My view is that the play offs are te right thing to do however the format should be changed to reward the top team. They should have to play one game to go through.
The thing about the play offs is it's another step up in intensity that we don't see throughout the season, maybe even higher than the CCF, although this year it's been poor until the semi finals! Leeds and saints both played better than they've played all year against two good sides because that is what is needed to go through, to peak at the right time.

I don't have a problem with an end of season knock-out competition if that is what people want. My view is that the LEAGUE champions should be the team that finishes top of the LEAGUE - seems to make sense. Wigan and Warrington have been the most consistent over seven months of hard work, yet get no recognition despite finishing 13 points ahead of Leeds who time their run in time for the Grand Final. They should be two separate entities - league champions and grand final winners. Surely the team that comers out top should get some reward as oppose to the team that wins 4 knock out games? You don't even have to finish in the top half of the table to get the chance to go for it.

And I haven't changed my mind just because Warrington finished top, it has always and will always be two separate competitions with the focus being on the wrong one!

We all know the format at the start of the season. We wouldn't be complaining if we were in the final from 5th. The league is certainly alot harder to win and deserves more recognition. We haven't made it to the Grand Final, but it is certainly my happiest season as a Wire. Remember where we were 30 months ago.

here's a suggestion, i'm sure from a logistics point of view this wouldn't work due to the weeks off, but if you really want to reward the team finishing top, you put them straight into the GF,and the play offs are then for which other team joins them.

It would work if there were less teams in the play offs. The teams would go all out to win the league and it would mean a lot more than it currently does.

Top four Play Off only.

1st goes direct to O/T
2nd has a week off before the semi final
3rd plays 4th the winner plays away to 2nd place and the winner of that game goes to O/T.

This would mean that we wouldn't have the stupid games early in the play offs where the also rans get battered by the good teams, a problem would be the top team would get a break of 2 weeks but the flip-side would be that they get direct to O/T

see you say that, but two of the worse performances in this series has been from the team finishing 4th

But is that this year only and not the norm?

The regular 27 game season doesn't pit all teams against the same teams as each other who are in the same run of form, with the same injuries and suspensions, with the same officials, nor the same weather conditions, or time of day.........

Yes the most consistent teams are graded in a table. Usually the best team wins. But the play-offs are right in my opinion. The play-offs raise the bar. The level of intensity is far greater than the regular 27 games. The tackling is tougher, the running is harder, the play-of-the-balls are quicker, the game is allowed to flow, there's more pressure.. just the whole level is higher (although the first rounds are questionable!). No team played at the level of intensity during the 27 games against us that Leeds did on Friday night. Saints gas it a go at our ground, but we showed a composure and control that we didn't show under the greater pressure of the GF Eliminator.

I like the P-O system (although I disagree with 7th and 8th being involved, I think it should just be top 6). It shows who can raise their game to an optimum level at the highest level of competition. We couldn't dothat this season, but we got further than we have before. This experience will do us good. What we need to do is take a look at our older players and make sure we recruit properly for the future and look into the eyes of the other lads and see if they really want it in the future. Are they all up for the challenge? Are they ready for the next step up? Will they take us onto GF glory?

Why wouldn't they? It's what they do in the world cup. They have leagues followed by a knockout phase and it's possible for the team who wins the final not even "winning" their league.

Now stop being stupid and a bad loser.

AS a neutral I think the Champions are the team that comes top of the league.Playoffs is just like a knockout cup game and it is not about consistency.I would not regard Saints or Leeds as Champions.Man Utd came top of the premiership all season then Liverpool win the playoffs in 4th?I don't think they be happy.

Although we are all agreeing that a top 8 play off is a bit of a farce, I don,t think you are giving Leeds enough respect in achieving a grand final place from 5th place.
Leeds have had an horrendous season with injuries and had a new coach to adapt to, its only in the last 6 weeks they have had a settled side, if Warrington were competing in similar circumstances they would probably have lost more games and final league positions looking slightly different.
I,m suprised Warringtonhave managed to keep a high level of form all through the season which is a credit to the club, but Leeds have given themselves the opportunity to build up form for the play offs, they deserve there place at Old Trafford as much as Warrington would.

its not a step up in intensity its just a style of refeering that completely changes.....you cant penalise teams all season for lying on and then come the play offs (well the final two rounds of the playoffs) stop blowing up.

We've had Ganson loads of times this season and he has policed the play the ball well yet on Friday.... nothing.... a complete change of style in a response to Nathan Browns criticism of Ganson in the game we nilled them.

it was just like one of those failed Lancashire yorkshire origin games from times gone by, sky raved about the intensity of it but Karl Kirpatrick just let everything go......thats not intense its just crazy unpoliced rugby

but we'll be quick to complain in the four nations when The refeering style is different from superleague.....and Australia are giving us a dry bumming

I think the format is almost right on the play-offs. Perhaps including 7th and 8th is pointless, there is too much of gap for them to contribute anything.

We have won the most difficult of the three trophies, by being the better teams over 28 games. The play-offs is then a competition of the best and quite rightly, those who finish the highest are given an advantage, club call, home matches, fewer games.

Unfortunately for us, we were beaten by a team that has hit form at the end of the season.

I disagree, the team that finishes top should get more reward.

I'd like to see the top 2 finishers in SL play each other for a place in the grand final, the losers then go into the play-offs with everyone else.

Here is a radical idea, instead of having a top 8 play off why not have the top 4 from Super League and the top 4 from the NRL all playing off against each other in an end of season comp, one year in Australia, the next year in the UK.

Revert back to the team that finishes top are the champions but the top 4 qualify for an 8 team play off series with 4 UK teams and 4 from the NRL.

I'd scrap the play offs as they stand now and bring in this new comp, we need our standard to improve over here and it will only improve by playing better sides.

Yep its radical but it would be a decent spectacle.

Could only see two Aussie teams in the final every year! They are far ahead of super league IMO, like this morning, NRL grand final for a team to grubber kick in the own 20 before half time and they weren't even behind is unbelievable! Their defence is brilliant and usually there attack is ruthless!