Playoff system

[Finn]

I'm hoping that the playoffs go to form, in which case we will be looking forward to 2 semis in 2 weeks time, Saints/Wire, Wigan/Leeds, sound familiar?

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 ######.

[Smog]

I'm hoping that the playoffs go to form, in which case we will be looking forward to 2 semis in 2 weeks time, Saints/Wire, Wigan/Leeds, sound familiar?

I'm hoping for great games, sell out crowds and hopefully a few shocks along the way

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 ######.

You haven't thought this cunning plan out have you baldrick

[Storm]

If the play off go to form, Wigan, Saints & Wire will be on the Semis. Who ever joins them from 4th to 8th, and it will most likey be Huddersfield, will be picked by the top team.

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.

[Wilderspoolmemories]

If wigan and saints win in round 1,then leeds are at home in round 2 to either hudds/crusaders and wire to hull/hull kr. If wire and leeds win then wigan won't pick wire or saints so the round 3 fixtures will be the same as round 1 fixtures! Something wrong there,go back to the old top 5 play off I say.

[Dave T]

I'm not sure why people would want something to fail. Surely it would be best to hope that you are wrong and it is a brilliant series.

Also, this scenario didn't happen last year with exactly the same format.

[RP London]

If wigan and saints win in round 1,then leeds are at home in round 2 to either hudds/crusaders and wire to hull/hull kr. If wire and leeds win then wigan won't pick wire or saints so the round 3 fixtures will be the same as round 1 fixtures! Something wrong there,go back to the old top 5 play off I say.

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?

[shrek]

I preferred the 5 team play off as well, games seemed a lot more intense, although we'll see how this years stack up as they seem to have thrown some interesting matches up. Was a lot easier to explain to the casual/non fan as well who was showing an interest on the back of skys advertising, not sure I could explain the 8 team play off correctly at the first attempt without cocking up a fixture or how club call works!

[Kenilworth Tiger]

If there's one thing that gets up my nose it's people moaning about things that haven't even happened!!!

It's like being at chuffing work

[no13benny]

In the 6 almost every season the top side played the second side in week 2, and then again in the Grand Final.

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.

[Finn]

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?

The Aus system guarantees no rematches until the Grand Final.

[RP London]

The Aus system guarantees no rematches until the Grand Final.

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

[Wiltshire Rhino]

How about straight knockout?

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 September 7, 2010 by Wiltshire Rhino

[southstand loiner]

yet again we reach the bit people dont understand so let me explain.

this weekend wigan beat leeds . after that leeds get there ***** 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.

[T Dub]

The Minor Premiers should collect the shield and go straight to the finalno further justification needed.

[Finn]

yet again we reach the bit people dont understand so let me explain.

this weekend wigan beat leeds . after that leeds get there ***** 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?

[Wellsy4HullFC]

I'm hoping that the playoffs go to form, in which case we will be looking forward to 2 semis in 2 weeks time, Saints/Wire, Wigan/Leeds, sound familiar?

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?

[giwildgo]

If wigan and saints win in round 1,then leeds are at home in round 2 to either hudds/crusaders and wire to hull/hull kr. If wire and leeds win then wigan won't pick wire or saints so the round 3 fixtures will be the same as round 1 fixtures! Something wrong there,go back to the old top 5 play off I say.

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).

[giwildgo]

The Minor Premiers should collect the shield and go straight to the finalno further justification needed.

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?

[T Dub]

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?

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 September 7, 2010 by T Dub

[giwildgo]

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

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.

[bewareshadows]

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.

I think only the American system really justifies a playoff system. However you then have to break up the league into divisional system.

Which would bring on the moans of, there are not enough players there are too many easy beat teams.

However the divisional system allows for almost unlimited expansion of the game without having to sacrifice the traditional clubs. It also justifies the licence system properly. If you tick the boxes your in, if not your out. No need to fiddle the criteria to fit some arbatary league limit of clubs.

Also clubs need not complain about not having enough derbies and no complaining about too many games in a season.

However I think this boat was missed at the Start of SL and as turkeys don't vote for Christmas and SL clubs control how the Christmas pudding is split. I can't see it happening unless SKy pull the plug on the funding or strangely offer a huge increase in funding.

[Finn]

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?

Presumably most of those rematches were in the top 5 / 6 systems and occurred in the final which is ok as the best 2 teams gravitate there. What I was winging about are rematches in weeks 1 and week 3 which begs ask what is the point of week 1?

I didn't winge at all with the top 5 system but have winged consistently ever since, even more so with this daft top 8 one which Nigel Wood thought up when he was presumably drunk.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

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

Why do 6th not deserve to be in but 5th do? Where is the limit?

It's basically a "how long is a piece of string?" situation, with the RFL's string being 8 teams long and yours being 5. There is no right and wrong answer.

[Finn]

Why do 6th not deserve to be in but 5th do? Where is the limit?

It's basically a "how long is a piece of string?" situation, with the RFL's string being 8 teams long and yours being 5. There is no right and wrong answer.

The string should not be long enough to reward mediocrity. Finishing outside the top half of the table and winning less than 50% of ones games hardly deserves a shot at being acclaimed Champions.

[bewareshadows]

I think only the American system really justifies a playoff system. However you then have to break up the league into divisional system.

Which would bring on the moans of, there are not enough players there are too many easy beat teams.

However the divisional system allows for almost unlimited expansion of the game without having to sacrifice the traditional clubs. It also justifies the licence system properly. If you tick the boxes your in, if not your out. No need to fiddle the criteria to fit some arbatary league limit of clubs.

Also clubs need not complain about not having enough derbies and no complaining about too many games in a season.

However I think this boat was missed at the Start of SL and as turkeys don't vote for Christmas and SL clubs control how the Christmas pudding is split. I can't see it happening unless SKy pull the plug on the funding or strangely offer a huge increase in funding.

eg

Saints

Wigan

Warrington

Widnes

Leigh

Salford

Wrexham

Cumbrian franchise

Toulouse

Catalan

Leeds

Bradford

Cas

Wakey

Hull

Huddersfield

Hull KR

Gateshead

London Quins

London Skolars

I know people say there is not the quality in depth but saying a smaller league improves quality is a very poor argument in my humble opinion. I use the Scottish football top division as my example.

As more teams want to join, you expand the leagues until they are too large and then create a 3rd division.

Those who I

Edited September 7, 2010 by bewareshadows