Quote: SmokeyTA "The Challenge Cup isnt meant to decide the best team in the country. It isnt and never was formatted to do so and it never attempted to do so. so as a judgement of the best team in the country it is worthless.
And Saints, in an uneven fixture list won the LLS by 1 point in each of those seasons, besides the GF decides the best team, we know this at the start of each and every season, being top after 27 rounds makes you champions as much as being top after 10 rounds does.
winning the 09 GF meant more by becoming the first 3 in a row champions than it did to win the LLS as well. frankly i couldnt care less about coming first or second in the league. Its a build up to the play-offs.'"
Isn't there an uneven fixture list every year? It's a bit of a cop-out. We could always bring up the Millennium Magic incident if we wanted to get an extra 2 points back!
Like I said previously, the champion side only need to come good at the end of the year. But is it better coming good at the end of the year three times in a row, or coming good all year and winning everything? Which one is the bigger achievement?
Quote: SmokeyTA "plus, when we change to a conference system the LLS will be as worthwhile as the lazenby cup'"
We're changing to conferences?
And if we did, there wouldn't be a LLS anyway, because there wouldn't be a league leader. There might be a conference leader, and they may get a shield, but that obviously wouldn't be as important as the GF because it wouldn't feature all the best teams.
Just on a side note, if Catalans won the league from 8th three times in a row, would people still consider them the best team in the country? Or that they just came good at the end?