Teams finishing 5th or 6th SHOULD NOT have a chance to win SL

[Tommygilf]

25 minutes ago, DavidM said:

Yes sometimes playoffs seem designed to be complicated . In a 12 team league what’s wrong with 1v4 and 2v3

Arguably a bit too short? I can certainly see the argument for it.

Personally I like top 6, and think it will be even better in a 14 team league.

[DavidM]

4 minutes ago, redjonn said:

The underlying problem has always been the lack of esteem or regard and reward celebration/respect given to finishing top of the league.

It been treated as joke with words like hub cap, no promotional efforts to build it as a exemptional achievement.   Thus the only focus is on GF.  As distinct from play offs following the remarkable achievement and reward of finishing top.

Maybe a break between winning title and associated celebration and reward of a week or even two before going into play-off rounds.

Valid point . It is a massive achievement by right 

[Just Browny]

1 minute ago, DavidM said:

Valid point . It is a massive achievement by right 

I dunno if it is really, Saints have chucked a few games and failed to turn up in  a few others this year. They will rightly feel proud if they win the GF given the injuries they have had to manage in the latter part of the season.

[Damien]

The last page or so sums I think the play offs are contrived as well. Even those that completely support the play offs don't want certain places rewarded because they don't deserve it, are mid table, haven't won enough games etc. It's really not that far a leap to then think that 2nd, 3rd or 4th don't deserve to be Champions either.

Conversely why stop at 6, why not 8 if its just to keep things interesting for as many teams as possible? It's like most want a system that ultimately weights it for 1 and 2 to get to the final anyway so why not just have 1 v 2?

Edited September 17, 2022 by Damien

[Dunbar]

15 minutes ago, Damien said:

This essentially the current system once we get the winners of 3 v 6 then 4 v 5.

It is.  Not enough reward for finishing higher and the task for those teams finishing lower should be much greater.

[SalfordSlim]

8 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

It is.  Not enough reward for finishing higher and the task for those teams finishing lower should be much greater.

You're right. Way too easy for a team like Salford with the lowest cap spend in the league.

They'll only have to beat the team who finished 3rd and the team that finished top (both who spend the full cap), away from home to make the GF. They'll then have to beat a Leeds team that always spends the full cap as well.

I think to even it up for the big clubs Salford should play with 11. They don't deserve to mix it in such exalted company.

[Dunbar]

4 minutes ago, SalfordSlim said:

You're right. Way too easy for a team like Salford with the lowest cap spend in the league.

They'll only have to beat the team who finished 3rd and the team that finished top (both who spend the full cap), away from home to make the GF. They'll then have to beat a Leeds team that always spends the full cap as well.

I think to even it up for the big clubs Salford should play with 11. They don't deserve to mix it in such exalted company.

I think your mixing up a few too many arguments in that post.

[SalfordSlim]

4 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

I think your mixing up a few too many arguments in that post.

Nah just laughing at some of the guff on here as usual. 

 

[gingerjon]

23 minutes ago, Damien said:

The last page or so sums I think the play offs are contrived as well.

Play-offs are contrived. Sport is contrived.

Rugby league has six tackles for no reason other than it worked better as a spectacle than four and much better than having no limit.

[moorside roughyed]

30 minutes ago, Just Browny said:

You'll need to update the folk who write the Cambridge dictionary as their definition is far more permissive:

league noun [C] (SPORT)

 

B1

a group of teams playing a sport who take part in competitions between each other:

The whole aim of a forum is for people to express a view. I have. No wonder the games on its way out when they get this for just expressing their point of view. Oh,and by the way I haven't had a look at the Cambridge dictionary or the Oxford one for that matter before posting this.

[Dunbar]

1 minute ago, SalfordSlim said:

Nah just laughing at some of the guff on here as usual. 

 

So you think having an opinion that we should have a play off system that rewards teams that finish higher in the league and provides a bigger challenge to those that finish lower is guff?

[Gomersall]

1 hour ago, Bod said:

It's an end of season knockout cup and should never have been implemented to decide the season long Champions. 

More seasons’ champions have been decided via a play off system than a FPTP system. Play offs aren’t a SL invention in British rugby league.

[SalfordSlim]

2 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

So you think having an opinion that we should have a play off system that rewards teams that finish higher in the league and provides a bigger challenge to those that finish lower is guff?

So is Saints only having to play 1 play off game at home not an advantage? The other teams have to play 2 games and Wigan (2nd) had home advantage, Hudds (3rd) had home advantage.

Neither Wigan or Hudds used it. 

What other advantage do they need?

PS. Does this conversation come up every year or is just because there's a distinct possibility that Leeds & Salford might be at OT this week people are seeing their arris's?

 

[Gomersall]

1 hour ago, DavidM said:

Yes sometimes playoffs seem designed to be complicated . In a 12 team league what’s wrong with 1v4 and 2v3

Not enough reward for finishing in the top 2?

[Dunbar]

6 minutes ago, SalfordSlim said:

So is Saints only having to play 1 play off game at home not an advantage? The other teams have to play 2 games and Wigan (2nd) had home advantage, Hudds (3rd) had home advantage.

Neither Wigan or Hudds used it. 

What other advantage do they need?

PS. Does this conversation come up every year or is just because there's a distinct possibility that Leeds & Salford might be at OT this week people are seeing their arris's?

 

As I said before,  I believe a second chance for the top team (top 2) is appropriate as well home advantage.  Plus lower teams always being sudden death and away from home.

So kind of the advantages that you mention but more so.

[Gomersall]

9 minutes ago, SalfordSlim said:

So is Saints only having to play 1 play off game at home not an advantage? The other teams have to play 2 games and Wigan (2nd) had home advantage, Hudds (3rd) had home advantage.

Neither Wigan or Hudds used it. 

What other advantage do they need?

PS. Does this conversation come up every year or is just because there's a distinct possibility that Leeds & Salford might be at OT this week people are seeing their arris's?

 

Every year.

[Damien]

16 minutes ago, Gomersall said:

More seasons’ champions have been decided via a play off system than a FPTP system. Play offs aren’t a SL invention in British rugby league.

Yes when we had Yorkshire and Lancashire leagues and teams played those from their own county more often. The moment we went to a divisional structure they were scrapped and remained that way for 23 years as they served no purpose. SL did not introduce play offs for the same historical reasons as you keep quoting, they were simply copying the NRL. Now yes, we now have loop fixtures and Magic, but these are not the reasons we now have play offs and these reasons could easily disappear overnight if so desired.

[whatmichaelsays]

8 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

As I said before,  I believe a second chance for the top team (top 2) is appropriate as well home advantage.  Plus lower teams always being sudden death and away from home.

So kind of the advantages that you mention but more so.

I agree that the original top five system was probably the system that rewarded league position most effectively. I also liked that we only lost one team each round, which felt like it kept engagement up for longer. 

That said, there was often the suggestion that whichever side won the 1vs2 qualifier was going into the GF "undercooked", having had two out of three weeks off prior. 

No system is perfect. 

[Just Browny]

28 minutes ago, moorside roughyed said:

The whole aim of a forum is for people to express a view. I have. No wonder the games on its way out when they get this for just expressing their point of view. Oh,and by the way I haven't had a look at the Cambridge dictionary or the Oxford one for that matter before posting this.

No you expressed your opinion as fact. I specifically looked for any markers of opinion but there were none.

[Wholly Trinity]

Nostalgia's not what it used to be...

Perhaps the problem is the age of posters on here. The majority? hark back to the good old days of fptp from '73 to '97.

I like the play-offs for similar nostalgic reasons. My team have been crowned champions twice but never been league leaders whereas Cas won the hub cap but have never been champions 

They also forget that a team could have won the league with 5 games to go, or only 2 teams in contention with even more rounds left. Damp squib and dead rubbers galore. 

Sporting competitions are by definition contrived and artificial. Everyone knows what needs to be done at the start of the season. Catalans being beaten at home was a shock. Wigan losing at home for the first time this year even more so. Don't underestimate the achievement of Leeds (spits) and how they turned their season around with a new coach. With fptp their season would have been over after 10 rounds. Sport needs fairytale endings. These need to be unlikely but not impossible. 

I guess resistance is to be expected when I espouse 12 team playoffs from 2x10 divisions...

[Damien]

5 minutes ago, Wholly Trinity said:

Nostalgia's not what it used to be...

Perhaps the problem is the age of posters on here. The majority? hark back to the good old days of fptp from '73 to '97.

I like the play-offs for similar nostalgic reasons. My team have been crowned champions twice but never been league leaders whereas Cas won the hub cap but have never been champions 

They also forget that a team could have won the league with 5 games to go, or only 2 teams in contention with even more rounds left. Damp squib and dead rubbers galore. 

Sporting competitions are by definition contrived and artificial. Everyone knows what needs to be done at the start of the season. Catalans being beaten at home was a shock. Wigan losing at home for the first time this year even more so. Don't underestimate the achievement of Leeds (spits) and how they turned their season around with a new coach. With fptp their season would have been over after 10 rounds. Sport needs fairytale endings. These need to be unlikely but not impossible. 

I guess resistance is to be expected when I espouse 12 team playoffs from 2x10 divisions...

Just to pick up on these two points in bold. I simply don't see how you can complain about damp squib and dead rubbers galore under FPTP when that is what we consistently see under the play offs to a far greater extent. Under the old FPTP system teams still kept going to qualify for the Premiership as per now and tried to qualify in the top 8. We also had 2 or 3 teams relegated so more teams battling to avoid relegation. There was far more to play for than now.

Then you essentially admit the first 10 rounds under the play offs were a complete waste of time, that never happened under FPTP.

There is also nothing contrived about a league where everyone plays each other twice with the team that finishes top being Champions.

[paul hicks]

5 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

How about 6 from 14?

well with leagues of 10 coming in why not 6 from 10.  or with 2 leagues of ten open, it up to 16 from 20. end of the day if the top clubs are good enough, they will win it if there not they don't deserve to.

all this rubbish of its not fair is just the way society now thinks everything should always be fair when the fact is it's not.

yes, it's a ridiculous post but no more so than the ones who want to change our games history 

 

[paul hicks]

18 minutes ago, Damien said:

Just to pick up on these two points in bold. I simply don't see how you can complain about damp squib and dead rubbers galore under FPTP when that is what we consistently see under the play offs to a far greater extent. Under the old FPTP system teams still kept going to qualify for the Premiership as per now and tried to qualify in the top 8. We also had 2 or 3 teams relegated so more teams battling to avoid relegation. There was far more to play for than now.

Then you essentially admit the first 10 rounds under the play offs were a complete waste of time, that never happened under FPTP.

There is also nothing contrived about a league where everyone plays each other twice with the team that finishes top being Champions.

pity we don't have a league where everyone plays each other twice then. wonder if IMG or whatever there called would bring in a 14-team league and get rid of the playoffs. you know the big game at the end of the season that has the biggest attendance and brings in the money for the RFL.

[Damien]

4 minutes ago, paul hicks said:

well with leagues of 10 coming in why not 6 from 10.  or with 2 leagues of ten open, it up to 16 from 20. end of the day if the top clubs are good enough, they will win it if there not they don't deserve to.

all this rubbish of its not fair is just the way society now thinks everything should always be fair when the fact is it's not.

yes, it's a ridiculous post but no more so than the ones who want to change our games history 

 

Absolutely none of that makes any sense at all.

[Tommygilf]

South Sydney are 80 minutes away from a Grand Final despite finishing 7th and having a 14-10 record.

They only have the hurdle of the 1st placed Panthers to get over.

Joke if you ask me!