Some one has been looking very hard to come up with that little jem.

As Stains are the league leaders then I would say yes (they have won more games dont you know).
Wigan have won the CC so they are cup holders and were the best team in that comp thus the only winners of a comp until league leaders came along.

Now the actual champions are the winners of the GF as I have said all along.
If Stains win or Wigan or Salford or whoever wins the GF they will be the rightful Champions as the rules go.

That's the key part.

The trophy created when Bradford (I think) were moaning in the late 90s early 00s when they couldn't win the big one against Saints is called the League LEADERS Shield. Nobody has won the league until they win the Grand Final (and in most cases nobody will remember them) but they led the league after phase 1. It's the equivalent of winning your group in the World Cup.

I disagree with the playoffs because they make regular season games meaningless (see the last three weeks) and basically turn the season into a 3/4/5 week period which then comes down to luck. The best method was the original top 5 because it actually rewarded your league position and meant you had to beat every side above you to win the competition.

Personally I'd go back to playing sides home and away, top of the league win the league and if you aren't good enough to have anything to play for after 10 games then tough, improve.

I agree with most of that, we've had play offs top 5 top 6, top 8 and all thats done is lower the intensity of games during the regular rounds which has lowered standards and game attraction the latter reduces new fans to our sport.

The RFL/SKY seem to like long drawn out dramas in the play offs, as it stands now as top 6, eventually someone will be champions from 6th place having won less than 50% of their league games. For me I would go top 3, first place rewarded with a direct place in the grand final, that way you don't need a League Leaders Shield. As you say if your team is outside the play offs then try harder to avoid being a "dead rubber" team.

Although we don't have the right amount of intensity in games we do still have the physicality, these loop fixtures and double weekend fixtures especially the latter are contributing to injuries and weakened teams. So I would just go to a 13 team league on a home and away basis with relegation/promotion every 2 years to give a promoted team a settling in year.

The thing if my memory serves me well didnt the RL have the league leaders as the champions and then a seperate premiership trophy in a play off series,top 5 ?.
This was early 90s changed later as you alluded to.

Premiership used to be top 8 and was scrapped in 1998 when the playoffs came in.

That is what I am trying to say,RL should have the Champions then a premiership play off as a separate comp.
We would have the true Champs then a extra comp which would be played at Old Trafford or where ever as it was back then,you would still get a great crowd and the money in the play offs would be welcome to the clubs involved.

Nope the Premiership was declining at the end there and nowadays it would be a real damp squib.

Proving your mettle on the biggest stage and under real pressure is a true test of champions.

To be honest I can see that,the rules are GF winners are the champs then that is the rules.
Was the premiership declining though could check the figures but cant be ars*d this morn.

I think the RL changed it from 6 then to 8 then to 4,I know as always they like to change things as they go along.

It peaked early to mid 90s after it moved to Old Trafford's and then declined a bit. By '97 it all felt a bit pointless coming when it did after SL ended.

I think most people agree that the table toppers at the end of the season should be champions.The problem is club chairman want the additional fixtures for their revenue and Sky want the big end of season showcase. It's not just a Super League problem, why should a team that finish top of the championship then have to play off to see if they are promoted.

Do they really? It's a very soccer mindset thing if they do, not much to do with Rugby League or its history, or indeed most other sports in the world.

I certainly do. The reason we had the old playoffs in the 60s/70s was because the season fixtures were lopsided. Play one another home and away and everything is fair.

Even football has playoffs though which I always argue with football fans. A team could finish 6th in the Championship, 20 points behind 3rd and be promoted to the PL.

As a fan I disagree with them for the reasons I've said BUT we all know the rules at the start so it is what it is.

9 grand final wins, 1 championship, 14 Grand Final appearances overall, 10 LLS, 8 Challenge Cups in 26 years

Cringe.

28 pieces of silver ware in 26 years of the full time professional superleague era, no one else comes close. Whats alarming is that we will have a stronger squad next year.