There is an argument for the above. I disagree, but it's completely unrelated to the point I quoted.

Well it's always difficult to know what your particular issues are.

But my post dealt with the main argument, I feel.

And you can't make a judgement on the importance of this game before the near end of the season. Here's to the point being of potential significance rather than your view that it doesn't matter one bit.

I'm looking forward to supporting the team and wanting to win rather than your apparent view that it just doesn't matter.

Are you really saying that? If so, then you effectively arguing that whether you play at home or away, makes little difference!

"Less and less" is a comparative - it is much less important under the current system than it was previously.

Given a choice of dominating all season, the wheels coming off with a month to go and limping into the playoffs in top spot, or hitting some form with a month to go and making 8th, then there is only one serious winner.


The point I and others are making is that under alternative systems, say for example the top 5, there is much more reward to the teams that finish higher up the league.

The play off system as it is doesnt suit wigan because our away form is better than our home form. Last season we beat saints, catalan and leeds away but lost to them at home, thus it is pointless us finishing top (unless you factor in the week off you get and the clubcall which havent helped us in previous years). Making the DW a fortress should be a top priority and would certainly help us in the playoffs.

So, if you are talking comparatively, you accept then that the final position is still relevant. And if the final position is still relevant, why wouldn't you try throughout the year to end up in the best position possible?

As for the size of the playoffs, I would rather we stuck with the top 8 as it gives more clubs something to play for towards the business end of the season. If those team "aren't good enough" then don't worry, they'll get beaten. However, by being involved they will gain experience and in ten years time, who knows, perhaps we'll have a competition good enough for the team that finishes 8th to win it.

If you're going to stick with a top 8, at least make it fair (particularly to those who finished 3rd and 4th).

Play the 1v8, 2v7. 3v6, etc. system, instead of making 3rd and 4th go away to the 2 best teams, while 5th get a much easier tie at home to 8th.

I can't stand the play-off system, but if we truly MUST have 1, then my vote would be for the old top 5 or 6, as it rewarded 1st (or 1st + 2nd) far more highly than this cock-eyed mess that we currently have, does.

My playoff would be 1st straight through to GF
2nd play 5th
3rd play 4th
on a straight knock out basis winners of the above matches play each other to determine who plays in the GF .

The disadvantage (From the clubs point of view) with your top 8 is that there are less rounds played.

With the current set up, although 3rd & 4th must play the top 2 teams they are rewarded by receiving a second chance, "a much easier tie at home".

the problem with the current system is 1st and 2nd get no 2nd chance if they win in week 1 where as 3rd and 4th get a 2nd chance for losing..

That is statistically not the case. For one thing your sample is too small to draw any conclusions based on what has actually happened. We just have not had this format in operation long enough to decide. You can though do some statistics that compete the chances of winning it from whatever position a team finishes in.

Statistically if all teams are considered equally capable of winning it then 1st and 2nd have an equal chance of winning it under this system which is wrong in itself (club call makes no difference to the stats).

They are both slightly more likely to win it than 3 or 4 and a bit more likely still to win it then the other sides.

However the point is, statistically, there is virtually nothing in it and the current play off is almost identical to a knock-out competition meaning there is very little reward for finishing top in terms of how much advantage you get by doing so. The old top 5 system meant the 1st placed side had a 37.5% chance of winning it. It drops to 18.75% with the old Ausie top 8 system (still better than ours) so IMO that is just not enough of an advantage for finishing top.

The best way would be a top 3 play-off system. 1st goes straight to the final and has a week off. 2nd & 3rd play-off in a semi-final to decide who joins then. That gives 1st a 50% chance of winning the competition.

Thats a fair point. But at least the highest placed winner gets to choose who to play!

Now I'm confused, you start your post with a statement that there's not enough of a sample to be of statistical significance and then go on to make some statements about the statistics seemingly based on an assumption that all teams are equal and so the club call means nothing. And describe that 3th/4th have the same chance to win, however without the weight of capability (8th not as capable as 1st for example) your analyses is pointless. Maybe some kind of weighting based on the league points would help?

I would argue that the sample, while low does have significance. Indeed we can clearly see that over the entire of the GF formats it's only the last two years that 5th even gets into a final.

Just because you have failed to understand it doesn't mean it is pointless.



You are confusing statistics and probability so perhaps I should have been clearer myself to differentiate the two.

Statistics are what you analyse and probability is how you calculate the chances of some outcome or other. There isn't enough data to analyse to say things like "our system makes it most likely 1st or 5th will win it". Calculating probabilities is much more straightforward which is what I am on about.

Capability could be some sort of weighting that would affect probability[i in a small way[/i but you have to be able to apply it sensibly. For example when 1st and 2nd are determined by a single league point "capability" would be virtually zero and make no odds. Crucially even if you did apply a weighting factor based on capability that wouldn't change the relative merits of the differing play off systems.

So that doesn't alter the fact you can apply basic probability calculations to the play off system and when you do you get the relative chances of a side winning it and you can compare the different play off systems on this basis. It's a fact that a top 5 system makes it more likely the team finishing first will win it compared to a top 8 system. Nothing you can say is going to change than and in any. Therefore a top 5 system rewards the league performance more.

Most people accept it does anyway just by looking at way the fixtures work in each but its actually a Mathematical fact as well. For some idiotic reason we ended up with a play off system that rewards the top sides the least of any of the alternatives.