I am confused, we finished top of the league at the end of the season and yet we get no Shield, I read it is now for the club that finish top of the Super 8, to me this is wrong it should be for the team that tops the league at the end of the regular season.

If points were not carried over into the super 8s then yes, but they are so I can understand exactly why it's given at the end of the super 8s

I can see why they've put the shield to the end of the 8's but personally I think it should be at the end of the 23 rounds.

I wonder if 'Rhinos' fans would be saying the same if St Helens or Wigan currently sat top.


Probably not...

Oh sod off.

Wait, I thought the LLS was an irrelevant hubcap?

Has it changed now Leeds are top after 23 rounds?

it's not a major award, but it's a nice to have. It means more in the current setup but is still small compared to the SL title. It should only be given after the 30 games though

Yeah it should be AFTER 30 games.

Imagine a scenario were we lose all/most of our next 7 games and finish 5th and not even in the playoffs......would be ridiclous to have the LLS in our possession then.

I have no interest in a League Leaders Shield. Our champions are the GF winners, and because of our uneven fixture list the club top after 30 rounds has proved nothing more than the club top after 22 or 23 rounds.

When we won the title from 5th we used to yawn when fans of LLS winners used to moan that they should be champions.I would like the shield as well as the SL title,but I accept the conditions of the comp

Not particularly any more ridiculous than a team finishing 1st given 2 home semi finals and losing both.

I'd say it probably actually is. Having something that says LEAGUE LEADERS on it and finishing 5th would be ridiculous. If Huddersfield was top after 23 Rounds and then slipped to 5th after 30 Rounds I think most (if not all) on here would say it's a joke to call them LLS winners (Especially if Leeds were the team who ended up in 1st after Hudds' fall down the table and didn't get awarded it instead).

Again, I'd say not particularly anymore ridiculous than a team finishing 1st after 27 rounds being given the League Leaders Shield then eventually finishing 5th after the playoffs. Which was possible under the previous system.

All this system has done is take away playoff games and put them into an additional qualifying section.

As I said, I understand the reasons why it's given out when it is and it really isn't something I'm going to get that worked up over or anything.

I actually quite like this system altogether, my biggest reservation of it is that the top 2 don't get a big enough advantage for finishing there as the playoffs don't give a second chance and it's a bit too easy for 3rd and 4th to get to Old Trafford.

Other than that I think it's a good system. I do get p|ssed off at people in the media saying its complicated though. It's really no more complicated than any of the playoff systems we've used.

Leeds haven't got the LLS because the league season hasn't finished yet. It's a simple as that.

Another 7 games to go, boys and girls.

I am certainly never going to get worked up by winning the Shield, or not as may be. I have always bought into the concept of the Grand final being the be all and end all regards who the true champions are and nothing would change were we to finish top at the end of 30 rounds.

I do hope we can see it through though this time. Smith and Bluey managed it only once each during their reigns, it's 6 years since we last did it, and Mcdermott hasn't even managed a top 2 finish during his time yet.