i was thinking the same, but maybe the treble champions is the point people are making, rather than merely super league champions 2009.

The award has the word "personality" in it.

Thats the forehead out of the running

I think that is indeed the point! Is this achievement better than Saints 2006 achievement of the treble of CC, Hub-cap and SL title? The three previous seasons Saints record was average at best with the hub-cap in 2005 but not reaching the final and nothing in 2003 & 2004! We have now won three SL titles in a row as well as one of the two WCC we have appeared in and have the double in the bag in 2009. Other than the CC we have dominated SL for the last three years and are arguably the (because of the three straight SL titles) the most successful team in SL history.

If we had beaten Manly in March and now have a treble would that make a difference to people's opinion? Is the CC the problem as to why at least people don't seem to think we at least deserve to be talked about as possible (because I don't think we will get the award) winners?

We have a little way off being "better than Saints" in Super League history books

In terms of total competition points I think we do quite well. The gap is something like 8 points over the 12 years

The thing is its sports personality of the YEAR. Our past stuff will mean nothing I'm afraid

I was laughing at your purely conceptual as opposed as statistical based analysis of success. Yes, arguably indeed. Good luck 'arguing' it.

Sorry, you are the one dissenting and therefore wishing, I assume, to highlight the fact you do disagree to my statement, which I quite clearly stated was 'arguable'? Surely therefore it is implicit in my statement that I agree that under various angles of scrutiny it is not likely to stand-up as a definitive statement!

The thing is I am not sure I agree with the statement that we are, because of statistical reasoning and other reasoned arguments. However, you are the one being smug and clearly think we are not, otherwise you would not have responded as you did. So, it is not up to me to argue as, as any good debater will know, the it is up to the opposition to disprove the propositions statement and not the other way round!

# of times SL champions
St Helens - 3
Bradford Bulls - 3
Wigan - 1

Leeds - 4

I excluded the years where Saints and Bradford cheated.

I think that is the most reasoned argument I agree. Both Wigan and Saints did 'trebles' in the years they won and we only did a double and arguably Wigan should have won it more than once during their dominating years!

Do you repeat that to the honours board at the RFL... Has the text changed yet. Good luck.

The most succesful team of the SL era is St Helens. Fact.

The most succesful team in rugby league history is Wigan. Fact

Both Lancastrian teams.

Lancashire sets the bar.