|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Star | 323 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Aug 2011 | 13 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Oct 2024 | Sep 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Hi I've just been reading the posts re play offs I was wondering what you think of this one
Winning should get a reward so
The play offs are for the top 5 teams
For winning top spot the reward is an automatic grand final spot
Week 1. 2nd v 5th
3rd v. 4th
Highest graded winning team at home to winners of second game winner progresses to GF
It's very simple AND makes you play hard to the end as the carrot for top spot is huge.... Thoughts peoples. ?
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Star | 1522 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jun 2011 | 14 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Jan 2022 | May 2020 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Automatic final place for finnishing forth with a 24 point start
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Star | 1789 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jan 2011 | 14 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Feb 2017 | Feb 2017 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote ="silvertail-wolf"Hi I've just been reading the posts re play offs I was wondering what you think of this one
Winning should get a reward so
The play offs are for the top 5 teams
For winning top spot the reward is an automatic grand final spot
Week 1. 2nd v 5th
3rd v. 4th
Highest graded winning team at home to winners of second game winner progresses to GF
It's very simple AND makes you play hard to the end as the carrot for top spot is huge.... Thoughts peoples. ?'"
Exactly has it should be, but our leaders at Sky are the ones who dictate what happens and the RLFC are powerless to stop it.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 140 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Feb 2009 | 16 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Apr 2019 | Apr 2019 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| They should only be top 6/top 5 but I'm not sure auto GF isn't right to me. Make bigger financial award or a play in a second WCC match for the LLS winner, but don't put them straight in the GF. Its possibly a disadvantage as you could finish the season against weaker teams and have no hard games to prepare you for the GF against a battle hardened team. The top 6 system we had for most of SL years is my preferred option.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Board Member | 1661 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Feb 2003 | 22 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Mar 2018 | Oct 2017 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| There's nothing wrong with the original top 5 system. To win from 5th you would have to beat all of the top 4 away (excluding the final), if you achieved this you would deserve it. System also guarantees one of the top 2 in the final.
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Star | 1704 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Aug 2011 | 13 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Oct 2023 | Dec 2020 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| YEP , original top 5 system, higher prize money for finishing top (if this means less for those 2-14 then tough)
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 1072 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jun 2009 | 16 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Jun 2022 | Jan 2022 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote ="Finfin"There's nothing wrong with the original top 5 system. To win from 5th you would have to beat all of the top 4 away (excluding the final), if you achieved this you would deserve it. System also guarantees one of the top 2 in the final.'"
While I agree it was a good system as no matter where you finished you had to beat every team that finished above you at least once to win the title, the top 5 system didn't guarantee one of the top two would make the GF, it just happened that at least one always did under that system. The schedule was
Week 1
1st has week off
A - 2nd v 3rd (winner plays 1st in week 2, loser plays winner of match B in week 2)
B - 4th v 5th (loser is out)
Week 2
C - 1st v Winner of A (winner to GF, loser plays winner of D in week 3)
D - Loser from A v Winner of B (loser is out)
Week 3
Loser of C v Winner of D (winner to GF)
It never happened but a scenario of
Week 1
3rd beats 2nd (3rd to play 1st for GF place)
5th beats 4th (4th out)
Week 2
3rd beats 1st (3rd to GF)
5th beats 2nd (2nd out)
Week 3
5th beats 1st (5th to GF)
gives you a 3rd v 5th GF as we had 2 years ago (3rd v 4th could happen in the same way). The top two would both need to lose both times they played but they could both miss out under the top 5 system. The top 6 did guarantee one of the top two made the GF as they always met to determine the first GF place.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Star | 576 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Apr 2011 | 14 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Feb 2016 | Feb 2016 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Said for years top 5 was the only play off system that had any credibility for the exact reasons stated!
If we go for the leagues of 8 though 5 will be too much.
Personally if its leagues of 8 then for me those games should be the play off 'series' if you like, to determine your top two for Old Trafford IMO, so no further play off should be needed.
If we have to have a play off system then I would go with a top 4, both now, and when/if the league adopts the division of 8 scenario.
My play off series would be.
1st v 2nd Qualifying Semi - Winners through to Grand Final
3rd v 4th Elimination Semi - Losers out, Winners through to play losers of qualifyer
Losers of Qualifyer v Winners of Eliminator Final Eliminator - Winners through to Grand Final.
For me there was always something great about that final eliminator match and this rewards top two with a second bite as should be the case
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 2797 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jul 2008 | 17 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Aug 2017 | Oct 2016 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote ="wiganermike"While I agree it was a good system as no matter where you finished you had to beat every team that finished above you at least once to win the title, the top 5 system didn't guarantee one of the top two would make the GF, it just happened that at least one always did under that system. The schedule was
Week 1
1st has week off
A - 2nd v 3rd (winner plays 1st in week 2, loser plays winner of match B in week 2)
B - 4th v 5th (loser is out)
Week 2
C - 1st v Winner of A (winner to GF, loser plays winner of D in week 3)
D - Loser from A v Winner of B (loser is out)
Week 3
Loser of C v Winner of D (winner to GF)'"
This is the system we should have had all along with 14 teams. Gives a genuine advantage for every place higher that you finish, something that definitely cannot be said for the current system. When the reduction to 12 happens, then I can't see a better system than the top 4 that another poster has put on one of the other topics.
Quote Grimmy wrote:
If it is a top 4 I'd go:
Week 1 (Qualifiers)
A - 1st v 2nd
B - 3rd v 4th
Week 2 (Final Eliminator)
C - Loser A v Winner B
Week 3 (Final)
D - Winner A v Winner C'"
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Star | 2795 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jun 2011 | 14 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Nov 2024 | Nov 2023 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Maybe I'm old fashioned but 1st should be champions and that's the end of it! Premiership play off competition following the league was fine by me. I know we'll never get back to that but if we did, bet ur life the coaches would be picking the strongest team possible every week and bring some intensity back!
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 15457 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jul 2005 | 19 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Jan 2025 | Dec 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| 2 weeks off is too long IMO. If we go with just 2x12 I'd go for the old top 5 system, if we do the 3x8 split I'd go for top 4 as follows:
Week 1 - Qualifiers
A - 1st v 2nd
B - 3rd v 4th
Week 2 - Final Eliminator
C - Loser A v Winner B
Week 3 - Final
D - Winner A v Winner C
Slightly OT, but as well as thinking an 8 team play off is too many for a 14 team league, I don't even like the way we go about it. I'd prefer:
Week 1 - Preliminary Eliminators
A - 1 v 8
B - 2 v 7
C - 3 v 6
D - 4 v 5
Losers out. Winners are then ranked 1-4 based on their league position, then same as the system above
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 1693 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jan 2009 | 16 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Feb 2014 | Jan 2014 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| The leagues of 8 would mean a top 4 playoff. That has already been decided. It's just the format of the top 4 that hasn't been decided.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Star | 671 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jul 2010 | 14 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Mar 2016 | Oct 2015 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Please just cut out the gimmicky club call and return to a top 5 play off and add promotion and relegation
Clubs need to be forced to work hard for what they achieve during the season.
The top 8 and no relegation is a bit like the current schools system of rewards for all
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Moderator | 14395 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Dec 2001 | 23 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
May 2024 | May 2022 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
Moderator
|
| Quote ="Finfin"There's nothing wrong with the original top 5 system. To win from 5th you would have to beat all of the top 4 away (excluding the final), if you achieved this you would deserve it. System also guarantees one of the top 2 in the final.'"
If you are going to have a playoff then that is the best one by far. It would also mean tonights game (and V Leeds next week) would matter to Wigan. None of this reserve team out there rubbish.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Board Member | 12006 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jul 2003 | 22 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Mar 2019 | Oct 2014 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote ="Bigredwarrior"Maybe I'm old fashioned but 1st should be champions and that's the end of it! Premiership play off competition following the league was fine by me. I know we'll never get back to that but if we did, bet ur life the coaches would be picking the strongest team possible every week and bring some intensity back!'"
That's my feeling but if we have to have a playoff then it should be top 4 or top 5 at a push. Rewarding teams that finish in the bottom half of the table is an absolute joke.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 9090 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Mar 2006 | 19 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Jan 2025 | Jan 2025 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote ="Bigredwarrior"Maybe I'm old fashioned but 1st should be champions and that's the end of it! Premiership play off competition following the league was fine by me. I know we'll never get back to that but if we did, bet ur life the coaches would be picking the strongest team possible every week and bring some intensity back!'"
That doesn't necessarily follow. Picking a hypothetical example, why would Wane pick a full strength team against say London if his team then had to face Wire and Leeds. You might have shifted the emphasis from one comp to another but the capability for players to play full on with 100% intensity would be no different to what it is now.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 15457 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jul 2005 | 19 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Jan 2025 | Dec 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| IMO the team that finishes top tends to be the one that always gets the job done against the mid-table/lower sides. IMO To be the best, you should be able to beat the best. Look at last season, we finished top but Wire (2nd place) beat us both times we played.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Moderator | 14395 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Dec 2001 | 23 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
May 2024 | May 2022 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
Moderator
|
| Quote ="Clearwing"That doesn't necessarily follow. Picking a hypothetical example, why would Wane pick a full strength team against say London if his team then had to face Wire and Leeds. You might have shifted the emphasis from one comp to another but the capability for players to play full on with 100% intensity would be no different to what it is now.'"
Teams rested players in the old league format but it was a risk whereas tonight it is totally risk-free.
They also didn't tend to make wholesale changes but would rest one or two players again because it was risky to do so. They wanted the 2 points.
It was also against the rules to go overboard on resting players as the rules were (but are not now) that you had to play your strongest side.
The two situations of resting payers in the old league format and now are just not comparable for these reasons.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Board Member | 6722 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jun 2003 | 22 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
May 2015 | Mar 2014 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote ="DaveO"Teams rested players in the old league format but it was a risk whereas tonight it is totally risk-free.
They also didn't tend to make wholesale changes but would rest one or two players again because it was risky to do so. They wanted the 2 points.
It was also against the rules to go overboard on resting players as the rules were (but are not now) that you had to play your strongest side.
The two situations of resting payers in the old league format and now are just not comparable for these reasons.'"
It's not. The risk is that we actually win.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Chairman | 8155 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Dec 2001 | 23 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Jan 2025 | Jan 2025 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| The play offs are boring hence the crowds are reducing each year.
So, have a top three play off. That's 25% of the new 12 club SL anyway.
The League Leaders go straight to the Grand Final, clubs 2 and 3 then play off for the other GF place.
That way there's no easy games, no club will be able to "rest" players as they may lose a game and lose a place on the League Ladder. Being 4th or 5th at the end of the League season would not be good enough, the intensity of games in the season would increase massively.
Also the League Leaders would be rewarded with an automatic Grand Final place.
The 2nd v 3rd club would be a play off sell out.
That's something we don't get now!
|
|
|
|
|