Bottom four 2016

[Dave T]

People are now using a top 7/8 as a stick to bash SL with, but let's look at last year's 8 and their performance in the last 10 years or so:

 

Leeds - never been out of it, ranging from 1st to 6th

Saints - never been out of it, ranging from 1st to 5th

Wigan - regularly in there, however finished 8th in 2006, 7th in 2005

Hudds - regularly in there in the last few years, but in 2008 they were 10th - prior to that they struggled to ever make the top 7

Cas - been in the top 7 only 3 times in the last 10 years

Wire - regular top 5 team in recent years, however 10th as recent as 2009

Catalan - in their 10 year history they have ranged from 3rd to 14th, 7 finishes of 7th or below

Hull FC - ranged from 2nd to 12th in the last 10 years, 5 of them 8th or below

 

In the first 15 years of SL, Bradford Bulls were storming it and then dropped out as a top performing team. The likes of Hudds and Wire have stepped up, but not enough to actually win the major title yet.

 

If we are going to criticise lack of variety, I could live with the lack of SL winners as a genuine challenge, but the likes of Wire, Hull, Hudds have let themselves down despite not being far off.

 

It is no surprise that the better teams are regularly the better performing team, that happens in many sports, but there is plenty of variety in SL.

[chrisl1]

 

 

2012 Salford, Widnes & HKR outside top eight Wakey made 8th.

2013 Salford, Wakey, Widnes outside top eight HKR made 8th.

2014 Wakey, Salford, HKR outside top eight Widnes sneaked 8th. 

2015 All four turkeys in the bottom four

 

 

 

 

"2012 Wakey made 8th" "2013 HKR made 8th" "2014 Widnes SNEAKED 8th"  Rather a subjective comment about Widnes.  They finished 4 points ahead of the 9th place team and were in the top 8 places for virtually the whole season.  Hardly sneaking.  Probably better to check the facts before making snide comments.

[Dave T]

"2012 Wakey made 8th" "2013 HKR made 8th" "2014 Widnes SNEAKED 8th" Rather a subjective comment about Widnes. They finished 4 points ahead of the 9th place team and were in the top 8 places for virtually the whole season. Hardly sneaking. Probably better to check the facts before making snide comments.

wording chosen carefully in order to provoke. Interesting that one of those Turkeys were tipped to do well last year by many, and are apparently one of tge richest clubs in the game.

[The Parksider]

A quick glance at the SL website confirms that since 2007 (the earliest on there) we have not had the same bottom 4 in any two consecutive seasons,

 

Salford, Hull KR, London, Catalan, Cas, Hull, Hudds, Crusaders, Wakefield, Widnes, Bradford have all finished in the bottom 4 between 2007 and 2014. That is a decent amount of variety.

 

No it's not

 

London are not in SL anymore to come bottom four

 

Bradford are not in SL anymore to come bottom four

 

Crusaders are not in SL anymore to come bottom four

 

Catalans were in their formative years 2006/7

 

And four other clubs you mention are in SL and are all regularly bottom five.

 

Instead of bending the stats "to provoke", take up the bet Dave.

 

Your the one to make the challenge!!!

[The Parksider]

"2012 Wakey made 8th" "2013 HKR made 8th" "2014 Widnes SNEAKED 8th"  Rather a subjective comment about Widnes.  They finished 4 points ahead of the 9th place team and were in the top 8 places for virtually the whole season.  Hardly sneaking.  Probably better to check the facts before making snide comments.

 

Let me guess - your a Widnes fan.

 

No need to take it personally just because your club are firmly in the frame for bottom four.

 

That's all I'm saying, I have nowt against Widnes, and aren't being snide.

If you think you'll beat bottom four come out and say it??

[Dave T]

No it's not

London are not in SL anymore to come bottom four

Bradford are not in SL anymore to come bottom four

Crusaders are not in SL anymore to come bottom four

Catalans were in their formative years 2006/7

And four other clubs you mention are in SL and are all regularly bottom five.

Instead of bending the stats "to provoke", take up the bet Dave.

Your the one to make the challenge!!!

one that you ignored and then tried to make up your own.

There is plenty of variety, the fact teams are not in sl now doesnt change that. It actually backs up my point.

[Dave T]

Let me guess - your a Widnes fan.

No need to take it personally just because your club are firmly in the frame for bottom four.

That's all I'm saying, I have nowt against Widnes, and aren't being snide.

If you think you'll beat bottom four come out and say it??

do you not think calling them turkeys is being snide?

[The Parksider]

I love this. People are complaining that it's going to be the same eight again before the season has even started! Talk about looking for a reason to moan!

There's "a good chance" that you're all speaking rubbish. The top eight has never been the same on consecutive years IIRC. So if it is the same, I'd say it was an incredibly rare and unlikely occurrence.

 

Nobody is complaining and we all like to speculate on winners and losers but according to you we should not be doing this??

 

I've a hat trick of posters here who can't answer the question but just want to have a go at the questioner!!

[The Parksider]

do you not think calling them turkeys is being snide?

 

Nah we all use all sorts of descriptions when we are having a lively debate.

 

It's harmless fun.

[The Parksider]

There is plenty of variety, the fact teams are not in sl now doesnt change that.

 

Of course it changes it.

 

More clubs always meant more variety why not go back to 1996 in your quest to back out of taking up my bet.

 

If two out of the four are different this year you win. 

 

Back yourself Dave instead of dancing around the point!

[Dave T]

Nobody is complaining and we all like to speculate on winners and losers but according to you we should not be doing this??

I've a hat trick of posters here who can't answer the question but just want to have a go at the questioner!!

ok to answer the question...

Salford, Hull FC, Wakey and Widnes if i had to put money on it.

I do think there are risks around Cas, Catalan, KR and Wire although a couple of them could go the other way and finish top 4.

[Dave T]

Of course it changes it.

More clubs always meant more variety why not go back to 1996 in your quest to back out of taking up my bet.

If two out of the four are different this year you win.

Back yourself Dave instead of dancing around the point!

no. I said we have never had the same bottom 4 or top 8 in consecutive years.

That has nothing to do with 2 teams being different. That isnt dancing around the point, that is bluntly telling you i am not interested in a bet on something i never said.

[Barnaby Reddin]

Salford, Hull FC, Wakey and Widnes if i had to put money on it

So 1 change in places 9, 10, 11 &12.....the weakest sides will remain the weakest and the rfl should just trim the SL to 10 franchised clubs with a plan to add teams in 6 years time.....the weakest clubs and stronger championship clubs can battle for the places at the top table......p&r or the illusion of it won't develop the game in the UK....

[Exiled Wiganer]

So, was this an agenda Trojan horse, or a genuine debate?

League tables generally match pretty closely wage bills, on which basis (I am guessing) the bottom 4 would have Trinity, Widnes, and Cas, as 3 clubs who spend under the cap. Cats can soend the most, as they have lower tax rates. Which means that Cas are continuing to defy gravity, while, say, Salford and the Hull clubs continue to under perform. It is wages, not what happens at the end if the season, that is the main indicator of the strength of teams. Hence, it would be absurd to expect teams with the same resources to move massively one way or the other in a normal league. Which makes the variances we see greater than the norm. If you compare the unpredictability of SL with the Premier League, ours is far more varied.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

Nobody is complaining and we all like to speculate on winners and losers but according to you we should not be doing this??

I've a hat trick of posters here who can't answer the question but just want to have a go at the questioner!!

I'll do this like you do:

1. Really? No one is complaining that "it will be the same clubs over and over"?

2. Where did I say people should not be speculating?

3. Where have I had ago at you directly here? I've just said there's a good chance you're all speaking rubbish... And there is (for the reasons I stated).

[The Parksider]

I'll do this like you do:

 

No. forget your fixation. just give us your bottom four please.

[The Parksider]

ok to answer the question...

Salford, Hull FC, Wakey and Widnes if i had to put money on it.

I do think there are risks around Cas, Catalan, KR and Wire although a couple of them could go the other way and finish top 4.

 

Hull is a very interesting choice, Adam Pearson says he's looking at top four. In the same interview he said that changes to the system could not come about for a "couple of years" or it would be a big credibility problem for the game, but that's another debate.

 

HKR to do better than Hull too!! 

[The Parksider]

League tables generally match pretty closely wage bills, on which basis (I am guessing) the bottom 4 would have Trinity, Widnes, and Cas, as 3 clubs who spend under the cap. Cats can soend the most, as they have lower tax rates. Which means that Cas are continuing to defy gravity, while, say, Salford and the Hull clubs continue to under perform. It is wages, not what happens at the end if the season, that is the main indicator of the strength of teams. Hence, it would be absurd to expect teams with the same resources to move massively one way or the other in a normal league.

 

It's a very interesting take.

 

Wages is an issue when you can't pay full cap. Widnes seem to be struggling, that's not having a go at them it's how it is. It was also the case they avoided bottom four 2014 only by winning a four pointer at HKR by a try and a goal.

 

Coaches is an issue as we see at Cas, get a good one and you could be comfortably in the eight, get a bad one and you could end up joint bottom as Cas did under their last coach.

 

But another factor for me is quality home grown players. If they are not coming through then your struggling and to me this is something that will protect Hull and Wire, above clubs like Salford who have more buying in to do.

 

Yet another factor could be quality halves, who are worth their weight in gold and if HKR escape it will surely be Kelly and Campese who will be behind it, same at Castleford?

[Spidey]

4 from

Hull KR

Widnes

Salford

Wakefield

Castleford

I'm hoping Widnes swap places with Cas in the 8. However our back row is looking quite depleted and weak at the moment an area which we looked okay last term

[Dave T]

So 1 change in places 9, 10, 11 &12.....the weakest sides will remain the weakest and the rfl should just trim the SL to 10 franchised clubs with a plan to add teams in 6 years time.....the weakest clubs and stronger championship clubs can battle for the places at the top table......p&r or the illusion of it won't develop the game in the UK....

but we always have weaker clubs under any structure. You cant just keep trimming, if we take that to extremes then it would just be Leeds, Saints and Wigan, maybe Wire and Hudds as lls winners.

12 is a decent number, whilst some may be weaker, they are still the strongest 12 available, if they are too weak they will drop out.

Only a couple of years back Cas would have been there, Hull FC are under achievers who can come good, if Salford get it right, they have the resources to do well.

It is fine.

[Dave T]

Hull is a very interesting choice, Adam Pearson says he's looking at top four. In the same interview he said that changes to the system could not come about for a "couple of years" or it would be a big credibility problem for the game, but that's another debate.

HKR to do better than Hull too!!

hull could finally get it together and do well, but i would still put many clubs ahead of them, however they do have this knack of massively under performing.

[The Parksider]

The rfl should just trim the SL to 10 franchised clubs with a plan to add teams in 6 years time

 

Read the OP it's predictions for the bottom four. Your way off topic.

 

Besides we already have "individual businesses" allowed to operate to a "set business model" allowed to use the "trading banner" of Superleague. That IS franchising we already have it, look it up. 

 

What you or DSK's idea of a franchise is neither of you say and the nonsense about dropping clubs then adding them in 6 years time well...........start a thread if you want to discuss it?

[Wellsy4HullFC]

No. forget your fixation. just give us your bottom four please.

So we're going for the "have a pop, ignore the response" tactic. Fair enough.

9. Castleford

10. Hull KR

11. Widnes

12. Wakefield

More chance of it being wrong. The bottom four isn't as easy to predict as people make out.

[The Parksider]

So we're going for the "have a pop, ignore the response" tactic. Fair enough.

9. Castleford

10. Hull KR

11. Widnes

12. Wakefield

More chance of it being wrong. The bottom four isn't as easy to predict as people make out.

 

Don't have a pop in the first place then, your post #49.

 

Anyway thanks for participating - a few are wondering when the Cas bubble will burst!!

[chrisl1]

Let me guess - your a Widnes fan.

 

No need to take it personally just because your club are firmly in the frame for bottom four.

 

That's all I'm saying, I have nowt against Widnes, and aren't being snide.

If you think you'll beat bottom four come out and say it??

Nice try with the diversionary tactics but you've completely failed to address the point made in my original post ie how a team finishing in 8th place, which has spent the whole season in the top 8, and 4 points ahead of the 9th placed team can be described as having SNEAKED into the top 8.  It's impossible to SNEAK into somewhere when you've been there all the time.