As do you when a season of attaining the highest qualifying position is reversed with the advantages that were hard earned shifting directly to a team who entered the Play-Offs in a lower finishing position. Most crucially the loss of home advantage for the Elimination Semi-Final. Prior to this flawed model has this happened before over the period 1998 to 2008?

What is the reward for finishing 2nd under this format? A game against a very dangerous opponent who only finished one place lower on the ladder with a reasonable probability of coming unstuck and finding yourself up against it. If that's the case why bother during the Regular Rounds, makes more sense to toss it off, short-change the public and have an easier run from lower down with less expectations. Is that what the RFL are trying to achive, to undermine the integrity of the Regular Rounds?

For the Play-Offs to work fairly IMO the League placings should matter and for as long as we have home advantage throughout to qualify for the final that should go with seedings just as it did from 1998 to 2008.

The fact you are now tipping a team finishing 6th to knock out a team finishing 2nd in week 2 shows we are using a dysfunctional format invented only to reward momentum and create the possibilities for upsets.

In fact i think huddersfield have had a pretty cushty time of things.

Get the opportunity to be one home game away from grand final.

Lose.

Now they get another chance and a home game to get to the semi again.

I think the great thing about the current playoff system is that there are pretty good positives for all teams in the top 5.

Well this systems been in place 2 seasons.

We've has 1st vs 2nd.

and err... 1st vs 2nd

And guess what?

This season will be 1st v 2nd/3rd.

You get 2 bites at the cherry and a home game to begin with.

Unfortunately for once R_R downplayed the significance as he failed to mention that Wigan also supplied every player (for both sides incidentally) in the mid-season England V Exiles match as well as having to fit the re-arranged Castleford game in mid-week also.

Put that one down to Jamie Peacock bizarrely suggesting starting the SL season with a bang rather than a whimper. What the heck was he thinking of other than to disadvantage the reigning Champions even further obviously. Don't recall his suggesting this to open the '08, '09 or 2010 seasons. Strange that.

__________



By finishing 2nd you should have earned the right to a home semi-final over 27 rounds, otherwise what's the reward or point beyond qualifying where it's harder not to qualify.

You shouldn't then have to put that at risk by playing the 3rd placed team - not when there are cushy formalities given to the teams finishing 5th and 6th.

You can still get that. You just have to win a home game against a team that placed lower than you.



5th and 6th have knockout games right from the start and will have to win away from home to get there, that's a certainty.

Cushy formality is complete opinion and not fact.

I believe to be crowned champions a team needs to be able to win high pressure games against their rivals as well as consistently beating teams week in week out. I think the current format balances those reasonably well.

Try as I might, I'm afraid I just can't get upset about any perceived iniquities in the present play off formulae. Nor I suspect are the players and coaches of the other teams who are in the mix.

You know what the SuperLeague set up is before the season's kickoff, and I prefer to expend my energy on supporting my team, rather than than attempting to rewrite the rule books.

Personally, I'm delighted with our weekend result, and look forward to our clash with Hudds, which could be an outstanding match, although I think we'll get a very harsh reality check the week after.

You could look at all the playoff formats we've had and put in decent arguments for and against aspects within them.

Look at the old format and the massive weight in advanatge from 2nd place to 3rd place when theoreticallythe placing could decided on just points difference yet 3rd would have to win 3 knockout games (one away from home) to make the final and 2nd had 2 bites at the cherry and needed to win just one game.

I think bar the club call the current format is the best we've had and generates the most money as theres more games involved.

Is it true that Wigan have not had a week off since the start of the season?
Maybe tvoc would kindly confirm that for me.
Plus has it ever happened before?

Well according to Eddie Hemmings, correct me If i'm wrong tvoc, but they haven't had a week off all season, what with the CC and WCC.

Les Catalans 56 Hull KR 6

Leeds Rhinos 42 Hull FC 10

Yes I can see your point.

Hindsight.

I can see tvoc's point. The playoff format seems to have been designed with a close competition in mind, there are only small differences in finishing a few places up or down within the eight but the league table often shows massive differences between those clubs as we do not have a close competition

Top 5 from 12 teams would be my preference

So where's the advantage for finishing 4th over 5th?

Getting a 2nd bite at the cherry isn't exactly a positive when it's almost inevitably going to be needed, and 5th get a home game (which you've said is a positive thing for 2nd) whereas 4th don't? 5th also get the privilege of playing the lowest ranked team left in the competition, at home. A team that's lost as many games than they've won, at home.

Huddersfield were always going to have to play 3 games to reach the final. If you'd have asked them which 3 games they'd have preferred...

Hull at home, Leeds away, Warrington away (if they'd finished 5th)
Warrington away, Leeds at home, Warrington away (now they've finished 4th)

I'd much rather have our option.

Look at last year... We were capable of a performance that beat the eventual champions. We just weren't capable of it TWICE. If we do the same this year (i.e. play out of our skin and beat the league leaders on their own patch) we're in the Grand Final. Last year, even though we finished in the "better" league position, doing that very same thing still wasn't enough to get us to the final, because we had to do it twice.

If we'd have finished 5th last year (not 4th), we'd have played Crusaders at HQ, then Huddersfield away, then that winning performance at the DW would've been the only time we played Wigan, we all know what happened there, and we'd have been in the final.

It's probably going to be 1st/2nd/3rd in the final anyway, so it's all irrelevant, but finishing 5th is much better than finishing 4th in my opinion. And it shouldn't be.