I can't believe some people still haven't got over the fact that the champions come from a play-off situation.

Firstly It happens in about 90% of sports nowadays apart from European football.

And secondly it's hardly a new thing in English RL in fact over 2/3rds of our history the champions of England has been decided over a play-off history.

The Old Trafford show piece has been invaluable in the preservation of our great sport. And long may it continue.

It'd be great if it comes down to Cas vying for the League Leaders in the south of France live on Sky. I like how finishing top secures a place in the World Club Series too. If that's expanded into a 2 or 3 week tournament (unlikely at this stage, I know) as opposed to just a series of fixtures it would give some real importance to that top spot.

The reason why some of us don't see the playoffs as an equal match to a league system is because a league system due to it's length tests a whole squad and allows for injuries and freak results.

The playoffs by being knock out in nature are subject the vageries of chance far more than a league covering 6-8 months.

If a team loses 2 or 3 key play makers before a playoff game down to the random chance of say a virus or food poisioning. Does that automatically make them a poorer team than those who finished say 8th, but just manage to have a full compliment of players and a bit of luck of the green. No it does not.

I agree the playoffs have been a success and I agree that all the club agree that the champions crowned are the winners of the GF. But when you talk about who is the best club in SL. I don't think the GF is a fair reflection of this.

Just as say if Usain Bolt was struck down with injury before the Olympics or World Championships it does not mean the winner of the 100m's is the fastest runner in the world.

Knockout is great for entertainment but a poor measure of ability.
Just as I'm sure most people on here would not accept a knockout principle when being assessed at their jobs. Being the best at your job for the whole year, only to be marked as a poor performer that year because on the day everyone gets assessed you happened to have the flu.

What I'd do is perform half heartedly most of the year then put all my effort into peaking for the assesment.

No one ever really kicked off about it when we had a different playoff format and the winner was pretty much always 1st and 2nd because it basically struck the best of both worlds because the structure was far harder to come from lower down which was punishment for not being consistent enough.

The grand final is fine and here to stay, what needs to change (for the billionth time and every rl fan knows) is the playoff format.

The top 5 was the best system we've had but we'll never return to anything like that because it would mean less games for SKY. SKY are the ones lurking in the shadows pulling all the strings with the RFL as mere puppets. Everytime theres been a major change in the structure of the league it has resulted in more games. Who do you think orchestrated the latest shift? The new structure will once again result in more games overall. The game as a whole pretty much has no control over the direction it takes because without SKY there would be no game, it would go bust.

I can see where you are coming from but the bottom line is the Grand final has grown to a stage where RL simply couldn't afford to go without it. It's the biggest day in the rl calender and draws more attention from the media and floating supporters than any other RL game. It's what the CC final used to be. No other RL game get's as much attention from other top sportsmen/women and high profile people in general, you only have to circulate twitter on grand final day.

Great post FlexWheeler

And while all of the changes keep happening, the fans of the spot are expected to smile and nod their heads, like a certain insurance company's give away toy,
oh yes.

I agree the GF is the top game and we need the exposure. But financially we need a league system the fans can follow as without it the game is a basket case.

Yup, agreed. Which is why the top 5 system was good because in reality if you didn't finish high up the table your chances were alot slimmer, so the week in week out games carried alot more weight but you still had the big end of season show piece.

Also, if you finished 5th you were not rewarded with a home fixture in week one to ease you in.You had to play 4th away, followed by 3rd away then the loser of 1st vs 2nd away. A much harder route, which is why it was probably never done but if it had been, would have been seriously earned.

if your top after 27 games youve earned it. i'd say a lot of you are forgetting how good saints were before they lost key players. many teams in the past have won the league but been poor in end of season games(the old premiership and old challenge cup finals) due to decimated squads

Not under the current system.

they'll have earned the league leaders shield

Which means nothing under the current system.