What ever happened to attending a fixture because you enjoy the sport?

When did every fixture need to be meaningful in terms of an end result?

What happened to pride and local rivalry?

There is an interesting point made by a Wigan supporter in this weeks League Express which points out the contribution to Superleague made directly by Wigan supporters that do attend games both home and away, regardless of what some people may think its clear that Wigan supporters do invest a lot of time and money in the game which must be of great benefit to the sport as a whole. Its also worth pointing out that its not just Wigan supporters but clearly other clubs also make a significant contribution too in terms of attendances.

This made me wonder what would actually happen if attendances decreased significantly at Wigan, the RFL could not fail but notice.

The bottom line for me is that whoever finishes top of the league at the end of the weekly rounds should gain more from it in terms of prize money, publicity and significant advantage in the play-offs. I agree with the proposal that whoever finishes top should automatically go through to the final at Old Trafford.

Many people who are in favour of the current format talk about the pressure of trap door rugby and the excitement of the play-offs and how the play-offs are a real test of how teams handle pressure knowing that they could be knocked out of the competition. Well, there is a worthy counter argument to that which suggests that before the play-offs were implemented the regular weekly games were more exciting than they currently are because teams had the pressure of trying to win every game they played both home and away.

Another negative for me is the derby games against St.Helens, sure they are always important because both teams like to gain the local bragging rights but these games used to mean so much more when the two points up for grabs meant even more than just bragging rights.

For me the clue in is the title.

Rugby League

Maybe I need to double check my history books, but I was always under the impression that play off football has been around a lot longer than the last two years.

Massive point on that one, as I made in my match preview last week. Saints have struggled in most regular season derbies recently (i.e lost all three easter clashes and failed to win any magic weekend one), yet have hardly seemed punished for that. That never seemed to be the way.

well said

the many posts in this thread are pathetic. you don't see these type of posts on NRL fan forums, or the NFL before the playoffs. There's only Man Utd & Man City who can win the premier league, but it doesn't make all the rest of the games meaningless does it.

What a sorry state this game is in

In the PL they have the CL places, EL places and £500k a place to play for as well as the £60m for staying in the league. If a team such as Chelsea lose a few games then they could miss out on the CL places as well as a few hundred million ££s. If Wigan lose to Warrington on Friday they'll still finish in the 8 and still have the chance to win the competition.

Absolutely nothing. I hate losing and would love the bragging rights over Wire. I'll just wait until August or October so as not to look stupid like the whole of RL has when laughing at Leeds the last two years.

The result on Friday will have NO bearing WHATSOEVER on who wins the league.

I wouldn't worry too much. I'd be surprised if there was as significant a drop-away in support as some posters on here seem to think.

Six pages in and there has still been no explanation offered as to why, if the play-offs are the only important matches, they are by far the worst attended.

1 - The format
2 - The cost
3 - The current state of the World

There's 3 for you.

Don't forget Huey, Dewy and Louie ... there's three more.

So you think the format of the playoffs, the cost of tickets and the economy aren't to blame then?

To get all the above the fixtures have to mean something. Where is the sport if you don't know if a side is trying to win the game? Where does pride fit into the rather cynical approach to the league the play off format encourages?

Remember a few years back when Millward put a Saints reserve side out v Bradford? That caused a huge stink and the RFL (ignorant of their own stupid rule change) tried to fine the club.

Yet these days on here we have people who regularly say trying to win the league is detrimental to your chances in the play-offs so the club shouldn't try to do it.

We even have pundits coming out with things like this:

"St Helens are my tip to win the regular season title as there are major doubts about Leeds and Warrington's commitment over 27 rounds of Super League action and Wigan's squad has weakened dramatically since last year. "

The man is basically saying those two clubs don't give a toss abut the league. From here

[urlhttp://www.sportinglife.com/rugby-league/news/article/480/8455300/saints-alive-in-2013?[/url

If the press are saying that who else thinks like that and how will it affect attendances? As I said earlier I don't think Leeds did try and have poor seasons and for that matter I don't think Wire played the numbers game either but if the perception is that is what clubs are doing it will eventually be detrimental to attendances.

If this sort of thing is cropping up in the press then the RFL (and the clubs) need to take note. The bread and butter of the sport is the league but if it is perceived as a waste of time that is going to cause problems.

It's up to the RFL and the clubs to make all the league fixtures competitive and clubs have IMO a duty to entertain the fans over 27 rounds. The aim should be to win both league and GF but there seems to be a growing perception the league is a 27 round qualifier. Maybe double the prize money if you do or just go back to a top five system or something but there [iis[/i a danger the RFL seem oblivious to.