A question for us all, given that Leeds finished 5th and in the regular season did not beat any of the top 4. Is it right that the History Books will now show Leeds Rhinos as Super League Champions 2011.

Have a think before you post, is it really for the good of our game that a team that won their final three games of a 30 game season are called Champions of Super League. I post a genuine question asking is it for the good of our great game that the fifth placed team are now called Champions 2011.

P.S. I have already posted my congrats to Leeds on their board.

BBC News (sportsdesk) have just been more than a bit "nasty" about our play-off set-up.
The woman overdub might as well have said it's a farce

Yes it captured interest in the Grand Final. In 2009 my feelings on another Leeds v Saints final were 'meh...seen it all before' but this year it felt unexpected and was good for the game IMO.

In a competition you are set down the rules of the competition at the start and then you have to play to those rules...you could say is it fair that a team dominates possession and is ahead for 60 minutes of the game then the other team comes back in the final quarter and wins - is it right? yes.

Was it right that New York Giants beat New England Patriots in the Super Bowl a few years back when the Patriots had gone through the year unbeaten?

Was it right that NZ Warriors were in this year's NRL Grand Final instead of Melbourne Storm, when the Warriors finished 6th (supposedly 'a great shot in the arm for league in NZ' as I've been reading in recent weeks.

Really we should stop whinging about this there have been threads about it all week and to dredge up old ground again, we're going to get laughed at by other fans, this will become the thing we can't let go of especially if we end up dropping off form next year without Matt King and with players getting older, we could end up spending the next 20 years not being able to let go of this season whinging about "2011 was OUR YEAR you know!"

Alternatively we could have a dismal season with people questioning if Tony Smith has taken us as far as he can, sneak into the playoffs in 6th or 7th place next year, then Briers, Morley, Monaghan and the others in last chance saloon rallying together to a great playoff run against the odds and winning the Grand Final.

pmsl at sallys avatar

Yes, it's completely right.

When it mattered, they beat the league winners & the third and fourth placed sides in knockout rugby. They (like we do) play rugby in the right way, and more than merit their victory today. They coped with the format best, is the current format correct? I'm not sure but this shouldn't discredit Leeds whole against low probablity odds delivered.

Tonight was the best game of RL I've seen this year, I thought Leeds were superb.

it was an amazing game.... i loved every minute of it.

I wouldn't go as far as that, its the best wet weather game ive seen. Leeds were solid in the first half with some very good defence along with the Burrow piece of magic, they only came to life as an attacking force after saints had lost both Wellens and Shenton. It was the Shenton injury that changed the game, that caused Saints a lot of disruption in having to move players around to fill the void left by both Wellens and Shenton.

At the point Shenton left Leeds looked beaten, they were behind by 8pts and looked devoid of ideas and some of their players heads had visibly dropped. Saints had all the momentum at that point, Leeds had only managed to cross the saints line just once up and till the point Shenton had left the pitch. It was too much dispruption for Saints after that, Leeds capitalised on it and the rest is history.

the shenton injury ruined saints.... that side of the pitch capitulated when he went off.... leeds targeted the weak spot to full effect.

I'd go with most of what Rob says. It was an excellent wet weather game and i really thought that the final score flattered Leeds by about 10 points.

Spot on! .... They had already had to reshuffle the team when they lost Wellens, they had to do it again when they lost Shenton. Too much disruption at a key time in the game, they were carrying other injuries as well and were down to just 2 bench rotations left with 15 mins still to go.

If they'd had no injuries do you think they'd have won?. They'd been outplayed at half time.

i think leeds would have won anyway.....they wanted it more....f*ck the injuries..... its rugby league.....

Without a doubt.

RL isn't a 40 min game tho, Leeds played well in the first half and defended really well but to me that effort started to take its toll in the 2nd half. Leeds looked out on their feet once Saints got into their rhythm and got on a roll, with around 20 mins to go their only looked like one side was going to win that game and it wasn't Leeds.

Leeds won the competition based on the format that everyone knew before the season started. Congratulations and fair play to them.

But as I put in a thread earlier this week, there is a flaw in the format of a competition when it is possible for one team to win 29 games on the run, lose the 30th and win nothing. Another can lose more than they win over the first 27 games then win their last four and be proclaimed champions.

You know what Rob, I don't think you're giving Leeds enough credit, I really don't.

Any team that can take 6 sets back to back, I think it must have been 6/7 minutes without the ball, then fall 8 points behind on the scoreboard soon after and still have the physical & mental strength to come back and score 20+ points in poor handling conditions.

I thought it was a special effort, and they did it with a swagger jagger.