The point of any Bonus is that it is a reward for its effort , meaning nobdy doesnt go into a gamewithout this knowledge , many disagrre but me im flexable , we all think it is a bad idea till the outcome is right then its ok to become a profile of the match .My point being , get to the point .

Dewsbury lost their 15 games by an average of about 18, Hunslet by about 24.

Dewsbury's biggest loss was by 32, Hunslet's by 58.

Dewsbury conceded more than 40 pts in 4 games, Hunslet in 5.

Still looks to me that Dewsbury were the most competitive of the 2.

Hunslet got more points than Dewsbury. The only stat that matters.

We (Hunslet) lost 5 games in the last 3 minutes, including 2 in the last 5 seconds (should have won them all!) now surely that shows we were competitive? We dropped 10 points due to this and in the end we only just managed to avoid relegation when in actual fact we should have been safe with a couple of games to spare! Anyways i’m not too fussed about the bonus point myself, obviously it’s helped us this year but if its there then why not play for it? Its not like we’ve done anything wrong

See he is off on one again. Not content with double negatives at the time he posted he really should have been in bed at his age.

Cya at Poker tomorrow Charlie.

I can see the good and bad points of the system to be fair but for me if you've lost then thats it. I don't think anyone should be rewarded for not winning the game but thats just me.

No, it's not just you - I never played when we got rewarded for coming second. Either play to win or just accept you are not as good as the opposition and accept the "Nil Points" verdict. It does seem to me very unfair that you can avoid relegation just by not losing by as many points as some of your competitors. If we must have it, then make it a 4 point difference instead of twelve. Twelve is a lot of points to lose by anyway.

If it's that good why isn't it in Sooooooper doooooper league?