My personal view point, I would rather simplify the whole process. 4 Teams play for the right.

1st plays 3rd

2nd plays 4th

Grand Final.

With just 14 teams involved in the league, it makes for a more logical end to the season for me. The top four in a play off. No home advantages, all played at neutral grounds.

I may be wrong but this would excite the fans, ensure full gates, and maybe make the other code and Joe Public tune into the concept of the RFL play off's.

Just an idea.

To be fair I was only trying to make Yed's idea a little more realistic as 9 neutral games would hit teams too much in the pocket.

Something has to be done. IMO it's reducing the teams. How the league format would change would take a fair bit of thinking though. I know others want 2 divisions of 10. Some just want P&R back.

Back on topic, the playoffs should not be rewarding mediocrity. Anyone who loses more than they win should not be competing for the title. This isn't a dig at Wakey in anyway, they knew the rules, played by them and earned their spot.

I would say top 6 based on a 14 team league. Problem is, probably only teams in 1-8 only have a realistic chance of making the playoffs with a 1/3 of the season to go leaving the other 6 with nothing to play for. Maybe 2-3 of these still trying to avoid the wooden spoon but 3 teams season would be over by round 18 unless a miracle occurs. And no, I don't want P&R back to keep the games alive in the basement battles.

It'd never happen, but I do think the 12 team, split after 22 rounds, league would work very well, especially for Sky. Not only do they get the huge last 10 rounds (imagine a mini league of Wire, Wigan, Saints, Leeds, Catalan and Hull with 3 televised games every weekend for example), but they also get the battle to get into the top six which would start around round 18 or so.

Admittedly, after 22 rounds the bottom six would have little to play for, but that's not really that much different to how things are anyway. Perhaps something could be introduced as an incentive for the bottom six whether it be prize money or even first pick of any OOC players at the end of the season.

True that. I'm sure we've all had the same "Surely the champions are the team that finishes top of the league? How can it be someone else?" conversations countless times down the years.

That's probably one reason why they don't generate interest from more casual sports fans, because most simply don't like the concept, then when they hear the complexities of how the fixtures are worked out it just sounds over complicated and daft.

I think the play offs need to stay, but I would favour a system where every game is a knock out with no second chances, which would in turn also guarantee no repeat fixtures.

Exactly. You explain the fact that we don't plat first past the post and then have to try to explain and/or justify why a team that loses in the first round can still win the final. (and why we have two sets of semi finals as I had to explain last week)