Jump to content


Rugby League World Issue 400 - Out Now!

RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD MAGAZINE - ISSUE 400 - OUT NOW!
84 pages, 38 years of history from Open Rugby to the present day.
Click here for the digital edition to read online via smartphone, tablet and desktop devices including iPhone, iPad, Android & Kindle HD.
Click here to order a copy for delivery by post. Annual subscriptions also available worldwide.
Find out what's inside Issue 400
/ View a Gallery of all 400 covers / WH Smith Branches stocking Issue 400
Read Jamie Jones-Buchanan's Top 5 RLW Interviews including Marwan Koukash, Lee Briers, Gareth Thomas, Steve Ganson & Matt King OBE


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

Play-offs

Top eight

  • Please log in to reply
34 replies to this topic

#1 Leyther_Matt

Leyther_Matt
  • Coach
  • 997 posts

Posted 23 January 2013 - 01:41 PM

Top eight play-offs for Championship.

Would love to be positive about it, but it has killed much of the intensity in Super League IMO and I just hope it doesn't have the same effect for us. Having one or two 'big' clubs missing out on the play offs every now and then does wonders for the 'exclusivity' of qualifying, but this pretty much rules that out. Also means it will be a protracted play-off series when I'd have said the previous Championship system was ideal.

Don't mean to be deliberately negative, but I'm struggling to see the positives.

#2 thundergaz

thundergaz
  • Coach
  • 2,652 posts

Posted 23 January 2013 - 01:51 PM

I agree its a stupid idea matt and I'm not a fan but to be honest I don't think it will make a jot of difference to us top 5 teams because I think the top 5 will be close this season but I think 5th to 6th spot there will be a massive gulf in points just my opinion of course but I just don't think it will affect us top 5 teams too much only when the top team gets to pick and choose who they play etc but it back fired on Wigan last season so who knows.

#3 intheshed

intheshed
  • Coach
  • 406 posts

Posted 23 January 2013 - 02:33 PM

Top eight play-offs for Championship.

Would love to be positive about it, but it has killed much of the intensity in Super League IMO and I just hope it doesn't have the same effect for us. Having one or two 'big' clubs missing out on the play offs every now and then does wonders for the 'exclusivity' of qualifying, but this pretty much rules that out. Also means it will be a protracted play-off series when I'd have said the previous Championship system was ideal.

Don't mean to be deliberately negative, but I'm struggling to see the positives.


Broadly I agree, I think 5 teams is enough even with the increase to 14 teams and the reward for finishing at the top of the table(two shots at reaching the final) was about right. Overall with I would have preferred to keep what we had but there are a couple of positives. Mainly the regularity of games for the top teams is better, old system meant either 1st or 2nd would only play once before the GF and with the week off for the challenge cup final before the final league game it wasn't enough imho.

The second positive is more a lack of a negative really :unsure: , it seems we have avoided the madness of clubcall which can only be a good thing!!!!

#4 gazza77

gazza77
  • Coach
  • 2,166 posts

Posted 23 January 2013 - 02:41 PM

I agree with it being too high a percentage of the teams in the league, however there is one advantage that I can see. Under the old system, whoever reached the final after a single game had a number of weeks off before they played again. This system will mean that shouldn't happen.

"Featherstone outside the Super League is like Rooney, Ronaldo, Villa out of Euro 2012."

Please view my photos.

 

http://www.hughesphoto.co.uk/


Little Nook Farm - Caravan Club Certificated Location in the heart of the Pennines overlooking Hebden Bridge and the Calder Valley.

http://www.facebook.com/LittleNookFarm


#5 Leyther_Matt

Leyther_Matt
  • Coach
  • 997 posts

Posted 23 January 2013 - 03:00 PM

The problem with so many blank weekends wasn't something we've encountered a Leyth, I must admit! ;)

#6 Darren Hill

Darren Hill
  • Coach
  • 368 posts

Posted 23 January 2013 - 03:10 PM

Am I mistaken, but has there been a reduction in prize money? I always thought the winner of the GF claimed a £100,000 prize and this year its £50,000.
NL2 GRAND FINAL WINNERS 2007
CHAMPIONSHIP WINNERS 2010
Championship Winners 2011
Championship Champions 2011

#7 jt

jt
  • Coach
  • 1,630 posts

Posted 23 January 2013 - 03:58 PM

Has this been voted in by the clubs themselves or has the RFL decided to do it this way

#8 SLUGGY

SLUGGY
  • Coach
  • 262 posts

Posted 23 January 2013 - 04:13 PM

I can't believe what I'm reading!!

Why don't you "top 5" teams form your own little breakaway league and play amongst yourselves, I'm sure you'll soon get fed up of that. It wasn't long ago that 1 or 2 of your so called "top 5" teams were being relegated into a lower division. How do you know that one of the teams promoted this year won't spring a surprise and perform above expectation? Why shouldn't every club in the championship have the same opportunity of having a shot at the grand final from anywhere within the top 8?

#9 Leyther_Matt

Leyther_Matt
  • Coach
  • 997 posts

Posted 23 January 2013 - 04:25 PM

I can't believe what I'm reading!!

Why don't you "top 5" teams form your own little breakaway league and play amongst yourselves, I'm sure you'll soon get fed up of that. It wasn't long ago that 1 or 2 of your so called "top 5" teams were being relegated into a lower division. How do you know that one of the teams promoted this year won't spring a surprise and perform above expectation? Why shouldn't every club in the championship have the same opportunity of having a shot at the grand final from anywhere within the top 8?

The point is that the top eight is too many teams and dilutes the achievement of actually reaching the play offs. As a Leigh fan, the year we finished outside of the play offs (don't forget we were only 'relegated' because Toulouse came bottom and Gateshead went WAY over the salary cap) meant that it was considered a big achievement to qualify the following year. Now, a team can finish god knows how many points behind the leaders/top five and have a sniff at becoming the champions.

The intensity has been ruined in Super League this season because the top teams know it would take an almightily bad season to come outside of the play off spots, and the same will apply for our league - as you say, one of the promoted teams may well spring a surprise, but it would need all four of them to have an outstanding season if it means any of the existing top five are going to come close to missing out on the play offs.

#10 Jimmy B

Jimmy B
  • Moderator
  • 593 posts

Posted 23 January 2013 - 05:02 PM

So in theory a team finishing 8th out of 14 can, by finding form at the end of the season and winning the play off final, call themselves "Champions".
Absolutely barmy !
How many league victories will it take to finish 8th - probably less than 50% of games played.
By all means have a play off but call it something else. What was wrong with the play offs being called The Premiership ?
A team finishing top of the pile after 26 league games fully deserve the title Champions.
With this news and the "partnerships " between Championship clubs and SL clubs I dread to think what is going to materialise in the coming season.
A complete mockery and it could only happen in RL !
Lets not forget, Featherstone Rovers is a RUGBY club.

#11 jt

jt
  • Coach
  • 1,630 posts

Posted 23 January 2013 - 05:50 PM

If we take last season Fev Fax Leigh and Sheffield all achieved 40+ points in the league and Swinton achieved 19 points If they had a good run in the playoffs does that team deserve to be playing in the grand final above teams who have worked harder all year it looks to me as though we are rewarding a team and crowning them champions for competing and winning less than half there games

#12 thundergaz

thundergaz
  • Coach
  • 2,652 posts

Posted 23 January 2013 - 06:08 PM

If we take last season Fev Fax Leigh and Sheffield all achieved 40+ points in the league and Swinton achieved 19 points If they had a good run in the playoffs does that team deserve to be playing in the grand final above teams who have worked harder all year it looks to me as though we are rewarding a team and crowning them champions for competing and winning less than half there games


I agree JT but I very much doubt that a team outside the top 5 will win the GF unless their partnered club lend them so called big stars for the play offs. Which wouldn't surprise me to be honest if the SL club hasn't got anything to play for come our play off time. ( I don't agree with it but I really can see it happening at some point) I can see the SL club that hasn't got anything to play for turning round to their feeder club and saying if we give you some top players for the play offs if you win it a 50/50 split on the winnings etc.i know last season a player had to have played so many games to qualify for the play offs etc but if it suits or helps a SL team you know the RFL will change the rules to suit.Also if we are taking the SL route why isn't P&R back on the agenda? The RFL really get under my skin more and more as the seasons go by. The sooner there is a change at the top the better.

Edited by thundergaz, 23 January 2013 - 06:21 PM.


#13 The Grinder

The Grinder
  • Coach
  • 631 posts

Posted 23 January 2013 - 11:42 PM

Top eight play-offs for Championship.

Would love to be positive about it, but it has killed much of the intensity in Super League IMO and I just hope it doesn't have the same effect for us. Having one or two 'big' clubs missing out on the play offs every now and then does wonders for the 'exclusivity' of qualifying, but this pretty much rules that out. Also means it will be a protracted play-off series when I'd have said the previous Championship system was ideal.

Don't mean to be deliberately negative, but I'm struggling to see the positives.


I would suggest that a lot of that intensity was lost when we lost annual P&R and the 8 team play-off system has at least given the clubs from 6 -12 in SL something to play for. Without this the teams from 8th - 14th would be playing friendlies all year.

In a new vamped Championship where clubs will be fighting to finish in the top 2 (home game advantage), top 4 (second bite at the play-offs), top 8 just to make the play-offs and avoiding the bottom 2 places (religation) that there will not be many dead rubber games in the Chanpionship this comming season.
I'm sure I'll think of something funny to say soon.

#14 thundergaz

thundergaz
  • Coach
  • 2,652 posts

Posted 24 January 2013 - 12:23 AM

The salary cap for our league is 300k. With them cutting the GF from 100k to 50k winning all 3 won't even cover the salary cap. Now IMO if I'm correct the RFL have really dropped a boo boo with this one. ( to be honest i dont think all 3 covered it before but now its no where near and they wonder why clubs are going bust) What is the point in having a salary cap that you can't win back?

#15 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,496 posts

Posted 24 January 2013 - 10:24 AM

The point is that the top eight is too many teams and dilutes the achievement of actually reaching the play offs.


Agree. It rewards mediocrity.
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#16 Les Tonks Sidestep

Les Tonks Sidestep
  • Coach
  • 1,562 posts

Posted 24 January 2013 - 11:27 AM

Agree. It rewards mediocrity.


No more so than the fact that a team with a >10% worse win/loss ratio than 3 other teams can become 'The Champions' ;)

#17 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,496 posts

Posted 24 January 2013 - 02:08 PM

No more so than the fact that a team with a >10% worse win/loss ratio than 3 other teams can become 'The Champions' ;)


Fair point, but - then - a champion team ought to be able to beat all the others. -_-

The clubs want a play-off system to keep interest up longer but finishing in the bottom half and still having a chance of winning and is a step too far.
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#18 Les Tonks Sidestep

Les Tonks Sidestep
  • Coach
  • 1,562 posts

Posted 24 January 2013 - 05:16 PM

Fair point, but - then - a champion team ought to be able to beat all the others. -_-


Which clearly last year's 'Champions' couldn't ;)

The clubs want a play-off system to keep interest up longer but finishing in the bottom half and still having a chance of winning and is a step too far.


On a serious note, completely agree with you but do we know it's the clubs' idea?

#19 The Grinder

The Grinder
  • Coach
  • 631 posts

Posted 24 January 2013 - 08:26 PM

Agree. It rewards mediocrity.


Why all the fuss? Last year it was 6 from 10 = 60% and this year it is 8 from 14 = 57.143% - same sort or ratio - just about.

Is it better or worse as a system? I don't know and to be honest I don't care. Since here we are at the start of the season we all know the rules as to how you get to be champions - may the best team over the season (including play-offs) win.
I'm sure I'll think of something funny to say soon.

#20 Steve Slater

Steve Slater
  • Coach
  • 1,792 posts

Posted 24 January 2013 - 08:48 PM

It might make the league a bit more competitive? With the extra clubs, I was thinking that there would be more easy matches, and there's no real joy in watching one-sided games. Clubs at the bottom end of the table might try a bit harder if they have more chance of reaching the play-offs. But on the other hand, those in 4th, 5th and 6th place might become complacent toward the end if they can slip outside the top 6 and still qualify.
If the prize money has dropped for the GF winners, maybe more money, and more prestige, should be given to the league winners, and extra prize money awarded according to the league position you finish? This would be the best way to get competitive games all the way throughout the season!




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users