Quote: McClennan "It lacks legitimacy to you but not to others. I do not think it adds legitimacy to say "Here's a top five system and the league leaders need to win only one game to get to the Grand Final". I understand that there's some attempted logic in there around rewarding regular season performance i.e. 2nd/3rd need to win two games, 5th needs to win three games. However this year, Leeds have won three games from 5th and have beaten the league leaders to make it to the Grand Final which is a similar path as would have happened under a top five format. All the top five format would have done is over-protect Warrington because Leeds would probably have to have gone through the others before they even got a shot at Warrington, which makes it all a bit end-of-level-baddie. '"
You are ignoring the fact the top five system rewards all the teams in it more for the higher they finish in some way, not just the first placed team. Second and third have the advantage in week 1 of not being sudden death and an opportunity to win the chance have a pop at the top side in week two in order to earn a week off themselves (if they win) and a quicker route to the grand final than what is possible for the teams finishing 4th and 5th.
4th and 5th face sudden death in week 1 but 4th gets home advantage for finishing 4th
2nd & 3rd do not face sudden death in week 1, 2nd gets home advantage due to finishing 2nd
1st gets a week off.
In week two loser of 2nd v 3rd gets home advantage over winner of 4 v 5 because they finished higher in the league than either of them.
Winner of 2nd v 3rd gets a pop at the quick route to the GF and a possible week off as they play 1 but neither goes out , so both reams are rewarded for where they finished in the league with the winner of 2nd v 3rd earning another life due to winning in in week 1.
Loser of the game involving 1 still gets home advantage when they face the winner of the other match because they finished higher than either of them.
So you see to say the top five is biased towards the first placed team ignores how clever the system is at ensuring greater reward for finishing higher in the league even you are not the one to finish top.
Now because it does that the league competition and where you finish in it assumes far more importance than is the case with the current format. So not only is it a better play off system it removes the possibility that teams will coast the last few weeks games. It makes the race for the top spot important. The current format devalues the league as there is little advantage given for a high placed finish.
Quote: McClennan "Let's assume Wire had gone through off the first game of top five system and ended up playing Leeds next week. Should a team making a Grand Final really have to have played two more games than another team to make it? Should a team playing in a Grand Final have a week off in the week before whilst the other one doesn't? How does that serve our Grand Final? Doesn't that unbalance the battle? If so, how is that legitimate? '"
It is legitimate for the reasons I just explained. How is it legitimate for a team finishing fifth or fourth to get to a grand final without playing a team finishing above them? It isn't. Why is it not legitimate for a team that finishes 5th to face a harder route to the grand final than any side finishing above them? Of course it should.
Quote: McClennan " Surely if the Grand Final is the pinnacle of our domestic sport (and it is no matter what people say) it needs to be an event where teams are not penalised prior to taking part. '"
The only way to ensure that is the play offs become a true knock out competition where all 8 teams go into a hat and all games are played on neutral grounds. We would than not need a play off system because you could just hand the GF trophy over to the winners of the Challenge cup because the more you make it like a knock out which is what you are suggesting the less difference there is between the two competitions.
The whole idea of play offs has always been to have it coupled to the league using the league as a qualifying competition such that the higher you finish the better chance you have of winning the trophy. You want s knock out competition or something so close it isn't meaningfully different.
3rd and 5th getting to grand final under this format is far less of an achievement than under a top 5 system and that is not right.
Quote: McClennan "If you allow the kind of disparity evident in a top five system you can end up with teams playing in the GF that are at too big a disadvantage physically because they've had to go through the mill compared to another. I seem to recall it happening to yourselves a few years back against the Bulls after you'd surprised Leeds in the semi when despite a magnificent achievement in beating us before running yourselves to a stop over in Leeds whilst the Bulls put their feet up and had a week off before facing you. Surely it undermines the GF to have a structure that creates that unevenness in recuperation?'"
You overstate the disparity and as previously explained are ignoring the advantages all teams get the higher they finish.
Quote: McClennan "Why would you want to undermine your showpiece occasion by penalising a team before they've even stepped out onto the turf? Surely a battle should be decided out on the field and not before a ball has been kicked? That a lower-placed team has made its way through to the final indicates they have overcome tougher obstacles in the first instance so they deserve to be there. They have earned the right to compete so they deserve to be able to compete on an equal footing and not one that's undermined by off-the-field issues created by the structure of the competition.
'"
The only thing that undermines the show-piece is the current format that makes it too easy for a side to win the title having lost 11 games during the season which is what will happen if Leeds win it. The GF winner needs to clearly be the best team and Leeds have looked anything like for most of the season. The play off format needs to subject such teams to a severe test to earn the right to play for the trophy in the final and the current format does not do it.
Quote: McClennan "If a team isn't good enough to beat a team that finished below them in a pressure cooker environment in front of their own fans then that's their problem. If anything the only true way to decide it is to go to neutral venues for all the play off action but that's not practical over here. Yes, reward the teams finishing higher in the table in the form of home advantage and easier draws but don't lever it so far in their favour that flat track bullies get a free pass into the final. I want to see my champions tested not molly-coddled. You get trophies for winning the world cup not the qualifying group and long may that be the case.'"
You clearly do not understand the concept of the tip five system, how it links to the league , how it rewards not just the first placed teram and that whoever wins it has a legitimate claim to the title by virtue of beating all sides who finished above them in the league (if 1st placed team fails). The entire basis of your argument is the first place team is mollycoddled which as I have explained ignores the advantages the other sides EARNED by finishing where they did. The fact the firth placed side is disadvantaged compared to ALL the teams above it, not just those finishing first, is as it should be. If they wanted to have a better chance at the title they should have finished higher in the league!
Quote: McClennan "If we're going to have a top 8 system it should be the Australian one because it makes sense. If not we need to make sure we don't undermine the Grand Final by (1) giving one participation a week off before the final while another one plays in a blood and thunder knockout game and (2) throwing together the best teams in the play offs until it is later in the rounds i.e. no 1v4 and 2v3 in the first week whilst 5v8 goes on.'"
You just don't get it do you? In the top five system no fixture combination is impossible. In either top 8 system there are fixture combinations that are impossible so neither are legitimate. In the top five system only two teams play in a blood and thunder knock out game in week 1. Only one team is eliminated each week. Those who finished higher in the league earn progressively bigger advantages in the play offs, not just the first placed team.
The top five system is THE most legitimate play off system going.
We are our own country and can make our own decisions thanks.
