With all due respect, Warrington have far more reason to feel aggrieved than Wigan. To come top, lose a game by only 2 points (with no second bite of the cherry), yet not be considered champions is harsh. Very harsh.

I like the play-offs though - the idea that you have to prove yourself as champions on the whole produces some fantastic high intensity RL. This must be good preparation for the internationals also. I just don't like the current format - if you finish top you should be allowed a defeat at any point in the playoffs. And the less said about club call the better!

Since when did zero suddenly become "numerous"?

You mean 1 post which was AFTER I had asked you how many posts had you put on there!

As I have shown many times I agree 100% with your sentiments on the Play offs and the fact that Leeds/Saints deserve to be in the GF.

What I was pointing out was that earlier you pin pointed Wiganners moaning etc about this subject whilst in truth it is a handful just like there is proportionally on the Wire board and every other board would be if affected in the same way. Why you not on there giving them 10 pages of grief?

Same as most other subjects a handful of Wigan fans may say something that may not be the best statements possible and certain fans of other clubs take those hadnful of opinions and blazen them all over other clubs boards and make out it's the general concensus of ALL WIGAN FANS!

Most Wigan fans can see what's happening and to be honest it doesn't bother most, certain fans Hate Wigan and will twist any individuals comments to perpetuate the MYTH that Wigan fans are arrogant/inbred/scum blah blah blah.

Truth is, as I said before, it says more about the individuals doing this than the people who make the quotes in the first place and certainly the Majority of Wigan fans who are trying to have reasoned debate.

Just beat me to it WLA!
He's made 1 post AFTER I asked him how many!!!!!!!

He doesn't Hate Wigan, Honest!

Although I see where you are coming from, Wire were very good this year, I disagree. Both teams knew the format throughout the season and so I don't think either should or have a right to feel aggrieved.

Mclennan and I made two perfectly reasonable and detailed posts about the merits or otherwise of the different play off formats. You jumped into that debate in a childish way my kids grew out of years ago making a totally unfounded claim and irrelevant point. And you continue to do so it seems.

Grow up.

No you didn't. Two such contributions wereIt 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.'"

How would that possibly work? If you ultimately reach a semi final phase, and the top team loses a week out from the final (as Wire did) then you can't re-schedule it. The old 1v2 with winner straight to OT achieved this, but had a shorter play off series, which is less good for business. We don't have football's profile and riches, so we need the publicity the play-offs generate.

Wire did have a second attempt available to them if they lost earlier in the proceedings. It was a safety net that they ultimately didn't use. They did get home advantage throughout, the weakest opposition in the semi and a week off which their coach reckons they badly needed.

As for 3rd and 5th being in the final, if we are to have play-offs, it only helps the concept that next year people will no longer write off the team finishing 5th. Prior to Friday night the prevailing wisdom has basically been that anyone below 3rd, or maybe 4th, is just there to make up the numbers. I still think it will be the exception rather than the rule, but it's a system that hasn't hurt the NRL. They had a 2nd v 6th Grand Final down under and nobody seemed too upset about it. After 6th place reached the final last year and 4th played 8th in 2009.

As some have pointed out above, it was top of the ladder, not play-offs, that was the departure from tradition in RL.

Don't the NRL use a different play off system to SL? 1v8, 2v7, etc? Sounds a little better than ours.

The way the top 5 worked was best, surely that could be expanded to give us the amount of games/weeks required.

You can throw as many insults as you want and ignore what I actually posted but I'll keep it SIMPLE for you.

This is what he said!
Under the Top 5 system every team would have to Beat Every team above it in the final league standings.
Under the Top 8 systems they don't play every team that finished above them.

Under the Top 5 system 3rd & 5th cannot get to the GF together
Under the Top 8 system they can
So 100% Fact it has to be harder as it is impossible!

Now read this bit very carefully!
If you actually read all of my previous posts which I know you must have as you have replied to them previously I don't disagree that the 2 x teams deserve to be in this Final! My personal belief on the subject is that whatever system you employ the 2 x most deserved teams will get to the final as they've played them rules better than anyone else.

I disagree with the arguments your using to justify it as a better system than what daveo & a few others think would be better!
In fact your so far off the mark in response to what they've said I think it's you who needs to see through the Fog and understand what is actually being written rather than "Assuming" that it is Wiganners moaning to fit into your pre-meditated argument!

So When you reply and claim that "I" have said things blah blah blah when I actually haven't I think you need to look a touch closer to home with some of those names you are calling me (And others)?

Or teams think finishing 5th is an OK ambition because it doesn't make that much difference and so devalues the league.



The NRL system is different than ours so you are not comparing like with like.

I think it is definitely true though that in our country the top 8 does have meaningless games featuring the lowest placed teams namely 7th and 8th. I think the scores and crowds reflect this as well.



Well they were wrong. The competition has been decided different ways in the history of the game depending on how the league was structured not based on any tradition. We played off in the 70's because the competition was 34 teams in one division but with only 30 fixtures so you could hardly claim to be champions by finishing top of the ladder back then. Just the top 4 played off then IIRC presumably because they didn't think lower teams deserved a shot at it

When it went to home and away fixtures then the logical way to decide who was champions in such a league was top of ladder, so we did. I suspect Millennium Magic will die a death sooner rather than later and if it does and we do end up with just home and away fixtures you can bet we won't return to top of the ladder deciding it however logical that would be then because Nigel Wood and the RFL are into "marketing".

good thread this