Actually Saints beat Huddersfield in the challenge cup on August 26 2006 and then went on to win the league and the grand final against Hull in the same year. For what its worth they also won BBC sports personality team of the year.

We didnt "win it from 5th" though did we. We "finished" in the top spot.

Its where you finish that counts. The rest is just the preliminaries.

First off, I agree that more of a fuss should be made over the League Leaders. For too long the trophy hasn't been viewed in the same way as the Challenge Cup and Super League Grand Final winners, and it should - well done Warrington, for the excellent show this season.

Now though I do have a question for those of you saying the League Leaders are the 'Champions'. If the final had been Wigan vs. Warrington - or anyone, for that matter, with Wigan winning, would you all have said they should have allowed Wire to stand in front of the board that says 'Champions 2011' because Wigan hadn't been true champions? Has that been said by any of you when the league leaders haven't won the Grand Final previously? And, if you have such a big problem with someone out of the Top 2 winning the final, why do we even bother with having a play-off system?

Personally, regardless of the team I support, I think it's great that a team from so low down can win the final. It shows that there is real competition in the league and would be pretty boring if it was so predictable each year. I'm sure you as Wigan fans would have been ecstatic had you won from 5th in previous years. Warrington and Wigan may have been the most reliable teams this season for winning in the league, but Leeds and Saints just wanted the Final more and made a stronger push for it that the others didn't.

For the 7,450 time! this debate has been done for the past few seasons at least and even last year when we finished top so you can pack it in with the what if it was Wigan crap.

league champions
premiership winners

simple.