: Thu Feb 19, 2009 8:20 pm  

my views are that we should have the 8 system we will have this year but almost as a seperate competition like the old premiership. The league made still competative by having sky money divided based on league position

: Thu Feb 19, 2009 8:37 pm  

The reason the RL went for this is simple, it was a vote of chairmen. The top two or three teams are always going to be outvoted by the rest in such circumstances. It's in the vested interests of the mediocre to want to play with the top teams at the playoffs.

Even if you're knocked out in the first round of the payoffs you're quids in because it's an equal share out of all the money. The teams that get to the final actually end up out of pocket because they get stung for expenses and bonuses.

It stands to reason then if you're a middlin' team you are going to vote for this. The only way Saints and Leeds will get this overturned is for the RL to intervene and make an executive decision which over-rules the vote of chairmen.

Be honest, can you really see the RL having the balls to do this?

No wonder McManus is vexed off, he's got every right to be. We've been shafted by these mediocre hopefuls.

: Thu Feb 19, 2009 9:06 pm  

donkey O'tay wrote:

The reason the RL went for this is simple, it was a vote of chairmen. The top two or three teams are always going to be outvoted by the rest in such circumstances. It's in the vested interests of the mediocre to want to play with the top teams at the playoffs.

Even if you're knocked out in the first round of the payoffs you're quids in because it's an equal share out of all the money. The teams that get to the final actually end up out of pocket because they get stung for expenses and bonuses.

It stands to reason then if you're a middlin' team you are going to vote for this. The only way Saints and Leeds will get this overturned is for the RL to intervene and make an executive decision which over-rules the vote of chairmen.

Be honest, can you really see the RL having the balls to do this?


No wonder McManus is vexed off, he's got every right to be. We've been shafted by these mediocre hopefuls.

I don't think that is correct.

Depending on when you get knocked out actually determines your final position i.e. Leeds first, Saints second Wigan third etc.
The prize money is then divided out as ratio's of where those FINAL positions are.

: Thu Feb 19, 2009 9:14 pm  

Rogues Gallery wrote:

I don't think that is correct.

Depending on when you get knocked out actually determines your final position i.e. Leeds first, Saints second Wigan third etc.
The prize money is then divided out as ratio's of where those FINAL positions are.

Well that directly contradicts what I was told by a senior person at Saints (director level). Don't want to mention a name in case he'd got it wrong and it embarrases him.

I'd like to see some corroborating evidence either way.

: Thu Feb 19, 2009 9:24 pm  

best thing would be a top 4.

1st vs 4th,
2nd vs 3rd


the rest fight for the highest positions, and earn extra points for the next franchise application or something along those lines.

: Thu Feb 19, 2009 9:36 pm  

I think he has a good point. Whilst most of us have come to appreciate the playoffs I agree there should be more reward for the most consistent team over the season. Mind you, my opinion may be clouded by our record of finishing top but not putting the GF to bed.

: Fri Feb 20, 2009 2:32 am  

Saint Simon wrote:

my views are that we should have the 8 system we will have this year but almost as a seperate competition like the old premiership.

I've been saying this for years. Why we have to follow the NRL all the time i'll never know. The system they use for their playoffs should have no bearing on what we do with ours.

No doubt some will try to make the suggestion that their league produces better international class players than ours, but i refuse to believe that has anything to do with them having 4,5,6, or 8 teams in the playoffs over the more obvious factors (higher levels of funding, better player development, better environmental conditions etc etc).

: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:13 am  

For me we should play every team home and away and the team that finishes top would be declared Champions. A bit radical I know but it would mean every single fixture would have value and hey, it might just work.

Top 8, load of nonsense, lose more games than you win and (potentially) end up as Champions. On the other hand a team could be totally undefeated all season until the final day and end up empty handed. If people say it wont happen I would say what is the point then ?!!

: Fri Feb 20, 2009 9:19 am  

Div wrote:

For me we should play every team home and away and the team that finishes top would be declared Champions. A bit radical I know but it would mean every single fixture would have value and hey, it might just work.

Top 8, load of nonsense, lose more games than you win and (potentially) end up as Champions. On the other hand a team could be totally undefeated all season until the final day and end up empty handed. If people say it wont happen I would say what is the point then ?!!

The fact that we went 20 odd games last season and lost in the Grand Final, that part was bothering me too.

: Fri Feb 20, 2009 10:14 am  

Div wrote:

For me we should play every team home and away and the team that finishes top would be declared Champions. A bit radical I know but it would mean every single fixture would have value and hey, it might just work.

without relegation and play offs, it would mean that from about july onwards only 1 or 2 games per week would have any meaning.

Last season, Leeds were 8 points clear in July - had it been a first past the post system, I doubt they would have thrown that lead away; and the season would have been petered out into nothingness.

It works in football because you have different European qualification for anything upto the top 7or8; and the bottom 3 get relegated - so half the teams end up with a positive or negative result. In SL you would have 13 teams with nothing.