Here is my view:

Roby and graham weren't enough to win this game. (If I recall leeds had a field day after graham was rested, towards the end.

Leeds had the mental toughness that saints just don't have these days. It use to be that you'd never write off the saints. I think six losses on the bounce has shaken the 'mighty' saints.

This was further shown (and the kuilling blow) was foster's penalty from half way. I remember when asked in the pub, after saints went a try ahead, if saints had now won it; and I said if they score again, it looks like it. Eight compared to twelve is nothing and they should have pushed for another try.

Leeds deserved the score they got. Hardy and ruthless in defence and free flowing in attack (very wireesque)

On the question of is it right? Yes, leeds played the system best, obviously. Is the system right is another question entirely!

Leeds played at a level that no team reached during the season. No other games were at the intensity of the Wire-Leeds eliminator or the GF throughout any of anyone's 27 games and Leeds showed that they could deal with and perform under that intensity in both games. If you can prove you can win them games then you prove that you can perform at a higher level to everyone else.

Week-in-week-out over 27 games and 7 months you are rewarded for consistency on were you finish in the league table and if you finsih top you win a shield. But the play-offs raise the bar (well, certainly the later rounds). It's not about 'playing well for three games at the end of the season' as so many have posted recently, it's about playing at a higher level and proving yourselves at that level.

We were the most consistent team over 27 games, we played at a higher level than everyone else over them 27 games, we were the best team over them 27 games; but we didn't put in a performance when the level of quality and intensity rose to a level not seen during them 27 games.


I think more fuss should be made when you finish as league leaders - a lot more. But I also agree that if you can come through the P-O's and win you've proved that you can go above and beyond consistency and win in the highest level of quality and intensity.

I'm racking my brain to think of sports where you're not rewarded in this way and said to be the best. F1 is the only one I can think of where you're just rewarded for consistency. Football does in domestic league form but then there are two cup compeitions and European competitions too which are all decided in a end of season showpiece event. Even then in the league - as a footy fan myself - I'm often saying "you're not pitted against the same teams, with the same injuries and suspensions, in the same run of form, with the same weather conditions, or the same time of day/year, nor the same referee". And that's true. You can finish higher than another team in the league but you haven't played the same games, you've played 27 very different games to each other (well apart from two against each other).

Leeds have finished top of the league, and won the Grand Final
Leeds have finished 2nd and won the Grand Final
Leeds have finished 5th and won the Grand Final

Each team they were rightly declared Champions.

Time to accept Leeds Rhinos ARE Super League Champions 2011, and move on.

....as has the vast majority of Wire fans. I already posted my congrats on the VT. I think it's reasonable to (1) debate the format of the playoffs and (2) seek greater recognition for the League Leaders, but the GF system is a fine way to end the season and decide the champions.

-------------that may be true,but saying it dont make it right does it?i mean,what other sport can boast *champions* who finished runners up in a cup final then went on to finish 5th,yup,5th in the league ,then put together a run of 4,yup,4 wins and be hailed as champions? not many im sure,and its not sour grapes,it seems to make rugby league a joke sport,which makes me very angry,as i think its the best game it the world to watch,but the format of late is a joke,im sick of trying to explain it to all my non rugby league mates ,who keep asking me ,why wire are not champions if they actually won superleague,and yes,we all know the format at the start of the season and its the same for all teams blah blah blah,but like i say,saying it dont make it right,especially when your team has blown away the opposition week in and week out and a regular basis by playing fantastic entertaining rugby,in my mind,wire are the true champions of 2011 ,and hopefully,20012 and im not taking anything away from leeds by saying this--( the lucky barstewards ) its just my opinion

This is the format everyone knew about at the beginning of the season so knowone can say leeds dont deserve it they played fantastic rugby at the business end of the season. I just think this is a realy good advert for our game this season at least in the top 8 has beenone of the most competitive i have seen since super league started proven by the fact that silverware has been shared amongst the 3 clubs and even more proven by the clubs that won the league leaders shield and the challenge cup werent contesting in the final . Super season heres to many more like it competitive rugby is what we all want to see im sure ??

I'm a Leeds fan.

In my opinion, the team that wins the league should be the champions and that was Warrington, end of story.

There then should be a play off grand final but if you win this should not mean you are champions. This way, there would be three major trophy to go at, the Challenge Cup, The league and the Play off Grand Final.

Unfortunatly, it will be Leeds who go down in the history books as as winners, champions, it will be Leeds who are playing in the WCC and nobody will remember who came first, second, third or fourth in the league.

I am ecstatic that we won but there needs to be a change in the current format for me but that's the way it is unfortunatly, everyone knows that that at the start of the season, maybe in the comming seasons, there maybe should be an emphasis on not winning the league, resting some players during the year, keeping people fresh and aiming to peak around the play offs so it would be irrelevent whoever finished first, second, third, fourth, fith etc, just get in the play offs and anything can happen.

I am sure most teams would waifer a few games during the season but come good in the play offs.

All in all Wire fans, you've had a great season, you have been the best team, the league table does not lie and this bodes well for the comming years, all the best for next seaon!!!

Which other sport can see teams that don't top their league become Champions?

NFL, NBA, Baseball, Champions League Football, World Cup Football, Aussie Rules, Ice Hockey, Rugby Union...

--raelly? i dont watch any of those sports so i will take your word for it,but im only really concered about rugby league and i stand by what i said

--really? i dont watch any of those sports so i will take your word for it,but im only really concerned about rugby league and i stand by what i said

double post to correct spelling mistakes

I think the tiltle of champions should go to the league leaders. It is the most difficult to win and is a true indicator, given that each team plays each other home and away, plus Cardiff.

The Play-offs are more like the old premiership. Its format gives greater advantage to those who finish the highest, and we as top team had everything in our favour. But if you have a bad game against a team like Leeds who have found form, you will go out.

I have nothing but praise for the Rhinos, but I feel a more apt title would be Grand final winners rather than champions.

No other LEAGUE has a redundant and purely money making playoff system at the end.

Have you ever heard of the NRL?. Besides Wigan played 2 extra fixtures more than you and if you take into account you beat them the week after Wembley which had a very large bearing on who finished top. I wouldn't call that fair.