Second half of the 1980's I believe when we were relegated just before Toppo took over. We were getting battered all season then finally got our first victory, I think it was 38-20 win v Widnes at home. Then a week or two later we suffered our record ever defeat (at the time) at home to Wigan when Henderson Gill and Ellery Hanley ran riot. I think they put 72 past us?

A year later we were promoted along with Fev and Oldham. Started that season new season in the top flight well by beating Warrington, Wigan and Hull in our first 3 games. And never finished bottom ever since

If there was any justice, the Bulls would finish bottom, I seem to recall Melbourne Storm having most points deducted for salary cap breaches. The bulls saga has made a joke of the game. They have blatantly broken the rules to bust the club but its a well worn thread elswhere.

I remember it well. Still didn't finish bottom of the table either, even with a 4 point deduction.

Apologies.....you are talking about 86-87. We were bottom then. Didn't realise that.

And yet some short-sighted berks continue to advocate that SL be reduced in number, which would be as spectacular an example of kicking away the ladder as you're ever likely to see.

Even now Tony Hannan, the editor of 40-20 magazine, is banging on about how the race for 8th spot is an exercise in rewarding mediocrity; perhaps he'd prefer it if instead of trying to make incremental improvements, clubs like ours just went out and spent millions they didn't have on buying players that would propel them instantly into the top 4 - I wonder what would happen to a club that did that?

Oh wait...

All the rubbish that keeps coming around regarding reducing the number of teams in SL.
We ought to let Leeds, Wigan, Warrington and Saints form their own "even more super, super league" with its weekly dose of super intense rugby.
Then we could "promote Fev, Leigh, Fax and Sheffield and have a decent league, everyones a winner ! and when the big 4 come and ask someone to join their elite competition we could tell them exactly what to do.

I think what he's saying is pretty accurate TBH, last season Hull finished eighth with about as many wins than losses as will we if we make it this year, that is technically rewarding mediocrity.
An argument could be made for reducing the top eight to only the top six, and in a way i would agree.
One thing it wouldn't take into account thought would be that it would make it even more difficult for clubs outside of the top six to recruit players with aspirations of success and would limit their opportunities to break into the top echelon of our sport, as more money would be generated by the "successful" clubs.
As with many things that are out of balance in our game or wrong, messing about with them only makes them wronger!!

There you go - you've successfully argued with yourself until you agreed with my way of thinking.

Good show!

From the point of view of rewarding mediocrity he's right, I didn't think you agreed with that from your post?
The repercussions of going back to six are more of a financial problem for the club than the possible on field benefits for the game for the reasons we both listed.
I don't see how I've argued with myself, maybe I just didn't understand your post?

Maybe we should make it 16 teams, then the 8th place would probably be winning as many as losing, thus no longer rewarding mediocrity?!!?

Here's an idea, lets play each other once home and away, whoever wins the most number of games in the season is the champion and if you loose the most you get demoted and give someone in a lower league who's playing really well a chance to step up a gear ..... oh, hang on, I think we've tried that before
Sorry, got an attack of the past ............ it's all the talk of the 'This Sporting Life' showing at the cinema

Cheers IA - as a relative new comer to the game (about 1983 ish) I was thinking it had been a 'first past the post' championship race used longer than a playoff system - we live and learn