Explain?

Wakefield qualified this season with a negative win ratio

The won 13 and lost 14 and would have needed to win 4 on the trot to be champions. Meaning they would have won 17 and lost 14.

Just to mention, Wakefield only qualified because of Bradfords points deduction. The 26 points Wakefield got wouldnt have been enough to qualify on points gained.

Fair point, I should have ' phrased ' it differently, no club with less than 50 % of the available points should be able to win the competition IMO

A clearer way of stating it would be no club with a less than 50% win ratio should be in the play-offs. But had it gone on points scored, they wouldnt have this year.

Top 6 play off gives every game real meaning you either make the final or are eliminated

Am I missing somthing here? where have all these meanigless fixtures people keep going on about been played? I will give you that there have been some poor games (not poor but maybe lacking skill at times) the only side I recall supposedly fielding a below par side is Warrington as they were supposedly pacing the season & that got them the cup & into a grand final. If the detractors on here think the games are pointless then maybe the game is in real trouble if 80 minutes rugby on a Sunday is not good enough. Not even the morons who watch soccer expect to win every game or see spectacular skill packed thrill a minute games every time they turn up, in fact most supporters know trhat thier teams seasons are about over & we are only 10 weeks into the season.

Absolutely, the whole point of a playoff system is surely that anyone can win it, if you're good enough to do so.

The harder it is to get in, and the more you have to work to get into the playoffs, the more credibility the regular season games are afforded.

I'm no fan of Leeds, but if I hear one more person saying 'you shouldn't be able to win if you're 5th best after 27 games', I'll scream.

I don't think they had it hard enough. I'm sure you realise that isn't the same as saying they had it easy.


I haven't even mentioned Wigan v Leeds. You've decided my argument is "Wigan should have won" and you're gonna keep going with that aren't you? If you'd bother to actually read my posts rather than just quote them as a platform to make a counter argument you've decided you're going to make no matter what, you'd see that my argument is predicated on Leeds playing Wakefield in Week 1, whilst Catalans played Wigan in Week 1.


Serious question: do you want to discuss this or are you just going to keep arguing with yourself? Take a step back, stop telling me what I believe, and respond to what I'm actually saying.

I think its clear that saying 'it wasnt hard enough' is the same as saying 'it was too easy'.
Your argument is that Wigan should have won. If you want to pretend '1st' makes it sounds like your not talking about Wigan and '5th' and you arent talking about Leeds then fine go ahead. We can all pretend you slipped it by us with your subtlety.
Les catalans lost, they got home advantage, Leeds won, they had to play at Les Catalans. That seems like a fair advantage to Les Catalans, Leeds then won again, they then went to Wigan who had a week off, that also seems like more of an advantage to Wigan.

Which team do you think was hard done to by being knocked out in these play-offs? Wigan who lost after a week off? Saints who lost after a week off? Les Catalans who lost 2 games in a row including one at home? Hull who lost away at wire? Wakefield?

What a ridiculous point that is!

The top 2 teams SHOULD have it weighted in their favour as they have EARNED that right by performing in the weekly rounds!

I'm shocked that you believe that people lower down the play-offs should have equal advantage to those towards the top!

i dont.

There is some serious butt hurt in this thread, by Leeds putting yet another cherry on top of the cherry that we had already put on the cake by winning 5 SL's in 6 years and 6 in 9 years. Putting Leeds in the history books as one of the greatest teams in the history of the sport

I'm glad its only a minority though