[url:2krb9ro1http:///viewtopic.php?t=412732[/url

Well I think its good. In Sheffield,s case for eg they could still get to the playoffs.

Even if it's at your expense when you've won more games (hyperthetically speaking)?

I definitely think it's kept games 'alive' and therefore is certainly a good thing. Might affect the table a lot more this time around as well.

I think it's definitely a good thing to have in the league. When it was first brought in I wasn't too sure about it but actually seeing it work it means teams compete to the full 80 minutes if there is still chance of getting a point out of the game.

I think it's a great idea, how many times have we, even when losing, urged the lads on for one last try in order to get a bonus point?

And why should a team who's getting battered every week, have the same number of points as a team who's losing by just a couple of points?

I also think it will be introduced into Super League before too long.

One of the better things the RFL has come up with in recent years. Close games like ours at Fev last week are an example where the losing team deserves something from the game. Can't see why SL haven't adopted this yet, if it's good enough for us...

I agree that it has generally been a very good thing for the game - I can't believe I am actually applauding something that the RFL have done - I'm off for a lie down...

Bad, teams shouldn't be rewarded for losing. Any team worth their salt in this league should be trying 100% regardless of the scoreline.

That was exactly what I thought when it was first brought in. Seemed like a bit of a mad idea, pretty unnecessary and something that would just make RL more difficult to explain to a neutral.

However, now I'd say overall Good. It's no easier to explain to a neutral but overall it's worked better than I expected. It's also kept a bit of interest in games that would have been killed off with 20 or 30 minutes to go as teams try to salvage a bonus point, and now I find myself when Leigh go 8 or 10 points up wanting them to push on and stop the opposition from getting one, so hopefully it acts as a bit of a spur for the team with the upper hand to try and kill games off rather than easing up as well.

I agree Leyther, when we played Widnes is a perfect example. I was willing our boys to score again right up to the last second to stop them getting a bonus point.

And TBH I don't think of it as rewarding a losing team, I look at it as rewarding the effort from a losing team. After all if you lose with less than 12 points then you must have put a great amount of effort in, so I for one am totally behind the bonus point.

I have been trying to think what I want to say on this subject and have found it difficult to put into words.

However, here goes, have a look at the following scenario:

League Z demotes the team who finishes bottom of the league at the end of the season.

Team A: Plays 20 Wins 1 by a point and loses the remaining 19 by 20 points. This gives them 3 points and a points difference of - 379

Team B: Plays 20 wins 0 and loses 17 by 20 points and 3 by 12 points.This gives them 3 points and a points difference of - 376.

Is it fair that team A who wins a match during the season is relegated instead of team B who goes all season without winning a match?

Answers to the RFL



My opinion is that sportsmen should be playing with pride and passion for 80 minutes regardless of whatever the scoreline may be at any given time and that winners should not be penalised ahead of losers.

Personally I don't think that the possibility of a bonus point or not even raises it's head for any player during the game. I think it's more for the benefit of the fans.
Players (hopefully) want to win every game they play and I don't accept that anyone, be it players or speccies (apart from Starbug

) go into a game thinking they'll be grateful for just a bonus point.

What do you think about the scenario though Mishmash?

It could happen!!

Imagine if team A were Leigh and Team B were Widnes

Then the bonus point would be the worst thing ever invented by the dumb asses at Red Hall!!

Winning the roll over in National Lottery has more chance of happening than this.



At the end of the day even if the above did happen, the clubs know the rules before the season started.

I was against it at the start, but think its a good idea now.

I'll settle for a bonus point on sunday

Yes

How? 'Cos rule is rules? Someone somewhere else mentioned the scoline being 12-0. So that'd be a point for not scoring [iand[/i losing.

But there are more complicated, but simple at the same time

scenarios which are more likely to happen where a team with less victories is positioned higher than the team with more victories.

My question is do people think this is fair and why?

As I stated my opinion is that it isnt however, I am always open to debate and reasoning and someone may just give me a scenario that changes my mind [size=59(but I very much doubt it)[/size

I think it is fair. The league position should be about consistency through the year. A team that wins only once all season might have got lucky against a side that was particularly weak. However, the team just above, may not have won a game, but intead of 40 point thrashings and capituations, has given all the other sides a damned hard game and gets say 6 points for doing so. Which is the more consistent side? the bonus point only rewards teams that are trying consistently.

The only thing I would say is that the bonus point should be for defeats of 10 points or less [ihaving scored at least 6 points themselves[/i and at the other end of the scale I'd like to see a point for scoring say 40 points or more.