Playoff system
#1
Posted 06 September 2010 - 08:31 PM
Hopefully the outcry from such a repeat set of fixtures (what was the point of them playing in week 1) will cause the playoff system to be reviewed, as the current system is ######.
#2
Posted 07 September 2010 - 12:34 AM
I'm hoping for great games, sell out crowds and hopefully a few shocks along the way
You haven't thought this cunning plan out have you baldrick
#3
Posted 07 September 2010 - 03:26 AM
Which ever one of the Top 3 gets the pick, (which will be Wigan), they have to make the other 2 play in a Derby game. No way will Wigan bring Saints or Wire to the DW Stadium. And the other 2 wouldn't put themselves in a Derby match either. I think this will be brilliant.
#4
Posted 07 September 2010 - 07:21 AM
2010 Warrington 30 Leeds 6
2011 League Leaders Shield Winners
2012 Warrington 35 Leeds 18
Challenge cups and league leaders shields everywhere! We need more silver polish!
#5
Posted 07 September 2010 - 08:12 AM
Also, this scenario didn't happen last year with exactly the same format.
#6
Posted 07 September 2010 - 08:30 AM
top 6 format could have produced the same fixtures too..
any type of play off format can produce the same fixtures at some point as the round 1.. it doesnt make round 1 fixtures pointless they are part of the league campaign to get to the play off series.. why is that wrong?
#7
Posted 07 September 2010 - 08:46 AM
Photographs;
Wigan v St Helens
Huddersfield v Wigan
Wigan v Warrington
Older Rugby Matches
Football Photos
Futsal Photos
My website
#8
Posted 07 September 2010 - 08:48 AM
It's like being at chuffing work
I, just like those Castleford supporters felt that the ball should have gone to David Plange but he put the bit betwen his teeth...and it was a try
Kevin Ward - best player I have ever seen
The real Mick Gledhill is what you see on here, a Bradford fan ........, but deep down knows that Bradford are just not good enough to challenge the likes of Leeds & St Helens.
#9
Posted 07 September 2010 - 11:18 AM
What was the point in the first match?
I think also, to be fair, Leeds and Warrington have a say in this first weekend, plus injuries play a part, and a few key ones to Saints who are already down on troops could make them a favourable pick in the Semis, if they get there.
Personally, I'm not sure choosing the 3 times reigning Champions is a great way to quell that teams enthusiasm, either.
Talk about an animal backed into a corner.
Playoff series will be awesome.
Http://www.freewebs.com/sltipping
#10
Posted 07 September 2010 - 12:08 PM
any type of play off format can produce the same fixtures at some point as the round 1.. it doesnt make round 1 fixtures pointless they are part of the league campaign to get to the play off series.. why is that wrong?
The Aus system guarantees no rematches until the Grand Final.
#11
Posted 07 September 2010 - 12:20 PM
at which point what was the point in the first match??
its still a repeat.. the only play off system that stops you meeting the same team in the play offs at any point is the american systems of the NFL etc.. but then you could have met any of your play off teams at any point during the regular season..
to critisise the play offs for possible repeat matchs IMO is pointless it CAN always happen
#12
Posted 07 September 2010 - 01:09 PM
1st vs 8th
2nd vs 7th
3rd vs 6th
4th vs 5th
If it went to form then
1st vs 4th
2nd vs 3rd
Grand Final
However if there are some shocks then you take their league postions into account.
eg the highest finishing winner would play the lowest finishing winner so potentially you could have
5th vs 8th
6th vs 7th
Grand Final
No repeat matches, not even in the Final.
I think that makes sense. It does in my head anyway. I hope you understand it too.
Edited by Wiltshire Rhino, 07 September 2010 - 01:11 PM.
#13
Posted 07 September 2010 - 01:52 PM
this weekend wigan beat leeds . after that leeds get there arses in gear and go to old trafford were they soundly thrash st helens and win the title yet again.
why complicate something that happens every year.
does life get any better .
#14
Posted 07 September 2010 - 02:04 PM
#15
Posted 07 September 2010 - 03:03 PM
this weekend wigan beat leeds . after that leeds get there arses in gear and go to old trafford were they soundly thrash st helens and win the title yet again.
why complicate something that happens every year.
Leeds would have to win on an opponent's ground for that to happen - have they ever done that in the playoffs?
#16
Posted 07 September 2010 - 03:11 PM
Hopefully the outcry from such a repeat set of fixtures (what was the point of them playing in week 1) will cause the playoff system to be reviewed, as the current system is ######.
If the play-offs went to recent form, I wouldn't put Leeds in the top 4. Probably Huddersfield.
And you make it sound like their has never been a repeat game in the play-offs. 1998, ,1999, 2000, 01, 02, 04, 06, 07 and 08 all had one repeated fixture in them. In fact if you look at it like that, there have only been 3 out of 12 years without a repeat game. Did you whinge all them years as well?
#17
Posted 07 September 2010 - 05:08 PM
Totally agree, there is something wrong when you can play only two games in the playoffs, both against the same side, win the first then lose the second and therefore not make the GF.
Needs a rethink regardless of whether the resultant games are top notch (which I think they will be this year).

oderint dum metuant
#18
Posted 07 September 2010 - 05:09 PM
Don't disagree in principle - but surely four weeks off for the playoffs would disadvantage the Minor Premiers in terms of lack of match practice?

oderint dum metuant
#19
Posted 07 September 2010 - 05:35 PM
Yes it would under the existing formula, but this is longwinded and over complicated, and when 8th is involved open to ridicule.
Everyone has a preference, mine would be:-
Week 1 - 1 bye, 2v5, 3v4 (ie 2 eliminators)
Week 2 - 1 bye, 2 v 3 (one eliminator)
Week 3 - final
Top 5 are involved, 6th downwards dont deserve to be
Fewer games so our best players are less knackered by the time the internationals come round
Use the exta week gained for something useful (week off before 4N, mid season international, WCC)
Removes games that arnt eliminators
Obviates preposterous 'club call'
Saves rehashing the same 'big' fixtures to the point where they are routine
Most importantly, gives real value to finishing top
Edited by T Dub, 07 September 2010 - 05:36 PM.
#20
Posted 07 September 2010 - 05:43 PM
Everyone has a preference, mine would be:-
Week 1 - 1 bye, 2v5, 3v4 (ie 2 eliminators)
Week 2 - 1 bye, 2 v 3 (one eliminator)
Week 3 - final
Top 5 are involved, 6th downwards dont deserve to be
Fewer games so our best players are less knackered by the time the internationals come round
Use the exta week gained for something useful (week off before 4N, mid season international, WCC)
Removes games that arnt eliminators
Obviates preposterous 'club call'
Saves rehashing the same 'big' fixtures to the point where they are routine
Most importantly, gives real value to finishing top
Sounds a better bet than the current system and well justified by your points, but I'd still be concerned about a two week layoff for the League Leaders in terms of match sharpness.

oderint dum metuant
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users













