Re: Play-offs, good or bad idead?? : Tue Sep 07, 2010 12:56 pm  

PADDERS wrote: Champions to me is the team that wins the LEAGUE ,grand final winners to me win an end of season play off competition winning the league imo is far superior than winning the play offs , grand final used to be called the premiership play offs which we won in 85-86 season it is just under a different name now no difference imo ! Perhaps we should put a 'sticky' on this, but the years of the 'premiership' were short lived. Fans in their twenties and thirties were not around earlier to see how things used to be, but just check here for one ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rugby_League_Championship ) to see that for the vast majority of its history the RL champions have been decided by a play-off of one kind or another. I don't especially lile the current top-eight system, as it can lead to 'repeat' matches, but play-offs are historically the way to go and the most exciting and attention-grabbing. As others have said, during the 80s/90s there was zero glamour in winning the league as the only match/occasion that mattered to the press or passing public was Wembley. Now we have two great occasions - we should not throw that away.

PADDERS wrote: Champions to me is the team that wins the LEAGUE ,grand final winners to me win an end of season play off competition winning the league imo is far superior than winning the play offs , grand final used to be called the premiership play offs which we won in 85-86 season it is just under a different name now no difference imo ! Perhaps we should put a 'sticky' on this, but the years of the 'premiership' were short lived. Fans in their twenties and thirties were not around earlier to see how things used to be, but just check here for one ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rugby_League_Championship ) to see that for the vast majority of its history the RL champions have been decided by a play-off of one kind or another. I don't especially lile the current top-eight system, as it can lead to 'repeat' matches, but play-offs are historically the way to go and the most exciting and attention-grabbing. As others have said, during the 80s/90s there was zero glamour in winning the league as the only match/occasion that mattered to the press or passing public was Wembley. Now we have two great occasions - we should not throw that away.

Re: Play-offs, good or bad idead?? : Tue Sep 07, 2010 1:06 pm  

Fact of the matter is, Sky dictate a lot of how our sport is run. Whether that's right or wrong is up to personal opinion but look at it this way.

Sky's main interest is to keep ratings high, and to keep brining in subscribers. Therefore the product Sky show has to be one of a quality standard. Rugby League is a product to Sky. If in Sky's opinion more viewers will watch and subscribe to their satellite service if rugby league had an exciting play off system in place then thats good for both Sky and the RFL. Sky bring in the viewers increasing their advertising rates for Super League games making themselves more money, and those viewers that are enticed by watching rugby league may decide to go to a game brining in more money for the clubs and the RFL at major games (Grand Final and the Challenge Cup.) Its win - win for both parties.

There are side effects to having a major broadcast partner like Sky, but financially as long as Rugby League keeps getting the ratings for Sky they will continue to invest in the sport therefore keeping the sport afloat.

Re: Play-offs, good or bad idead?? : Tue Sep 07, 2010 2:10 pm  

If we beat Wigan in the Grand Final I am sure we will all agree that the true champions of 2010 will always be remembered as Wigan. They were the most consistent team over the season regardless of what happens in the lottery of the playoffs.

Well done Wigan, true champions of 2010.

Re: Play-offs, good or bad idead?? : Tue Sep 07, 2010 3:17 pm  

sally cinnamon wrote:

If we beat Wigan in the Grand Final I am sure we will all agree that the true champions of 2010 will always be remembered as Wigan. They were the most consistent team over the season regardless of what happens in the lottery of the playoffs.

Well done Wigan, true champions of 2010.

No it will be us because that's how it works.

Re: Play-offs, good or bad idead?? : Tue Sep 07, 2010 3:30 pm  

It gives other teams something to fight/aim for or perahaps fall back on if they we're going for the title. In the Premier League for example you can compete for the Champions League or Europa we obvioulsy have no such leagues. For me they add drama and excitment and this new top 4 second chance system is now much better. I do agree however you should get more for being 1st.

Re: Play-offs, good or bad idead?? : Tue Sep 07, 2010 4:11 pm  

I dont remember having these arguements before Wigan finished top?!?!

Re: Play-offs, good or bad idead?? : Tue Sep 07, 2010 6:57 pm  

WWRLFC78 wrote:

I dont remember having these arguements before Wigan finished top?!?!

correct and suprise suprise ...which turkeys voted for Christmas

.............yes good idea.......no they're a bad idea
Bradford...............93%.......7%
Castleford............ 88%.......12%
Catalan...............100%.......0%
Crusaders.............67%.......33%
Harlequins.............67%.......33%
Huddersfield..........67%.......33%
Hull Fc.................84%.......16%
Hull Kr..................65%.......13%
Leeds...................81%.......19%
Saints..................67%.......33%
Salford.................76%.......24%
Wakefield.............76%.......24%
Warrington............81%.......19%
Wigan..................62%.......38%

Re: Play-offs, good or bad idead?? : Tue Sep 07, 2010 7:09 pm  

Yes they are a good idea, but under the original format of 1v8,2v7 etc. Would also like to see an academy final played before the GF aswell.

The finals day for the lower divisions is also a great idea and worth supporting.

Re: Play-offs, good or bad idead?? : Tue Sep 07, 2010 7:19 pm  

sally cinnamon wrote:

If we beat Wigan in the Grand Final I am sure we will all agree that the true champions of 2010 will always be remembered as Wigan. They were the most consistent team over the season regardless of what happens in the lottery of the playoffs.

Well done Wigan, true champions of 2010.

Unfortunately you cannot change the rules of a competition half way through to suit yourselves (It's not the 1980s anymore). The champions are the team that wins the Grand Final. That was the title that was up for grabs at the start of the season and, wether you like it or not, the team that will be crowned champions will be the winners of one game played on the 2nd October. Right or wrong is completely irrelivant.

Wigan deserve the upmost respect for what they have achieved this season in winning the league leaders shield. Well done.

You may be able to argue that Wigan have been the most consistant team, and therefore the best, but not champions, yet. You may well win the Grand Final, and if you do I will be one of the first to congratulate you as champions.

Re: Play-offs, good or bad idead?? : Tue Sep 07, 2010 7:24 pm  

WersYourMylerGone wrote:

I think 8 is too many teams and although it kept the season exciting until last day of the season 7 would be better.

The way i would do it would be:

1st into the semi final
2 v 7
3 v 6
4 v 5

Then 1st place picks who they want in the semi final

I dont think 1st place should pick who they want to play.

I'd rather see it get drawn out.