Wire and Wigan have been the best two all season but then there's the play offs. It may seem odd that 3rd and 5th are at the GF however they won the games where Wire and Wigan didn't. That's the play offs.

What does appear to be happening now is that the club who wins the C Cup do not do well in the play offs. No cup winner has won the GF since the C Cup was moved to Aug Bank Holiday weekend. Wigan are just not the same team since winning the cup. Wire won the C Cup twice then the wheels fell off in the play offs.
The test of this will be to see how Leeds do next week. They, like us, have not had a week off and their 80 mins will be interesting. They were superb last night v Wire I have to admit.

Wire and Wigan might have been the best teams in the leahiue all season. Saints and Leeds have just proved they are the best two teams in the play offs. As many have said, we all knew the rules before we started so we'll continue to go with it.

Too be honest top 8 play off is a farce, 1st place has never deserved the recognition of this achievement. The RFL are basically saying your last 3 play off games has much greater value than the 27 league games. Top 4 is just about acceptable, can you imagine the day when an 8th place team who has lot 3 times as many games as the league leaders will become Superleague Champions.

I highly doubt it would ever happen, but it could, which is not right. You should NOT be able to finish in the bottom half of the table, yet get a chance at getting to Old Trafford. I think that's just not right. Top 6 at a push, but I think the playoffs, if anything, should be top four. That way I think we would see more competition at the top. Plus, if you changed it to bottom two relegated, there would be competition at the bottom as well, to ensure you keep your Super League place.

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 all know the rules at the start of the season but i agree the top 8 does not work how about a top 5, the side finishes top goes straight to the final and then 2nd v 5th 3rd v 4th and the winners play to meet the team finishing top although the top side would not play for 3 weeks ! i think the original format was ok but not the last 8

What you're mostly missing is I'm saying this from a team that finished 2nd so it's not like its because we got knocked out as it would be wire who were champions anyway.
It wouldn't be so bad but it's more than half the league in there can you imagine football or whatever being decided by a 14 team playoff system?

I don't disagree with playoffs I disagree with the titles given out for league leaders and the gf

I know you probably blanked it out, but Saints in 2006 won the challenge cup final in August, then the league leaders shield, and finally the grand final. Losing only four games all season, with those games being lost by 1,2,3 and 4 points.

It therefore can be done, but you have to be a special team, which is how it should be. Its also why Saints ended up the BBC team of the year.

Doing the League and cup double should be something that occurs once every Preston Guild, it should not be something that is easy to attain.

The crazy thing about the playoff system is that had Warrington chosen differently I feel sure the GF would be Warrington V Leeds.

Am I right in thinking you lot won your first play-off game and got a week off in 2006 - in fact didn't you get the first week off, won the 2nd to go straight to the GF and then got another week off as it was the top 6?

I said the other week, that if we didn't win our first play-off game we wouldn't retain our title as we desperately needed the week off.

I will admit that, that particular saints side had some special players in it such as sean long and keiron cunningham at the peak of their powers.

However, one of the main reasons that they manage to achieve the double that season was due to the highly mediocre nature of the competition that year the only credible contenders were Leeds who were still at the beginning of becoming a champion team although they won the GF in 2004. Bradford were at the end of their dominance, Hull were average, Wigan were nearly relegated and Huddersfield were a team that just about were beginning to make the play-offs. So before you start proclaiming what a 'fantastic' team it takes to win the double, look at the quality of team it now takes to win the double.

You have to admit that was a class team. They can only play what is put in front of them.

I already have admitted they had some greats in their team. I'm just comparing it to the quality of today where even if you have a 'great' team you face much stiffer competition who could turn you over on any given day.

So why, as a supporter, should you be d going to any of the 27 league fixtures, when you know they are pretty much worthless??

Reading some of these threads it seems some teams aren't even giving 100% most of the time, so why should anybody be bothered watching these matches?

Would have respected the thread more if it had been started before tonight, and you wouldn't have moaned if you would have won it from third a few years ago.

Having said that, more credit should be given for finishing higher, and I think the higher placed club should always have the home advantage. And the previous top six system was much better, where at least one of the top two clubs ends up in the final.

If Leeds win the GF they have lost 11 games during the regular season !!!

Twice as many as Wire & nearly 3 times as many as Wigan.

The system is the system but come on

There is no fair way other than giving the title to the team who finish top. The only other way that I think gives a bit of an advantage to your final position is to have a round robin play-off system between the top 4 only. Each team has home advantage over the teams who finish below them (top plays all 3 at home, 2nd plays 2 at home & 1 away to the top and so on). Top 2 teams after each plays 3 times goes to Grand Final. The play-offs are here to stay, I just think there has to be a better way. Lets face it how can a team who loses 13 times (Hull & KR) have the right to be crowned as Champions ?