Caught much of NZ warriors this season? I've watched quite abit to check up on Tomkins, and they would literally put 50 points on the best super league has to offer.

They are 9th in the NRL.

Conrad hurrell is a beast, they must feed him raw meat, he'd smash through Watkins like a rag doll.

Sometimes, one team is 30 or 40 points better than the other on that given day.

Frankly I think it's an insult to the players to suggest that those kind of gaps come about purely because they can't be bothered.

Still, if we want to introduce more gimmicks to the sport until it becomes virtually unrecognisable...

Not sure about that.

Scorelines blow out because a team can have a purple patch where they may score 3/4 trys in a short space of time. That could still happen in quarters.

A team could be awful in one half, but also in two quarters!

There's a shocker on the VT at the moment suggesting we do away with awarding 2 points for a win (and 1 for a draw) and that the table should be determined solely on best points difference from a teams For & Against column.

There will always be blow out scores. RL is a tough unforgiving game. I have played in many matches which appears to be even until 60 mins then one team or other gets blown away in the last quarter.

The game is so much about momentum, that once your energy levels dip, you find it very hard to get back in the game. Even though its tough to be on the end of a large defeat, with most of the points in the last quarter I think its infinitely better to how it is in RU, where you can have been dominant all game long but not have a big lead through repeated slowing down of the game then a fluke breakaway try loses you the game.

In RL you tend to get what you deserve, especially if you are patient. Things like possession and territory count over the course of a game.

I posted this on the VT a few days ago, but for the Super 8 fixtures how about increasing the points for a win to 3? Say there's a difference of 6 points between 4th and 8th, it would then be 2 wins difference between the two as opposed to 3. If teams at the bottom of the 8 hit a purple patch in form they have a better chance of reaching the semi final spots. The teams at the top can still hold them off though if they keep winning, so it remains fair.

Agreed but that doesn't explain why there are significant more blow outs in SL than in the NRL - fatigue is not the sole preserve of SL players?

is not but the NRL is more even with most clubs able to spend full cap, which I guess is why the top 8 changes so frequently. SL is more uneven so there will be more mismatches

I wouldn't go that far.
2013
#of games with a winning margin of 30+ points:
SL = 36
NRL = 33

Total # of games incl playoffs =
SL = 198
NRL = 201

It's the total number of games played in 2013 in each competition, to give context to the first figure.

But my point is there's this general assumption that there are far fewer blowout scores in the NRL when I don't think it's true. I see plenty of blowout scores in the NRL too.

BUMP

It seems no team wants to cement top spot... If next season follows a similar pattern then the top 8 will be very exciting.

An interesting idea.

I don't think it is a case of not wanting to. It is more a case of teams either not able to because of injuries (e.g. Saints) or teams like Leeds looking at the bigger picture and not going all out to finish top.