|
FORUMS > Wigan Warriors > 2019 Season - Super 8's scrapped |
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Moderator | 14395 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Dec 2001 | 23 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
May 2024 | May 2022 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
26.jpg Last league derby at Central Park 5/9/1999: Wigan 28 St. Helens 20
Last league derby at Knowsley Road 2/4/2010: St. Helens 10 Wigan 18:26.jpg |
Moderator
|
| Quote: wiganermike "The only issue for me with playoffs to decide who the champions are is that with an even fixture list as we have (one extra fixture at Magic Weekend doesn't affect the table greatly enough) they are unnecessary as with every club under the same fixture schedule the team at the top is clearly the best and should be champions. If you have a league where everyone doesn't play everyone else the same number of times, such as they have in the NRL or as we did have when teams played everyone twice plus 5 teams a third time then you need to use playoffs to redress the balance as an easier or harder set of "extra" fixtures can affect where teams finish on the ladder. So with our current even fixture list system then top of the table should be the champions (though we all know the cash cow that is the GF is here to stay). With the end of the 8s in sight then we could perhaps see a return of the old 27 fixture format (with teams playing 5 teams a 3rd time) this would more justifiably need a playoff structure.
However the same issue with uneven fixture lists affects the foot of the table too so if we have playoffs between the top 4 to decide the title then we should also have playoffs at the bottom to decide who goes down (9th v 12th and 10th v 11th, the winners stay up, losing teams then play each other with loser of that game going down). A ridiculous situation I know and I am not seriously suggesting it.
IMHO you do not need playoffs to decide the champions without a truly uneven fixture list that causes disparity in difficulty of fixtures, but you cannot have such an uneven fixture schedule in a league with relegation (unless you have a ridiculous relegation playoff too). If having P&R, as we are going to, then the fixtures should be the same for all so as not to potentially affect the finishing positions of clubs that could then finish bottom and be relegated due to varying difficulty of fixtures from club to club. So we would then not need to have playoffs to decide who the champions are as there would be no imbalance in fixtures to redress. However there is no chance that the GF will be scrapped despite how unnecessary it is as a method of determining the destiny of the championship.'"
I think you are spot on there. The point about there being a need for a relegation playoff with an uneven fixture list is a good one. Even then you could end up with the bottom team well adrift despite an easier fixture list and yet they escape by managing to win two games at the end of the season. As you say it will never happen and one reason it won't is the stated objection that with the S8's the four teams in the qualifiers all face the uncertainty of relegation and a relegation playoff just replicates that.
The problem is we have imported the Aussie concept of a playoff system to decide the champions but are wedded to P&R. If we can't bite the bullet and make SL a closed shop as is the NRL so we can have an uneven fixture list delivering sufficient rounds (I don't think SL wil think 23 is enough) then there is no place for a playoff system.
I think the problem is the SL chairmen can't (yet?) bring themselves to admit they really want a closed shop. Their aversion to the qualifiers is based on the fact that relegation threatens four teams not because of the sporting ignominy of failure relegation represents but because it is a financial disaster. One team going down but with criteria placed on the team potentially coming up could be a closed shop in all bar name. That said, we have had this before and it was not popular as it made it possible for a monumentally poor team to survive only for a far better team in a future season to be relegated.
| | |
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Club Captain | 107 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jun 2016 | 8 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Mar 2021 | Mar 2021 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
75178_1611381797.jpg :d7dc4b20b2c2dd7b76ac6eac29d5604e_75178.jpg |
|
| Quote: DaveO "The more teams you have able to qualify for the playoffs the more the regular season rounds are seen as not mattering much as it doesn't take much to qualify. Instead of having teams at the bottom with nothing to play for the more you have in the playoffs the sooner teams qualify and then you even get the fans not wanting the coaches to play their best sides in the remaining rounds in case of injury. As soon as your team qualifies you may as well not bother going until the playoffs start.
If we have to have a playoff I'd revert to the top 5 because that is the only one that combines a playoff system with the encouragement to finish higher in the league. When we had the top 8 playoffs because of the stupid way it was organised the best place to finish was 5th! You got to play the bottom team at home in the first round while the top team was playing 4th (and of course 4th got "rewarded" by finishing higher than 5th by an away trip to the top team, pure idiocy).
As to teams having nothing to play for or facing an impossible task to qualify, so what? I just do not see how it possible to solve that problem without creating one at the other end of the table such as I described above where once you qualify teams start resting players and/or the games are seen as equally pointless.
This notion we have to do something to keep teams at the bottom interested seems a pretty modern invention to me. The concept of wanting to win a game of RL for its own sake and put one over on your rivals despite your team being out of the running for a trophy this season seems to have vanished. Far better to accept the fact that no system can prevent teams being out of the running at some stage and revert to those finishing top being crowned as champions. The fact by about half way through the season half the teams will be out of the running should not be an issue. They could still affect the destination of the trophy and this idea we have to give them something to play for is like the idea everyone has to be a winner at school sports day.'"
I’d be happy with a top 5. It takes us back to 4 weeks of finals and a great build up to the GF. It also reasonably exclusive and doesn’t contain half the league.
I disagree with you about the battle at the other end being about everyone has to be a winner. The issue at the other end and keeping fixtures meaningful isn’t just about the players. Fans too need a reason to turn up. If your season is over many fans drop off. That is their choice of course but it affects revenue and atmosphere at games.
I believe if you keep more teams involved in some way, whether that is playing for the title or survival, there is more intensity in the games and therefore more reason for fans to turn up. Didn’t that used to be the joy of the CC? Especially when the lower league was closer in standard to the top flight. Just look at the Championship and League 1 in football, even games at the bottom end get good crowds at the end of the season because the team have something to play for. Surely getting attendances up has to be a priority. Using Australia as an example Parramatta got 25,000 for their first home game of the season, they are now down to 8,000 with nothing to play for. Admittedly The Cowboys have maintained their crowds even though they are down at the bottom, but they do still have a hope of making the finals.
So not every team has to be involved in winning the title. It would be criminal if a team won from 8th in a 12 team competition. If we do even up the number of games played and therefore the final table is a true reflection of everyone performance we should reward the tap toppers more than we do currently. Call them league champions and give out more prize money. We can still have the GF to decide the champions.
| | |
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Star | 1426 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Aug 2013 | 11 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Nov 2022 | Sep 2022 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
: |
|
| It is all very well to give preferences but can anyone tell me 1) How many games are we contractually obliged to provide for Sky? and 2). How many games do we realistically need for a reasonably well run club to break even?
Aussie clubs play fewer games but are cash rich and we need to make up the shortfall by playing more games. 22 rounds then a play off will always benefit richer clubs.
| | |
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Moderator | 14395 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Dec 2001 | 23 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
May 2024 | May 2022 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
26.jpg Last league derby at Central Park 5/9/1999: Wigan 28 St. Helens 20
Last league derby at Knowsley Road 2/4/2010: St. Helens 10 Wigan 18:26.jpg |
Moderator
|
| Quote: MelbourneWarrior "I’d be happy with a top 5. It takes us back to 4 weeks of finals and a great build up to the GF. It also reasonably exclusive and doesn’t contain half the league.
I disagree with you about the battle at the other end being about everyone has to be a winner. The issue at the other end and keeping fixtures meaningful isn’t just about the players. Fans too need a reason to turn up. If your season is over many fans drop off. That is their choice of course but it affects revenue and atmosphere at games.
I believe if you keep more teams involved in some way, whether that is playing for the title or survival, there is more intensity in the games and therefore more reason for fans to turn up. Didn’t that used to be the joy of the CC? Especially when the lower league was closer in standard to the top flight. Just look at the Championship and League 1 in football, even games at the bottom end get good crowds at the end of the season because the team have something to play for. Surely getting attendances up has to be a priority. Using Australia as an example Parramatta got 25,000 for their first home game of the season, they are now down to 8,000 with nothing to play for. Admittedly The Cowboys have maintained their crowds even though they are down at the bottom, but they do still have a hope of making the finals.
So not every team has to be involved in winning the title. It would be criminal if a team won from 8th in a 12 team competition. If we do even up the number of games played and therefore the final table is a true reflection of everyone performance we should reward the tap toppers more than we do currently. Call them league champions and give out more prize money. We can still have the GF to decide the champions.'"
The irony is what we had before solved the problem to a large extent. We had the Premiership playoffs which involved the top 6. They key difference was the emphasis was that the league leaders were champions. So while teama drop out of contention for being champions as the season progresses in a 12 team league the premiership ought to be enough to do as much as possible to keep teams interested. It seems perfectly logical to me if you drop out of contention for the main prize while you are still in contention to get into the premiership playoffs it is viewed as a lesser competition but still worth doing. When they went to the GF as deciding the champions they fixed something that was not broken and since then we have changed the format multiple times and still can't decide what is right.
Relegation keeps interest at the very bottom but that is a whole other issue due to the viability of P&R between such disparate leagues. It's no use saying clubs can still pay to the full salary cap (which they can now) in the lower league, the crowds are paltry and the financial side of relegation is disastrous.
The other thing is fans are not thick. Trying to come up with artificial constructs to add meaning to games where there is none are soon called out.
| | | |
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Star | 1522 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jun 2011 | 13 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Jan 2022 | May 2020 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
60422_1310296726.jpg :d7dc4b20b2c2dd7b76ac6eac29d5604e_60422.jpg |
|
| Now there are reports that Disney is going to make a bid, in addition to the bid for Fox TV in the US, for SKY TV. This could make things interesting.
| | |
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Club Owner | 20342 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Mar 2003 | 21 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Jul 2024 | Jul 2024 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
[b:3rwwi1cz][color=#800000:3rwwi1cz]WIGAN RLFC - SL ERA
WORLD CLUB CHAMPIONS 2017 & 2024
SUPER LEAGUE CHAMPIONS 1998, 2010, 2013, 2016, 2018 & 2023
CHALLENGE CUP FINAL WINNERS 2002, 2011, 2013, 2022 & 2024
LEAGUE LEADERS CHAMPIONS 2010, 2012, 2020 & 2023
ACADEMY GRAND FINAL WINNERS 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2017, 2018 & 2019
WOMEN’S GRAND FINAL WINNERS 2018
BEST SUPPORTED CLUB OF THE YEAR 2010, 2011 & 2012
CLUB OF THE YEAR 2010 & 2012
[/color:3rwwi1cz][/b:3rwwi1cz]: |
|
| Hetherington’s men doing their best to get relegated it seems! Can we add to their pain next Thursday?
| | |
| |
|
All views expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of the RLFANS.COM or its subsites.
Whilst every effort is made to ensure that news stories, articles and images are correct, we cannot be held responsible for errors. However, if you feel any material on this website is copyrighted or incorrect in any way please contact us using the link at the top of the page so we can remove it or negotiate copyright permission.
RLFANS.COM, the owners of this website, is not responsible for the content of its sub-sites or posts, please email the author of this sub-site or post if you feel you find an article offensive or of a choice nature that you disagree with.
Copyright 1999 - 2024 RLFANS.COM
You must be 18+ to gamble, for more information and for help with gambling issues see https://www.begambleaware.org/.
Please Support RLFANS.COM
2.95166015625:5
|
|
POSTS | ONLINE | REGISTRATIONS | RECORD | 19.6M +1 | 2,918 ↑15 | 80,085 | 14,103 |
| LOGIN HERE or REGISTER for more features!.
When you register you get access to the live match scores, live match chat and you can post in the discussions on the forums.
|
RLFANS Match Centre
Mens Betfred Super League XXVIII ROUND : 1 | | PLD | F | A | DIFF | PTS |
Wigan |
14 |
403 |
164 |
239 |
24 |
This is an inplay table and live positions can change.
St.Helens |
15 |
423 |
162 |
261 |
22 |
Hull KR |
15 |
383 |
201 |
182 |
22 |
Warrington |
15 |
358 |
213 |
145 |
20 |
Salford |
15 |
295 |
288 |
7 |
20 |
Catalans |
15 |
288 |
220 |
68 |
18 |
|
Leeds |
15 |
274 |
270 |
4 |
16 |
Huddersfield |
15 |
298 |
317 |
-19 |
12 |
Leigh |
14 |
264 |
226 |
38 |
11 |
Castleford |
15 |
238 |
429 |
-191 |
7 |
Hull FC |
15 |
198 |
474 |
-276 |
4 |
LondonB |
15 |
140 |
598 |
-458 |
2 |
Betfred Championship 2024 ROUND : 1 | | PLD | F | A | DIFF | PTS |
Wakefield |
13 |
486 |
142 |
344 |
26 |
This is an inplay table and live positions can change.
Sheffield |
13 |
354 |
217 |
137 |
20 |
Bradford |
13 |
341 |
218 |
123 |
18 |
Toulouse |
12 |
332 |
174 |
158 |
16 |
Widnes |
13 |
315 |
245 |
70 |
15 |
Featherstone |
13 |
330 |
283 |
47 |
12 |
|
Batley |
13 |
205 |
286 |
-81 |
12 |
Doncaster |
13 |
237 |
325 |
-88 |
11 |
York |
14 |
285 |
293 |
-8 |
10 |
Whitehaven |
13 |
266 |
358 |
-92 |
10 |
Halifax |
13 |
270 |
377 |
-107 |
10 |
Barrow |
12 |
203 |
339 |
-136 |
10 |
Swinton |
13 |
260 |
332 |
-72 |
8 |
Dewsbury |
14 |
168 |
419 |
-251 |
2 |
|