Super8 format to be scrapped : Tue Jun 12, 2018 4:05 pm  

Well we were due a change of format. It has been 4 years since the last change ... http://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk/sport/wolves/16285209.Super_8s_set_to_be_scrapped_from_next_year/

Well we were due a change of format. It has been 4 years since the last change ... http://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk/sport/wolves/16285209.Super_8s_set_to_be_scrapped_from_next_year/

Re: Super8 format to be scrapped : Tue Jun 12, 2018 5:01 pm  

Good..at last..one up one down..

Re: Super8 format to be scrapped : Tue Jun 12, 2018 8:24 pm  

I wasn't a big fan of the middle 8s concept. However, the top 4 aspect of it did seem to stop the complaints about 'meaningless games'. In our glory days under TS when we used to win most weeks, the victories felt a bit hollow as there was always the feeling that it was 27 or however many games of going through the motions before the season started, when Leeds who had been mediocre all year would suddenly start winning.

Even now I think there's a weakness that whilst there's a big fight to get in to the top 4, there isn't that much reward for finishing higher within that - its just about getting a home fixture in a one-off knock out, where everybody is equal and one slip and you're out.

I wonder if it would be worth bringing back the old top 5 system that they used when they used from 1998 to 2001.

Then you had:
[note - team finishing higher in the league always has home advantage]

Week 1 [team finishing 1st has week off]

Qualification playoff: 2 v 3 (winner progresses to qualification semi final, loser progresses to elimination semi final)
Elimination playoff: 4 v 5 (winner progresses to elimination semi final, loser OUT)

Week 2
Qualification semi final: 1 v winner of qualification playoff (winner progresses to Grand Final, loser progresses to preliminary final)
Elimination semi final: loser of qualification playoff v winner of elimination playoff (winner progresses to preliminary final, loser OUT)

Week 3
Preliminary final: loser of qualification semi final v winner of elimination semi final (winner progresses to Grand Final, loser OUT)

Week 4
Grand Final

Although it looks complicated when you first see it, its pretty straightforward. The first two weeks there is a game where you are playing for the right to a week off, and if you lose you have a second chance next week; and a game which is to stay alive in the competition. Then it gets to 3 teams left, one gets knocked out in week 3 and the last two standing play the Grand Final.

This system provided a staggered reward where each team gets a distinct advantage over the one that finished a place below. It is very difficult for a team finishing 5th, or even 4th, to win the Grand Final, they had to go on winning streaks playing away from home.

I think a 5 team playoff would be the right number in the current standard of SL.

Re: Super8 format to be scrapped : Tue Jun 12, 2018 8:30 pm  

How about finish top champions?...
Nope too radical. It'll never work.

Re: Super8 format to be scrapped : Tue Jun 12, 2018 9:18 pm  

rubber duckie wrote:

How about finish top champions?...
Nope too radical. It'll never work.

Careful you'll have the leeds fans on here in a minute telling us how great the GF is but then they would say that wouldn't they?

Re: Super8 format to be scrapped : Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:30 am  

sally cinnamon wrote:

I wasn't a big fan of the middle 8s concept. However, the top 4 aspect of it did seem to stop the complaints about 'meaningless games'. In our glory days under TS when we used to win most weeks, the victories felt a bit hollow as there was always the feeling that it was 27 or however many games of going through the motions before the season started, when Leeds who had been mediocre all year would suddenly start winning.

Even now I think there's a weakness that whilst there's a big fight to get in to the top 4, there isn't that much reward for finishing higher within that - its just about getting a home fixture in a one-off knock out, where everybody is equal and one slip and you're out.

I wonder if it would be worth bringing back the old top 5 system that they used when they used from 1998 to 2001.

Then you had:
[note - team finishing higher in the league always has home advantage]

Week 1 [team finishing 1st has week off]

Qualification playoff: 2 v 3 (winner progresses to qualification semi final, loser progresses to elimination semi final)
Elimination playoff: 4 v 5 (winner progresses to elimination semi final, loser OUT)

Week 2
Qualification semi final: 1 v winner of qualification playoff (winner progresses to Grand Final, loser progresses to preliminary final)
Elimination semi final: loser of qualification playoff v winner of elimination playoff (winner progresses to preliminary final, loser OUT)

Week 3
Preliminary final: loser of qualification semi final v winner of elimination semi final (winner progresses to Grand Final, loser OUT)

Week 4
Grand Final

Although it looks complicated when you first see it, its pretty straightforward. The first two weeks there is a game where you are playing for the right to a week off, and if you lose you have a second chance next week; and a game which is to stay alive in the competition. Then it gets to 3 teams left, one gets knocked out in week 3 and the last two standing play the Grand Final.

This system provided a staggered reward where each team gets a distinct advantage over the one that finished a place below. It is very difficult for a team finishing 5th, or even 4th, to win the Grand Final, they had to go on winning streaks playing away from home.

I think a 5 team playoff would be the right number in the current standard of SL.

I too think this is the best play-off system we’ve had.

Re: Super8 format to be scrapped : Wed Jun 13, 2018 7:11 am  

The grand final is too much of a money spinner to change, the SL won't change

Re: Super8 format to be scrapped : Wed Jun 13, 2018 8:17 am  

sally cinnamon wrote:

I wasn't a big fan of the middle 8s concept. However, the top 4 aspect of it did seem to stop the complaints about 'meaningless games'. In our glory days under TS when we used to win most weeks, the victories felt a bit hollow as there was always the feeling that it was 27 or however many games of going through the motions before the season started, when Leeds who had been mediocre all year would suddenly start winning.

Even now I think there's a weakness that whilst there's a big fight to get in to the top 4, there isn't that much reward for finishing higher within that - its just about getting a home fixture in a one-off knock out, where everybody is equal and one slip and you're out.

I wonder if it would be worth bringing back the old top 5 system that they used when they used from 1998 to 2001.

Then you had:
[note - team finishing higher in the league always has home advantage]

Week 1 [team finishing 1st has week off]

Qualification playoff: 2 v 3 (winner progresses to qualification semi final, loser progresses to elimination semi final)
Elimination playoff: 4 v 5 (winner progresses to elimination semi final, loser OUT)

Week 2
Qualification semi final: 1 v winner of qualification playoff (winner progresses to Grand Final, loser progresses to preliminary final)
Elimination semi final: loser of qualification playoff v winner of elimination playoff (winner progresses to preliminary final, loser OUT)

Week 3
Preliminary final: loser of qualification semi final v winner of elimination semi final (winner progresses to Grand Final, loser OUT)

Week 4
Grand Final

Although it looks complicated when you first see it, its pretty straightforward. The first two weeks there is a game where you are playing for the right to a week off, and if you lose you have a second chance next week; and a game which is to stay alive in the competition. Then it gets to 3 teams left, one gets knocked out in week 3 and the last two standing play the Grand Final.

This system provided a staggered reward where each team gets a distinct advantage over the one that finished a place below. It is very difficult for a team finishing 5th, or even 4th, to win the Grand Final, they had to go on winning streaks playing away from home.

I think a 5 team playoff would be the right number in the current standard of SL.

What is the advantage of this format though - it only offers an additional 1 place of interest.

We cannot avoid the fact there are meaningless games in terms of league position and honours in all sport. Look at football for example - there are many premiership and championship mid-table teams with a good following. At least the Super 8s and Qualifiers gave a bit of incentive in the lower league positions where top 4 was unobtainable.

In any case I don't think the falling attendances are due to the league structure. They are caused by the dull spectacle.

Re: Super8 format to be scrapped : Wed Jun 13, 2018 8:30 am  

Perhaps Duck's first past the post would be the better format ,with an end of season knock out competition for all the SL teams playing for the sky trophy, which would fit perfectly with 16 teams. The final could still be played at Old Trafford ,but maybe it would give some more variety among competing clubs instead of the usual suspects year after year.
On the field ,perhaps increase the number of tackles in a set to ,hopefully,get the handling aspect back in the game & away from the boring kickathon that we used to criticise Rugby Union for.

Re: Super8 format to be scrapped : Wed Jun 13, 2018 9:05 am  

As long as Sky are ploughing millions into the sport they will want a big say on the format of the competition. I for one would just like to see the winner takes all league format, but alas those days are long gone. Sky love their play offs and the big Finale.

If we have to have a play off lets keep it to a top four, the same as the aviva premiership. We need to increase the league by 2 teams next year so we get 13 home and away fixtures. If a Championship team comes up this year, how is it decided who the additional team will be?

I don't feel the need for an additional magic weekend fixture but i am sure we will get one none the less.