Re: Wire or Leeds? : Sun Oct 07, 2012 1:23 pm  

hula89 wrote:

Hopefully a few chair people of the top teams will do something about it and complain. Sadly I think the only way that anything would be done is if someone like Wigan or Saints won from 5th after Leeds had finished 1st. The RFL won't do a thing while it benefits Gary Hetherington's pocket.

Re: Wire or Leeds? : Sun Oct 07, 2012 1:54 pm  

pies-r-us wrote:

You’re right mate last night’s result was an absolute disaster for the game of rugby league.

And I thought we took it badly!

Re: Wire or Leeds? : Sun Oct 07, 2012 8:56 pm  

Take off your cherry and white blinkers and see the big picture ! The champions are the team that wins the grand final end of. If the champions were the team that finishes top, then Warrington would have won the title because they were the most consistant team over the year and rested and rotated their older players to keep them fresh for the play offs. They also put out a reserve team prior to wembley and lost the two points that would have given them the title. The only reason you would chose to finish higher up the table is to make your play off games easier and to obtain a second chance from finishing in the top two. Games through the season are not meaning less, is just that Leeds have won back to back Grand finals from 5th so everyones jumping on the band wagon saying weekley games are.

Please take some time to ackowledge what a champion team Leeds have been over the last eight years in a salary cap competition. They have never broken the cap like some and are currently spending under the cap. Adam Pearson and Ian Lennegan can spend all they want prizing contracted players from other clubs to try and buy sucess, but local lads with a never say die attitude is a winning combination no club, not even Wigan can buy under the current rugby league structure.

Re: Wire or Leeds? : Sun Oct 07, 2012 9:49 pm  

Tingley Rhino wrote:

Please take some time to ackowledge what a champion team Leeds.....

Your winning the 'play off final' , is just akin to winning the Challenge cup isn't it ?

Win a few matches and proclaim yourselves champions, which is a misnomer.

Fair play for winning the cup, again.

But to use the title 'Champions' is an oxymoron.

Hell, even Wakey turned you over this season, as well as many other clubs.

Re: Wire or Leeds? : Sun Oct 07, 2012 10:00 pm  

So the only sure fire way of becoming champions is to win the League?
If Warrington or Saints became Champions by winning the GF you would still complain as they finished 2nd or 3rd.
Or is it just because Leeds won it again you think it is a bad idea?
The champions of SL is the team that wins the GF.
The league fixtures are all about gaining an advantage in the play offs.
These are the rules and these are the rules all the SL clubs signed up to.
Oh and yes we did get beat by Wakefield in the League even Widnes beat some of the top teams this year!!

Re: Wire or Leeds? : Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:56 am  

chapylad wrote:

So the only sure fire way of becoming champions is to win the League?
If Warrington or Saints became Champions by winning the GF you would still complain as they finished 2nd or 3rd.
Or is it just because Leeds won it again you think it is a bad idea?
The champions of SL is the team that wins the GF.
The league fixtures are all about gaining an advantage in the play offs.
These are the rules and these are the rules all the SL clubs signed up to.
Oh and yes we did get beat by Wakefield in the League even Widnes beat some of the top teams this year!!

The SL clubs signed up to this idea you say, but I didn’t, and I’d say if it’s broke fix it. Not everything that is a rule/law or idea is necessarily perfect and this one is turning into a very bad one for the SL. I was told that it was once legal to kill a Welshman within the boundaries of the walls of Chester, this I’d think you’d agree was a bad idea if you were Welsh, and the way the play offs are structured and the title of champions is a bad idea for the weekly rounds of SL, and I would think the same no matter who wins a GF. Also with no P&R about half of SL has virtually next to nothing to play for all season.

Re: Wire or Leeds? : Mon Oct 08, 2012 8:11 am  

Would Leeds have finished top if thats what they had to do to become Champions?

Winning the playoffs is no more harder than winning the CC. In fact, Wigans run to win the CC last year was harder than Leeds run to win the GF. Finishing top is the hardest thing to do, thats why that team should be the Champions starting next year. Give us all a reason to buy a season ticket as the regular is meaningless with just 27 friendlies at the moment.

Re: Wire or Leeds? : Mon Oct 08, 2012 9:15 am  

Dougy wrote:

Give us all a reason to buy a season ticket as the regular is meaningless with just 27 friendlies at the moment.

Disagree with this point. Why not back your team to surpass Leeds' achievement: win the LLS and GF (throw in the CC as well and your team will definitely get the acknowledgement that you appear to so desperately need). But AEOTD it's a personal choice I guess; just don't be too surprised to find your team, having enjoyed lacklustre support throughout the season and displaying the lack of effort in regular rounds that many fans are apparently calling for, finds itself unable to lift itself at the seasons end.

Re: Wire or Leeds? : Mon Oct 08, 2012 9:20 am  

Dougy wrote:

Would Leeds have finished top if thats what they had to do to become Champions?

Winning the playoffs is no more harder than winning the CC. In fact, Wigans run to win the CC last year was harder than Leeds run to win the GF. Finishing top is the hardest thing to do, thats why that team should be the Champions starting next year. Give us all a reason to buy a season ticket as the regular is meaningless with just 27 friendlies at the moment.

In the CC you get weeks between the rounds. In the playoffs you have to back up, week after week.

From wigans run i remember them playing bradford away (who finished outside the playoffs) warrington away (1st) saints neutral (3rd) and leeds neutral (5th). I don't remember the game before bradford, but would i be right in assuming it wasn't an opponent worth mentioning?

Leeds had to back up week after week against 8th (h) 4th (away) 1st (away) 2nd (neutral)

So no, wigans cup run wasn't harder. And the weekly rounds aren't meaningless because you still need to finish higher up to have the best chance. Though i suppose, anywhere from 1st to 5th wigan generally fail to make the grand final so It doesn't matter for you guys.

Re: Wire or Leeds? : Mon Oct 08, 2012 9:44 am  

Peter Kingsley wrote:

In the CC you get weeks between the rounds. In the playoffs you have to back up, week after week.

From wigans run i remember them playing bradford away (who finished outside the playoffs) warrington away (1st) saints neutral (3rd) and leeds neutral (5th). I don't remember the game before bradford, but would i be right in assuming it wasn't an opponent worth mentioning?

Leeds had to back up week after week against 8th (h) 4th (away) 1st (away) 2nd (neutral)

So no, wigans cup run wasn't harder. And the weekly rounds aren't meaningless because you still need to finish higher up to have the best chance. Though i suppose, anywhere from 1st to 5th wigan generally fail to make the grand final so It doesn't matter for you guys.

-talk about missing the point!and to think,you actually *believe* your world champs of rl as well as *worthy* champions of sl