Can someone please explain to me how it works!!?
Ive heard so many different stories!
Whoever comes top can pick who they want to play??
does the winner go straight through to OT??
how the hell does it work!!??
| WWW.RLFANS.COM https://rlfans.com/forums/ |
|
| The new play off format https://rlfans.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=426872 |
Page 1 of 4 |
| Author: | kosi [ Mon Aug 24, 2009 10:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | The new play off format |
Can someone please explain to me how it works!!? Ive heard so many different stories! Whoever comes top can pick who they want to play?? does the winner go straight through to OT?? how the hell does it work!!??
|
|
| Author: | Knaresborough Rhino II [ Mon Aug 24, 2009 10:32 pm ] | ||||
| Post subject: | |||||
|
|||||
| Author: | kosi [ Mon Aug 24, 2009 10:49 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
so even less of an advantage finishing top than other seasons bar you can choose your opponent?! so both finalists will be playing the week before the final!? no rest for anyone! |
|
| Author: | DHM [ Tue Aug 25, 2009 8:54 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I have to admit it's the first time I've been bothered to look at the system. There seems to be nothing, other than home advantage - which I guess is reasonably significant, to be gained from finishing top 2. Finishing top only gives you the very limited "selection" option which to me doesn't seem to be much value when the likes of Hudds, HKR, etc are so evenly matched. No week off before the final either and a minimum of two playoff games -no matter where you finish. I suspect this was the driving force behind the format. My own opinion is that 8 teams out of 14 is too many, I'm in agreement with Phil Clarke on this one (possibly a first). The idea was to increase interest for the lower teams at the end of the season and give them all something to play for, but this year only a couple of weeks ago there were 10 teams with realistic chances of making the old top 6, surely that's good enough? Especially with the truly dire season that the bottom 4 clubs have had - do they really deserve to have a crack in the playoffs? If the RFL were really interested in keeping the competition open then perhaps they should once again re-think the scheduling of the CC semi-finals? |
|
| Author: | G1 [ Tue Aug 25, 2009 9:01 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
The teams vying for 7th and 8th have lost more league games than they have won. Surely that is not a playoff calibre team. I agree with the tache, top 8 is too many. |
|
| Author: | rich86 [ Tue Aug 25, 2009 9:12 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Should just be the top two into the play off's - save us all some time and money 
|
|
| Author: | DHM [ Tue Aug 25, 2009 9:17 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
It is interesting to hear a lot of comments along the lines of "in this new format everyone's got a chance". Usually in after match interviews with Brian Noble for some reason. I was thinking how much more of a chance do Wigan need? They've had one off games to make a GF the last two years. |
|
| Author: | Richie [ Tue Aug 25, 2009 9:55 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
G1 wrote:The teams vying for 7th and 8th have lost more league games than they have won.
Surely that is not a playoff calibre team. I agree with the tache, top 8 is too many. I agree too. Should always be half or less than half of all teams. That way it's usually only teams who have won more than they have lost. |
|
| Author: | Rogues Gallery [ Tue Aug 25, 2009 10:23 am ] | ||||
| Post subject: | |||||
|
|||||
| Author: | thebloodbath [ Tue Aug 25, 2009 11:22 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
G1 wrote:The teams vying for 7th and 8th have lost more league games than they have won.
Surely that is not a playoff calibre team. I agree with the tache, top 8 is too many. Which is point I made when everyone was kissing Salfords hairy a*se when the finished within 'the elite' . |
|
| Page 1 of 4 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|