Re: What does Leeds' victory mean for the regular season? : Sun Oct 07, 2012 10:44 pm  

Starbug wrote:

More complicated, and less ' credible '

how is just top 2 qualify for GF more complicated? it would mean we keep the GF, a 70k crowd, a big night at OT but we won't ever get a team finishing lower then 2nd being champions.

Champions would always be super consistent and a inconsistent team would never be champions. The regular season becomes meaningful, you HAVE to finish top 2 to be champions.

Then week after GF, the QF's of the Prem Trophy 1v8, 2v7 etc, leading to final at Elland Rd.

Re: What does Leeds' victory mean for the regular season? : Sun Oct 07, 2012 10:47 pm  

RL13 wrote:

I think a salient point to be made about this. Is if we had a straight league of 14 teams playing each other twice, with the team on top being crowned champions - no-one would be making a thread stating that a) the team on top didn't deserve to win and b) it was unfair that the teams who finished 4th or 5th were denied a chance to beat 3rd, 2nd and 1st.

Very, very good point.

My only drawback on scrapping the playoffs to decide the Champions is the loss of a 70k crowd at OT every year as it would only be a 30k crowd(IMO going on previous atts). What i have said on my other posts keeps the GF and also includes the Prem Trophy final.

Re: What does Leeds' victory mean for the regular season? : Mon Oct 08, 2012 12:42 am  

I think Leeds know how to win it when it comes to play offs and credit to them, but Leeds winning it from 5th for the past two years has really questioned the respect for the play off system, how can a team who didn't even finish in the top 4 be champions ? Surely it should be the top 4 clubs that have more of a chance of winning it.I think the RFL made a mistake when they changed it from 6 to 8 there was nothing wrong with top 6 and if it was brought back it would make teams to be a little more consistant threw out the regular season.

Re: What does Leeds' victory mean for the regular season? : Mon Oct 08, 2012 6:45 am  

Isn't the real problem not Leeds at all but the abject failure of the other clubs to beat them when it counts? Had Cats, Wigan or Warrington beat Leeds this and other similar threads wouldn't exist.

Re: What does Leeds' victory mean for the regular season? : Mon Oct 08, 2012 6:59 am  

BrisbaneRhino wrote:

Isn't the real problem not Leeds at all but the abject failure of the other clubs to beat them when it counts? Had Cats, Wigan or Warrington beat Leeds this and other similar threads wouldn't exist.

Correct, if you have a play off system in place, then it is irrelivant which club wins the GF, the only discussion should be the number of teams involved and the formatt , and the relative benifits, problems it produces

Re: What does Leeds' victory mean for the regular season? : Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:44 am  

It's been a long boring season, the weekly rounds have lacked intensity, even the sky team have given up their mantra "it gets better and better every season" Given that there is scant reward for finishing top and a team from a lowly position have become champions, there is no reason for title contenders to go hell for leather in the weekly rounds. Have people forgotten all the titanic battles throughout the season we used to have when it was a league system instead of the last three games of the season.

Re: What does Leeds' victory mean for the regular season? : Mon Oct 08, 2012 9:07 am  

Coventry Bears wrote:

British mentality displayed to its fullest. Well done!

He's right, though. If supporting a team was just about winning and glory then there'd be no point for about 90% of people who watch any sporting team world wide. You support your team for many reasons, not just because of success. At least I'd hope that was the case.

Beverley red wrote:

Not even the morons who watch soccer expect to win every game or see spectacular skill packed thrill a minute games every time they turn up

Does that include us "morons" who watch both "soccer" and rugby league? Or are we slightly less moronic?

Re: What does Leeds' victory mean for the regular season? : Mon Oct 08, 2012 11:41 am  

My only issues with the current play off system is over half the league get to play in them, the 5th place team get to start the play offs with a home game against a team that lost more games than they won, while 4th have to travel to league leaders. I'd prefer to see a return to top 5 system.

That said, Leeds still deserve a huge amount of credit for winning the games they did, and if there is an issue where Leeds fans start to wonder if there is any point attending regular rounds, then that is an issue for Leeds to perform in the season. Can't imagine they had a plan at the start of the season that involved having to win at Catalans and Wigan to get to the final.

Re: What does Leeds' victory mean for the regular season? : Mon Oct 08, 2012 12:00 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

Your premise is flawed, we dont have that many meaningless games. Had we crowned the champions from the league season it would have been won in front of 9k on a sunday afternoon in Hull. We would have then been left with an entire round of meaningless games, for everyone. Most teams would have been playing meaningless games from August, and some from June. The playoffs protect us from meaningless games.

The play-offs produce meaningless games. Too many sides know they'll be in the mix from the start, and a few months later even more teams know they'll probably be there. Coaches are increasingly rotating their squads to protect players for the play-offs. Better to have teams fighting to get INTO the play-offs, rather than just maintaining their position in a pack of 8.

Don't confuse criticism of the format with an attack on Leeds. When a team wins the Grand Final from 1st or 2nd, or even 3rd, it can be argued they've been one of the very best throughout. A team has now won twice from 5th after losing 11 games in the league campaign, which makes the term "champions" a little ridiculous and simply highlights the flaws of the system. That it happens to be Leeds is irrelevant.

The majority of comments I've heard and seen on social media (from fans of different clubs, including Leeds) say the same thing - winning it from 5th is a great achievement but not many agree with the system.

The team who are champions didnt finish 5th, they qualified 5th and finished champions.

Yes, they did. Care to point out where I said otherwise?

Again, this is NOT an attack on Leeds, but the system.

Re: What does Leeds' victory mean for the regular season? : Mon Oct 08, 2012 12:21 pm  

Cronus wrote:

The play-offs produce meaningless games. Too many sides know they'll be in the mix from the start, and a few months later even more teams know they'll probably be there. Coaches are increasingly rotating their squads to protect players for the play-offs. Better to have teams fighting to get INTO the play-offs, rather than just maintaining their position in a pack of 8.

That isnt down to the play-offs though is it. That is down to the disparity in quality in the league.
And whilst you may argue that clubs who know they are in the 8 have 'meaningless' games (which they arent as they decide the format of the play-offs and the teams they play and the advantages they get) and leads to rotation, any top 8 system would create the same issue, and any play-off system which has fewer than 8 clubs, would increase the amount of 'meaningless' games as we would have more teams, playing for nothing, earlier in the season.

Don't confuse criticism of the format with an attack on Leeds. When a team wins the Grand Final from 1st or 2nd, or even 3rd, it can be argued they've been one of the very best throughout. A team has now won twice from 5th after losing 11 games in the league campaign, which makes the term "champions" a little ridiculous and simply highlights the flaws of the system. That it happens to be Leeds is irrelevant.

As i said to your fellow Wigan fan Your argument, and your use of supporting evidence is predicated on the premise that were the play-offs in a different format, Leeds wouldnt have won them. If we discount that premise then Leeds victory is evidence of nothing. Now you can say you accept that Leeds could have won the play-offs under any format, but if you did, you would need to accept that means Leeds winning in the play-offs isnt evidence that the play-offs arent hard enough on the club playing 5th. Leeds could have won the play-offs under any system in which 5th qualified. There are few systems which would produce a more difficult run of games than Les Catalans away, Wigan away, Wire neutral. I see no reason to assume any of the teams in play-offs would have beaten Leeds over the last month, so i see no reason to assume that any other play-off format would have produced a different result. So I see no reason to assume that it was the play-off format which led to this result, so i see no reason Leeds victory is evidence of anything other than leeds are the best at winning the comp.

The majority of comments I've heard and seen on social media (from fans of different clubs, including Leeds) say the same thing - winning it from 5th is a great achievement but not many agree with the system.

The majority of people i've heard comment on it simply said what an acheivement, what a game, what spirit it was played in and how brilliant it was to end our season that way. Very few, mainly Wigan fans, have complained that they dont like the system or that the system has produced an unfair result.

Yes, they did. Care to point out where I said otherwise?

You said they finished 5th, in the context of your post I thought it important to note that they finished champions, but qualified 5th.

Again, this is NOT an attack on Leeds, but the system.

Except it is an attack on Leeds achievement, you may be trying to frame it a different way because out right saying it would make you look bitter, but it is an attack on Leeds achievement.