I disagree about the games tbh, I really enjoyed the Wakefield Catalans game
and thought Wigan Cas tonight was a good one, bothe could have gone either way. Don't see how they where tedious though?

Attendances where poor though, wakey only had 4,008 and the DW wasn't exactly full.

I agree with the suggestions of going back to the previous style of 1v2 grand final eliminator, great rugby, full houses and cracking atmosphere, stil don't understand why that was changed, the old playoff format was a winner IMO.

The only decent game was the elimanator last night..the others were boring, not sure about this format, players appear not willing to put their bodies on the line, things should improve now the matches are eliminators.

I preferred the top 6 rather than 8, that said with no relegation the top 8 gives more meaning to some of the end of season games. I hate the fact that one side has to pick their opponents, that's gimmicky and crap.

So in your opinion, we were not Champions in 1956 & 1958, as we won the Championship final but didn't finish top of the regular standings in both of those years.

For those who are unaware, it should be pointed out that play-offs are not an invention of Sky, but have been in existence for the majority of the games history being first played for in 1907.

Of the 99 teams who have been crowned Champions (up to Oct 200icon_cool.gif, 66 achieved the feat via a play off system with 33 doing so in a first past the post set up. A 2 to 1 ratio in favour of a play off.

The old Premiership was only introduced in 1974 to compensate the loss of a play off at the seasons end. If it was reintroduced now it would have half the impact of the SL play offs with little attention being paid to it by the general media and a far far smaller crowd at Old Trafford to climax the season.

Having said all that, I still reckon it should have stayed as a top six play off. The fact that Bradford and ourselves could have still qualified with a couple of weeks remaining, despite having had dreadful seasons, doesn't say much for the standard of the competition.

I enjoyed the result on Friday too, but agree that the best game was last nights.

The first 4 games effectively meant nowt, so there was little intensity in either of them. Only Leeds looked like they wanted the week off.

Think you mean the first 2 games Chris. The second 2 definately meant something as they were eliminators.

Cannot remember which poster said it but they should go with

1v2 for 1st final place

3-8 play till down to one team and they play loser of the 1st match.

This stacks the odds in favour of the top 2 reaching the final.

Yep - Monday lunchtime

How do you end up with one team to play the losers of the first game.If its 3v8 4v7 5v6 you end up with 3 teams through to the next round

Round 1

Match 1 5th vs 8th
Match 2 6th vs 7th

Round 2

Match 3 1st vs 2nd (winner to final)
Match 4 3rd vs lowest placed winner
Match 5 4th Vs highest placed winner

Round 3
Match 6 Match 4 winner v Match 5 winner (or highest placed winner at home)

Round 4
Loser of final eliminator vs Winner match 6 )winner to final)

seems the most sensible format for the playoffs.

Sensible is sometimes a euphemism for boring though. I think you have to embrace the excitement of the play-offs or the fairness of 'table-toppers are champions', or you can end up with the the worst of both worlds.

FWIW, I prefer the more open new system. The old system just felt like a mechanism for ensuring the table toppers contested the grand final, as if we were a bit embarrased to decide our champions via a knockout competition.

You never played in the old system so how can you have a prefrence

Booooooooooooooooooooooo