If you think about it....the playoffs and Grand Final are how we find the champs. So it's the regular rounds that are the money spinning exploitation of fans and TV subscribers. It's just a way of guaranteeing fixtures.

Why hadn't English Rugby League thought of deciding its' champions by a playoff and championship decuider before Sky TV came along eh?

Oh hang on........

Anyone with half a brain knows the GF series were nothing more than a money spinning initiative.

With regards to the format we have had, I knew Sainst would benefit just as much as they would suffer.

It was as inevitable as night follows day. I can't really say I was too bothered about the 'fairness' of the system, notwithstanding the fact that I thought Leeds were the best team in the competition in 2007 anyway, irrespective of League tables.

I notice how you dont mention last season in your last paragraph

Football is becomoing more and more of an outpost with regards to using a league system to decide the champions:

Rugby League
Rugby Union
Limited overs cricket
Basketball
Darts
Formula One
NFL
Basketball
the list goes on

have all moved away from a straight points system.

indeed even the champions league uses a league system to try to ensure that it gets the teamsthat it wants to qualify for the lucrative play off phase.

It's the weekly rounds that are the money spinning initiative.
Head to head playoffs are clearly the obvious and fair way to find which team is best. The drawback being that they don't give a regular set of home fixtures and severely limit the earning potential of the teams eliminated early in the competition.

You'll note that St Helens and Bradford have had a go on both the swings and the roundabouts here.

Any noises coming from there will almost certainly be hypocritical whining.

Wigan have come close to having a crack but obviously need a higher finishing spot to launch from. Leeds fans at this point just luv it but we'll be on the wrong end of it sometime (probably).

The first past the post system can only be put into place if all teams play each other only on a home and away basis, with none of the "extra fixtures"

As an example, last season in the "normal" Supersleague round Wigan played Saints 4 times, Leeds 3 times and Catalan 3 times.

That's almost 40% of their games against the top 3 teams.

If for example last seasons champions had been decided on the top of the league system they should have only been 6 games against those teams.

In other words the TV bosses have there way has it generates more money, as with all play-off competitions..It's all down to money in the coffers...

Will the English Prem ever have a GF....No!

Yet they're one of the the most money orientated businesses going. Was the talk of a "39th game" not suggested for revenue purposes?

Which pretty much suggests you are tying yourself in knots and contradicting yourself

Is the "English Prem" really a good example? How many teams have actually won it over how many years?

They don't have a salary cap in the "English Prem" either? Should we scrap that?

In professional sport you do know what the "professional" bit means don't you?

Problem for the emglish Prem is that they would have to cut the league down to about 15/16 teams in order to fit the play off games in and nobodies prepared to suggest that. There is also the problem that by having a knockout competition at the end there would be potential pitfalls for the big 4 which may mean that they are knocked out by a lesser team and could affecttheir qualification for the Champions League.

The big clubs see the Premier League as a means to qualify for the lucrative Champions League anyway, which to them is the play off system.