all this discussion will go out the window if we win the GF on the 8th oct!

I think whom ever wins the league are league champions and whomever wins the grand final is play off champions ! From my point of view winning the league is a greater feat best after 27 rounds winning grand final you only have to win 3-4 games depending on where you finish

Who ever wins the leauge should be champs.
And the play offs should be a seperate comp like the cc.

I like the playoff format and have no problem as such with the champions being the team that wins the grand final.

Even so, it does bother me that, however unlikely it is to happen, it is possible that a team could start the season and win 29 league/playoff games on the run, lose the 30th game and win nothing, but another team could limp into the playoffs losing more games than they win, then win their last four games and be crowned champions

Exactly what i posted earlier ....... and it's wrong ..... and 'SLIMply winning' -I'll say the same again on the 8th October whether we win the GF or not.

I never understand how the play offs can be compared to winning the regular league. The play offs can be won by winning 4 or so games whilst the regular season takes a massive effort over a couple of dozen games. No brainer.The play offs are fun but it aint no league shield.

Since the play-off system was introduced in professional RU (admittedly not a very long time ago), Wasps have been crowned "champions" on four occasions, despite not having finished top in any of those years. Gloucester have finished top three times, yet have never been "champions"- though they did win the play-offs in 02, when it was deemed that the team finishing top were the champions


If the RL play-offs are a joke, then so too are the RU ones.