-if there isnt a problem with the present format-why are there so many threads on most of the rl forums saying there is

For me the problem is not Leeds winning from 5th, but the effect on the 27 rounds and the lack of interest among potential supporters if the play-off system is seen as being weighted in such a way which does not give the top one or two teams a suitable advantage for their league placing. And the issues with the play-off system have been discussed intermittently here through the season. For me at least this really isn't sour grapes against Leeds - I rather like a lot of their players and what they have done in the play-offs is very impressive indeed and they beat us fair and square last year and this. But what I want is to feel that it is four months rather than eleven before I watch some intense and meaningful fixtures where there is something at stake.

Like I said I can understand fans thinking that way so will ignore the foot stamping.

Seems to me your main purported criticism is that the attendences in the play offs were low as fans apparently vote with their feet in protest at the concept.

After 14 years.

The attendance at the final, or the attendances for the final since it's inception, each seem to disprove that notion though. It's clearly seen as a marquee event.

The reality is simply that the play off games are televised and don't benefit from season ticket attendance. Likewise the Challenge Cup rounds (which aren't all televised) don't get season ticket attendance and they provide, by your rationale, far more dissapointing attendances and as a result a far more urgent challenge. Wire have done incredibly well in the cup in recent years though, which, I'm sure, is totally unconnected to your concentrating solely on the play off system. Two days after Wire were defeated in it.

I'm also struggling to see how not having play off games or reducing their number will somehow raise more revenue.

Even leaving the flawed and rather disingenuous attendance argument aside you can't ignore the wants of the RFL, Sky, the clubs, the international management and wider media. They all completely buy into the play off concept.

That really leaves us with the true nub of the matter: whether the Grand final winner is a more worthy champion than the side who can accumulate the most points in the weekly rounds. There's clear arguments for both approaches. Personally I find it more appealing with play offs - they make for a much tougher challenge, allow for higher intensity, give a dramatic season finale rather than the damp squibs first past the post can provide and it lends itself to player management that recognises players can' be mentally or physically at their peak for 9 months solid.

For good or ill the game reverted to a championship in 1998 and for the last few years one club has proved better able to succeed in that environment. That's arguably not good for the game but it isn't a fault of the system only in how effectively different clubs prove able to apply themselves to it.

thats the whole point,leeds have done well in play offs,but in the regular season bugger all,cept get to wembley and lose -again-how can they be classed as sl champions.im really having to think about renewing my s/t , i prolly will, but the fact im having to think about it is causing me some concern as i love rl!but a team being crowned champions after finishing 5th ,again,really does leave a nasty taste !

You don't honestly believe that half a dozen clubs jockeying for position for 27 games and then stringing 3 or 4 top performances back to back is a tougher challenge than going all out to finish top after 27 games?

Wigan v Catalan: 7,232
Wire v Saints: 10,190
Leeds v Wakefield: 9,044
Hull v Huddersfield: 8,662
Catalan v Leeds: 11,523
Wire v Hull: 7,323
Wigan v Leeds: 8,235
Saints v Wire: 12,715

These figures are a negative for the sport. Every attendance is probably below each club's average attendance.

Something is wrong with the current set-up of the Play-offs.

Those figures will look much healthier in a few years when fans start to realise how pointless most regular league games are and league attendances start to fall.

-this-

This seems a far more honest critique - thanks.

I'd certainly agree that the weighting could be tweaked. Personally I preferred the old top 5 system as it rewarded the top 2 relative to the others far more but understand that top 8 can keep it more interesting at the lower end of the table - would Wakey have had their late surge if they had no chance of making the play offs? I doubt it.

Then that's indicative of what can happen in a simple league format. The title can be decided weeks before the season's end and few clubs are in the title race by the time we get to the last 4-6 weeks so have little to play for - unless you also bring back promotion/relegation too. Likewise, in a straight league format points and performance will still feel less vital the further away from the season's end you are - a team who loses a game in June certainly won't see it as the end of the world.

I'd also add a last point - that Leeds's route to the title wasn't easy. Home to the competition's form team, away to Catalans, away to the League Leaders and then against the cup winners and second in the table Wire, all with no second chances. Compared to that the route to the final for either Wigan or Wire seems far more straightforward - as it should be as reward for their placings, its just that Leeds were able to peak (and have the experience) to overcome the odds. I don't see that in itself as any cause for concern.

All televised games, none benefiting from season tickets and all pretty healthy when compared to the Challenge Cup...

^Excellent post (again) from Ian Scott there.

I've got my views on the play off format which I will save for a later day to avoid any sour grapes accusations. I have no problem with the play offs existence though, nor Leeds success.

If the team that finished top won the Grand Final every year there would be no point having it. Leeds have been inspirational.