Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Viking Warrior

rfl announce radical plans for the 2013 season

39 posts in this topic

Why don't we have this discussion in the middle of next season?

Then we can try and decide whether we think some teams are giving their all, or just going through the motions? Or whether the games are worthwhile competitions or just a warm up?

It might be interesting to see peoples views before any places are decided or there is a clear league leader.

But fans had discussions like this last year, and the year before, and before that !!

Not many people are criticising Leeds, The fact is most fans (and some clubs) think the format is wrong, that a top 8 is too many clubs and it rewards mediocrity.

It more often than not sees one sided first round games and doesn't push teams to try and finish further up the table.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But fans had discussions like this last year, and the year before, and before that !!

Not many people are criticising Leeds, The fact is most fans (and some clubs) think the format is wrong, that a top 8 is too many clubs and it rewards mediocrity.

It more often than not sees one sided first round games and doesn't push teams to try and finish further up the table.

I know but we are now talking about the past and perhaps memories are clouded or just hazy. If team A play several terrible games in June-July, people can note it (not one off bad performances) then compare it if that team start playing red hot come Sept.

Edit: which could be total co-incidence anyway, so scrap that idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Other sports have no problems with the idea that champions may emerge despite having indifferent regular seasons.

See this for example http://bleacherrepor...-history/page/4

Leeds are worthy champions, they may not necessarily have as much skill or flair as other teams but they possess something equally important- a big game winning mentality (in play-off games at least, though it does not appear to extend to Wembley). They could have been rocked by conceding the early try, but instead they calmly continued to execute their game plan to brilliant effect. Why was this?, they were confident in their ability to control the game and ultimately the result, and that confidence comes from having done it so many times before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Other sports have no problems with the idea that champions may emerge despite having indifferent regular seasons.

See this for example http://bleacherrepor...-history/page/4

Leeds are worthy champions, they may not necessarily have as much skill or flair as other teams but they possess something equally important- a big game winning mentality (in play-off games at least, though it does not appear to extend to Wembley). They could have been rocked by conceding the early try, but instead they calmly continued to execute their game plan to brilliant effect. Why was this?, they were confident in their ability to control the game and ultimately the result, and that confidence comes from having done it so many times before.

I Havee NO problem with Leeds winning it. They are a very good and Champion team. I don't have a problem with deciding the Champions via a playoff and grand final (in fact I think this is a great concept and really finishes the season off on a high).

I have a problem with the 8 team playoff system whereby any of the top sides can make the playoffs without realy trying during the weekly rounds, thus turing the weekly rounds into glorified friendlies

We need to make the weekly rounds more relavent and reducing the playoff to 5 or 4 will do that, AND i still think Leeds would be there and would probably win it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But then isn't there the argument that by reducing the number of teams in the playoffs you are creating more glorified friendlies as a lot more teams mid to bottom in the league have nothing to play for? Not saying I agree with this, but it's worth pointing out. At least in the 8 team system, you are playing to keep form, even if you are confirmed in the playoffs in July.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But then isn't there the argument that by reducing the number of teams in the playoffs you are creating more glorified friendlies as a lot more teams mid to bottom in the league have nothing to play for? Not saying I agree with this, but it's worth pointing out. At least in the 8 team system, you are playing to keep form, even if you are confirmed in the playoffs in July.

Yeah but the theory was that by increasing it to 8 we would get more teams with something to play for.....which is true in theory but it isn't turning out like that.

Maybe there could be a decent cash incentive for finishing higher up the table (outside the top 5) or something? ie the lower you finish the less you get..... but considerably less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

to cut the season to the month of september so that it will stop leeds from finishing 5th and being called champions......................

They would adjust again,just like the Borg.resistance is futile,but hey next year is a new season and Leeds might just finish top and win it from there ,AGAIN

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

to cut the season to the month of september so that it will stop leeds from finishing 5th and being called champions......................

They would adjust again,just like the Borg.resistance is futile,but hey next year is a new season and Leeds might just finish top and win it from there ,AGAIN

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

then there will be no argument, i am not being anti-leeds but i have never been a fan of the current play off system, and to cast a wider net, if there had still been p&r then the 4th best team in CC would have been promoted...............that is what is wrong for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

to cut the season to the month of september so that it will stop leeds from finishing 5th and being called champions......................

then there will be no argument, i am not being anti-leeds but i have never been a fan of the current play off system, and to cast a wider net, if there had still been p&r then the 4th best team in CC would have been promoted...............that is what is wrong for me.

Looks pretty anti Leeds to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

then there will be no argument, i am not being anti-leeds but i have never been a fan of the current play off system, and to cast a wider net, if there had still been p&r then the 4th best team in CC would have been promoted...............that is what is wrong for me.

you need to get some practice in with your shoe horn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But then isn't there the argument that by reducing the number of teams in the playoffs you are creating more glorified friendlies as a lot more teams mid to bottom in the league have nothing to play for?

If we went to the top 5 rather than the top 8 then there would have been the same number of teams playing pointless friendlies at the end of the season. Wakefield and Bradford would have been cut loose from having a chance of qualifying for the playoffs, whereas Leeds and Hull would have been playing games with real intensity to qualify for the top 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we went to the top 5 rather than the top 8 then there would have been the same number of teams playing pointless friendlies at the end of the season. Wakefield and Bradford would have been cut loose from having a chance of qualifying for the playoffs, whereas Leeds and Hull would have been playing games with real intensity to qualify for the top 5

So the top teams would have to perform on order to compete.

With top 8 we create the illusion of competition, when in reality we are rewarding mediocraty and allowing our elite teams an easy ride

Surely it's up to Brafford and Wakefield to up their game to compete in the top 5, not drop the qualifying criteria.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we went to the top 5 rather than the top 8 then there would have been the same number of teams playing pointless friendlies at the end of the season. Wakefield and Bradford would have been cut loose from having a chance of qualifying for the playoffs, whereas Leeds and Hull would have been playing games with real intensity to qualify for the top 5

Not quite my point, as technically the teams already in the 8 (like Leeds and Hull) should be aiming to finish as high as possible to get the greatest advantage in the playoffs. I'm more playing devil's advocate here but if the teams already in the 8 choose to drop their intensity once they qualify, that's personal choice and if glorified friendlies happen that's at the risk of the club's chances in the playoffs. If you cut it to five teams, there is no question there will be a lot more pointless matches. It will create more intensity, but only in a couple of cases, it runs the risk of reducing the intensity across the board - while we are in a 14 team league with no relegation at least.

In my ideal world, I guess I'd have a 12 team league, with a 6 team playoff and then one up/one down. That way most teams should be in the mix for something come the end of the year

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



Rugby League World - June 2017

League Express - Mon 17th July 2017