Maybe should go back to top 6.

was just thinking of a way of whoever finished top is straight into the gf, then the other teams battle it out, but its hard to come up with something that makes sense.

1 i thought of with top 4

1 - straight into gf
2 - first week off
3 vs 4

then the winner of 3 v 4 v 2 then GF

Regarding the title of the thread..


Crap! Rather like superleague as a spectacle in 2011

Awful. Absolutely awful... We need to go to top 5 or 6. There is no excuse for a team in the bottom half of the league managing to get the change to fight for a place at OT.

but the nrl had a top 8 when they where 15 teams meaning a bottom half club could win it ?

Two awful games so far. Let's hope tomorrow is a similar blow out.

Very disappointing. You can see that the teams have switched off now that the league has been decided.

I'd definitley go for whoever finishes top goes straight to the final

Ive spoke to a few people about it, and every single person has ageed having first place team straight into the GF is the way forward

Top 5 for me

the only thing is with what I said,
whoever finishes top, would get 2 weeks off.

Would this mean the team who had played the week before would be more battle hardened??
I think its a very hard concept to get right

I'm just not comfortable with a playoff series deciding the champions. I mean what was the 27 league games for? what is the point of having them? Might aswell have a 14 team knockout comp and have it done with in the spring. The playoffs are like an end of season wind-down rather than title deciding games. The crowds show i'm not the only one thinking like this.

BTW I am going tomorrow just because its a game of RL and Wigan are involved.

Top get week off and advance to semi finals

A - 2 v 3
B - 4 v 5 (loser eliminated)

C - 1 v Loser A
D - Winner A v Winner B

E - Winner C v Winner D


That way, the teams that finish 2nd and 3rd know that losing in round 1 means a trip to the leaders whilst winning gives you an 'easier' tie. Yes 1st could have to play 2nd, but they've had a week off and have home advantage.

It is a tricky concept which is why it should be first past the post.

They're qualification for the playoffs. The higher you finish, the better chance you have.

I disagree, but they're the rules.

"BTW I am going tomorrow just because its a game of RL and Wigan are involved."

No other reasons needed, are you all listening?

Higher you finish the better the chance??? Leeds played Hull and Hudds, we played Saints and now have Catalans. Reckon it's the RL trying to manufacture so called big games rather than rewarding how you've played for a full season.

Forgive my intrusion on your board, but I said last year when Wigan finished top that they were the true champions, whatever happened in the play offs. Playing 27 matches and finishing top means that a team has been the best over the season. This Sky manufactured play off is knock out competition for goodness sake after all the hard work, elation and heartache of the regular season.
By all means have and end of season competition if we must, but let's not kid ourselves that it truly decides the league champions.

I agree it shouldn't do, but just like in 99% of sports, it does. Like it or not (and I don't) they're the rules.

Ok, ovavoo, you're MEANT to have more of a chance. Home ties, weeks off, second chances etc. You get what I meant.

The system is flawed.

Leeds potential route to old trafford:

hull (h) hudds (a) warrington/saints (a)

wigan potential route

saints (h) catalans (h) saints/warrington (a)

Which route would you rather have?

Leeds route is similiar if not easier on paper. This doesn't refelct the fact leeds finished 5th wigan 2nd.

Only difference is an extra home game and a 2nd bite at the cherry.

Just gotta play the vards you are dealt the best you can I guess.

It prob is more to do with the format - don't remember this much complaining when it was top 6. And i'm sure on average the attendances where better for it aswell. Didn't we once get 22,000 on against Saints for a week 1 playoff game?

Getting back to a top 6 would give more credibility to the playoffs.

Get rid of alltogether

Just checked previous playoff home games with Saints to compare attendances(to nearest 100):

2000 Week 2 -19,200

2001 Week 3- 19,300

2003 week 2 -21,800

2004 Week 1 - 20,100

2011 Week 1 - 12,900

Prior to last week, all 4 previous home games were either to go straight through to Old Trafford, or to avoid elimination. Last Sunday was neither. The format has to take some of the blame. Please RFL sort it out.

I think everyone can agree top 8 is too much.

who can we all contact to complain?????

Since the system is known before the start of the season, everyone knows that finishing first does not make you champions. You might want it to when you finish top, but there's very little difference at the end of the season between 1st and 2nd - you get a second chance in the play-offs and that's it. Some teams may decide they really want first place - others may decide that keeping key players fit for the playoffs matters more than 1st vs 2nd. If they scrap the playoffs, then and only then can the team that finishes top be champions - because that's how the rules are set out.

BTW, quite happy to see the number of teams in the playoffs reduced to 5 say - results this year suggest that there are only 4 teams so far in contention at all (although one of those - Leeds - have yet to play anybody decent).

As for quality of playoff games so far, there has only been one reasonable quality game - yourselves vs Sts. In the NRL there has only been one poor game (when Brisbane flogged NZ oddly enough).

Wise words Douggie but I doubt the RFL will listen.

Along with others I think that 3 & 4 playing away then 5 & 6 playing at home is somehow flawed. There are various combinations that can be used but four weeks is too long. It should be cut down to three weeks.
This year, so far, the play offs have been a disaster.
The RFL/SL have to improve the situation and quick.