Toulouse will play play off semi-final in Toulouse

[Henson Park Old Firm]

10 hours ago, Davo5 said:

Yeah good luck getting football clubs permission to have numerous games on their pitches on in October.

I think the wheelchair players might struggle with the size of Old Trafford’s pitch to be honest.

Maybe its time to move the Grand Final then.

[sentoffagain2]

3 hours ago, Blind side johnny said:

The decision was made on two bases: that the team winning the league leadership should indeed have a real advantage in the final, and that there is a clear financial advantage for the competing teams. in playing at one of the competing teams' grounds rather than having to hire one from a third party.

Until recently i don't think anyone knew where the Championship Final would be held.But if Toulouse qualify as the top club they will have earned the right for a home final.As a Fev supporter i feel they will have earned the right to play at home by beating us on our home ground.No complaints from me if Toulouse reach S.L.as long as they earn the right on the field.

[haskey]

Bl----y disgusting

[bentleyman]

59 minutes ago, haskey said:

Bl----y disgusting

What is ?

[Harry Stottle]

11 hours ago, UTK said:

 

Completely agree that in reality there are likely far bigger implications for the winner of the championship than SL, but don't you think that actually justifies the final being awarded to the highest finishing side of the regular season that makes it?

Surely whichever team has performed the best over the course of the entire regular season should be rewarded for that performance whenever possible. Hypothetically, the dominant side of the season could lose half their team to injury the week before the final while a side could scrape into 5th on F/A and go on a month-long run that lands them in the final against a depleted opponent. In the current format of a finals system they are more than entitled to be there, but surely the team that has consistently displayed excellence over the course of the entire season should be afforded an advantage when the big day comes. Otherwise what is the point of the rest of the season other than to finish 1-5? 

I would think a system that rewards teams performances consistently across the season would result in a better chance of the best team in the championship being promoted and therefore most likely to make a decent fist of the uphill battle that is staying in SL. I'm not against the idea of a neutral venue but I really do think rewarding higher-placed teams has merit. It would certainly function to promote the idea that every game of the season counts, irrespective of where the two teams participating may sit on the ladder. 

 

 

 

 

As I have said before, the exact same format is used in the SL play offs  with the exception of the GF which is on a neutral venue, would you suggest that if the League leaders of SL had a number of injuries going onto the the GF it should be put back a week or so to allow that team finishing top to recuperate some player's? sorry but every final that has ever been played has a set date fir the game to be played, if for what ever reason injury or suspension a team is devoid of players that is how the cookie crumbles.

[Harry Stottle]

9 hours ago, lucky 7 said:

It does give the league leaders an advantage, but finishing top at the end of the regular season should be rewarded

They are in the lead up to the final.

[Harry Stottle]

9 hours ago, The Daddy said:

Tripe, what's the point of a long competitive season where a SL place is at stake only to give teams that finish below that haven't performed as well more chances to level the playing field. Doesn't finishing first count for anything? Seems like it did when Cas won the league leaders shield and many fans were saying that it meant more than winning the grand final. Now that Cas have no hope of finishing top and Catalan could win the league leaders shield all that talk has gone quiet. Too many RL fans have a massive chip on their shoulders 

Total bunkum, the team finishing in first place is rewarded with an easier passage to the final, with your level of thinking just scrap the play offs and promote the the league leaders, it may have passed you by but there is a reason why the play offs are contested.

[Harry Stottle]

3 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

Are we going to totally ignore the middle 8s? 

Why?

[yipyee]

35 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

As I have said before, the exact same format is used in the SL play offs  with the exception of the GF which is on a neutral venue, would you suggest that if the League leaders of SL had a number of injuries going onto the the GF it should be put back a week or so to allow that team finishing top to recuperate some player's? sorry but every final that has ever been played has a set date fir the game to be played, if for what ever reason injury or suspension a team is devoid of players that is how the cookie crumbles.

The simple solution is to make it 2 legs with the highest place ream having home advantage in leg 2

[UTK]

3 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

As I have said before, the exact same format is used in the SL play offs  with the exception of the GF which is on a neutral venue, would you suggest that if the League leaders of SL had a number of injuries going onto the the GF it should be put back a week or so to allow that team finishing top to recuperate some player's? sorry but every final that has ever been played has a set date fir the game to be played, if for what ever reason injury or suspension a team is devoid of players that is how the cookie crumbles.

I was just using that hypothetical as an example to demonstrate that any number of random factors can influence the performance of a team in one game of the season. As you've previously alluded to, promotion likely has further reaching consequences than winning the SL GF in the current state of the game. The reality is promotion is decided by only one game during the season - The Championship GF.

Yes, those who are higher-placed have a structurally easier run to the GF, I don't see it as a bad thing however that they should continue to reap the rewards of their regular-season performance by being entitled to a home final should they make it. Therefore, should they make the final and become struck down with random factors such as injury/suspension/etc they still maintain the benefits earned during the regular season for the most important game of the year, which ultimately may or may not help them home (See TWP v London 2018). 

Of course if my previous hypothetical situation were to transpire, and the lower-placed team were to beat the higher-placed team on the day then they will be more than deserving recipients of promotion. As you rightly point out that's how the cookie crumbles. 

[Niels]

18 hours ago, cookey said:

Toulouse deserve everything they get,hopefully they will replace Leigh.

It seems they have played every game away from home. Surely on the percentage basis,you should earn a greater percentage for an away victory,than a home win. It must have cost them a lot of money travelling,without any home income/revenue.

Home advantage seems to be lessening though. In football they have scrapped the away goals rule. Although for me they have destroyed a lot of the tension. 

 

[Tommygilf]

6 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

Why?

Because the only time prior to the reinstatement of the Championship Grand Final as a promotion event since licensing had the promotion game played at the home of the highest ranked team.

That was instituted before Toulouse or Toronto came into the competition. Which kind of makes your assertion seem silly...

[tms]

On 28/08/2021 at 12:10, Barley Mow said:

Yeah. "fédération anglaise de rugby à XIII" is "English rugby league federation" - it's the translator that gets it wrong and changes it to union.

FOR a laugh B grandson put it in other translators and funny enough they all had union in the answer one beauty was

THE UNION OF ENGLISH RUGBY

but my favourite shows those running it know all about rugby but could't make up their minds so came up with

RUGBY LEAGUE UNION 

[Harry Stottle]

2 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

Because the only time prior to the reinstatement of the Championship Grand Final as a promotion event since licensing had the promotion game played at the home of the highest ranked team.

That was instituted before Toulouse or Toronto came into the competition. Which kind of makes your assertion seem silly...

Different comp, it was not only about 2nd division teams trying to secure promotion in a mini Round Robin comp, it was also about jeapordy, the first one was between two SL teams in 2016 who were the bang average teams who could not secure their SL status but finished 4th and 5th.

Your comparrison is way of the mark Tommy, in the Championship the final placings have to be earned, like the Championship GF's used to be prior to the M8's, tge last one in 2015 at Headingley between Fev and Leigh.

[Tommygilf]

32 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Different comp, it was not only about 2nd division teams trying to secure promotion in a mini Round Robin comp, it was also about jeapordy, the first one was between two SL teams in 2016 who were the bang average teams who could not secure their SL status but finished 4th and 5th.

Your comparrison is way of the mark Tommy, in the Championship the final placings have to be earned, like the Championship GF's used to be prior to the M8's, tge last one in 2015 at Headingley between Fev and Leigh.

The first one was in 2015 between the bottom Super League side, Wakefield, and Bradford. Just for clarification.

You stated that:

13 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

"I would say without fear of constructive criticism that if Toronto and Toulouse never existed the Championship GF would still be played at a neutral venue, there would have been no reason whatsoever to change the structure."

When the structure was changed before they were introduced and the "Million Pound Game", which is still the name of the Championship Grand Final since the end of the middle 8s, has always been played at the home of the highest ranked side. I'm just pointing out how that was an incorrect assertion from you therefore. Just sounded a bit silly and underlined your bias.

That's before we get to facing the realities that RL, especially lower division RL, has to make financially viable decisions. If you'll get a lower crowd by hosting it at a neutral venue you have to pay extra for on top, does that make sense? 

[Davo5]

11 hours ago, Henson Park Old Firm said:

Maybe its time to move the Grand Final then.

To where ?

[Scubby]

Just now, Davo5 said:

To where ?

LSV of course. Ensures there will never be home advantage.

[Tommygilf]

5 hours ago, Niels said:

Home advantage seems to be lessening though. In football they have scrapped the away goals rule. Although for me they have destroyed a lot of the tension. 

I think away goals are an interesting point. When a side has an away goal lead and comes home for the second leg it can make them incredibly defensive.

In modern high standard (and pretty similar) stadia I don't think it matters anything like as much as previously.

[Steve Slater]

Any other year home advantage is the fairest method, but not this year! Fair enough, Toulouse deserve it because they beat Fev away, but if you look at the fight for 3rd, 4th & 5th places it's a real lottery heavily dependant on who has certain games cancelled. Bradford and Fax look likely to lose next weekend while Batley look likely to win, although this is sport and anything can happen? If the results go to form then Batley will be on equal percentage points with Halifax. But if Bradford's fixture against Toulouse was cancelled they would end up above the other two. So, for that reason alone it would be fairer if the play-off fixtures took place on neutral grounds. Maybe the 3rd V 6th and 4th V 5th could take place at Headingley on the same day, and the semi-finals could take the same format?

[The Phantom Horseman]

20 hours ago, The Daddy said:

 Too many RL fans have a massive chip on their shoulders 

I agree with that. As an example, how about this post on the Toulouse Olympique forum, where somebody is clearly trying to stir things up by selectively quoting the Featherstone chairman and calling not just him, but also their fans, "very arrogant".

http://www.rugbyforumxiii.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=76&t=73064

Of course it has worked a treat and Toulouse fans on that forum have taken the bait hook, line and sinker.

This does look to be a classic example of a poster with a massive chip on their shoulder, so I wonder if your criticism extends to him? His user name of "The Daddy" is just a coincidence, right?

 

[Harry Stottle]

1 hour ago, Tommygilf said:

The first one was in 2015 between the bottom Super League side, Wakefield, and Bradford. Just for clarification.

You stated that:

When the structure was changed before they were introduced and the "Million Pound Game", which is still the name of the Championship Grand Final since the end of the middle 8s, has always been played at the home of the highest ranked side. I'm just pointing out how that was an incorrect assertion from you therefore. Just sounded a bit silly and underlined your bias.

That's before we get to facing the realities that RL, especially lower division RL, has to make financially viable decisions. If you'll get a lower crowd by hosting it at a neutral venue you have to pay extra for on top, does that make sense? 

Yes sorry you are quite correct that Wakey and Bradford was the first MPG.

But my whole point is that the Champioship GF was altered to has you allude to for financial reasons and also I would strongly suggest that Toronto being an expected finalist would have not got many attending, previously Championship GF's were at a neutral venue, I honestly do not see how some people agree that the SL GF should be at a neutral venue, but the Championship shouldn't.

 

 

[Harry Stottle]

1 hour ago, Scubby said:

LSV of course. Ensures there will never be home advantage.

You do know Leigh have won more Championship GF's than any other team, but off course you knew that.

[Harry Stottle]

27 minutes ago, The Phantom Horseman said:

I agree with that. As an example, how about this post on the Toulouse Olympique forum, where somebody is clearly trying to stir things up by selectively quoting the Featherstone chairman and calling not just him, but also their fans, "very arrogant".

http://www.rugbyforumxiii.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=76&t=73064

Of course it has worked a treat and Toulouse fans on that forum have taken the bait hook, line and sinker.

This does look to be a classic example of a poster with a massive chip on their shoulder, so I wonder if your criticism extends to him? His user name of "The Daddy" is just a coincidence, right?

 

RUMBLED

[Tommygilf]

15 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Yes sorry you are quite correct that Wakey and Bradford was the first MPG.

But my whole point is that the Champioship GF was altered to has you allude to for financial reasons and also I would strongly suggest that Toronto being an expected finalist would have not got many attending, previously Championship GF's were at a neutral venue, I honestly do not see how some people agree that the SL GF should be at a neutral venue, but the Championship shouldn't.

I'm glad you've clarified that is your point, because it is different to what you said before.

I see it as Toronto being an extreme example sadly. It would be just as fiscally risky if Rochdale, Batley, Swinton, Hunslet, Whitehaven or any other club who averages less than 2k fans in the UK were to get to a final. In fact, of all of those, I reckon Toronto would have gotten the highest attendance at a neutral GF at Headingley, but that still wouldn't make it worth it. Can the RFL really fund an event predicated on the quite low chance of 2 well supported clubs making it? I don't think they can.

There just isn't the interest in most of Second Division RL to warrant the expense. Even before, it was part of a triple header finals day, not a standalone event. Perhaps that would be the future, combined with the NCL final and L1 play off final? 

Of course the logic you posit supports the view that having international clubs in the lower divisions of UK RL makes little practical sense given the finances and interest levels they work with.

[Scubby]

1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

You do know Leigh have won more Championship GF's than any other team, but off course you knew that.

This was in response to a suggestion about moving the SL Grand Final, but of course you knew that.