If the system was a league table there is no doubt both Leeds and Warrington would be in the top three battling it out.

As for Kevin Sinfield there is no doubt he is the most important cog in the Leeds machine. "Man of Steel" Sam Tomkins has the ability, but nowhere near the mentality of Kevin Sinfield. Some people are born winners and Sinfield is one of them, I think this is the reason he gets so much stick as this leads to a lot of jealousy, which most of his critics on hear just come up with elaborate ways to justify, which is just sad I'm afraid.

Sinfield is picked for england at 6 for the same reason he is at Leeds - he's excellent at maintaining composure throughout a game and therefore keeping the structure of the side intact.

His limitations are as above - not quick enough to be a world class stand off (I'd also argue he simply doesn't make enough killer passes either), and not big enough to be a world class 13. But as a captain, goalkicker and simple presence on the field his value is immense.

He's a way better player than Sutton (the invisible man in far too many games) for exactly that reason, and that's why Mcnamara has chosen him at 6, because so many British players with seemingly far more natural ability go completely to pieces when it matters. I'd probably pick him at 13 for England, with the role of moving the side around and letting the likes of Tomkins and Widdopp make the big plays inside the opposition 20.

In the right NRL side he'd be excellent - the Broncos this year for example would have killed to have someone with his composure rather than the erratic Corey Norman. He'd be excellent at the Dogs as well, less so for other teams like the Storm or Manly, who have less need for what he can give.

It doesnt, it rewards a team at the end of the season who are able to handle the play offs, if warrington had won? would it reward inconsistency. No.

Warrington and wigan had a massive advantage and werent able to win their games. thats not the fault of the team who can win.

Leeds had to beat the form team in the competition, away at france, away to the league leaders, and beat the team who came 2nd and won the challenge cup.

Leeds v Warrington at Headingley this season is a prime example of the problem you have with a play off system.

Decent enough contest, but no intensity or drama, because both sides knew a defeat meant almost nothing in the grand scheme of things....At the end, players were laughing and smiling with each other, no grim faces or tears on the side of the losers, Tony Smith giving interviews about how it was a good workout and how there is a long way to go in the season.

It isn't what the majority of people going to games want to see, though I admit I don't have any quick answer to how to solve it - I just fear that at a time when we want to encourage crowds to RL matches, we are actually doing the opposite.

As an alternative, how about having the league position decided by points difference rather than 2 pts for each win?

This would allow for more possible movement each week if one of the teams failed to turn up and conceded 50+ which in turn should encourage teams to approach the matches with "more intensity".

Wally Lewis?