At first I didn't like the playoff structure. I thought that the team that finished top deserved to win.

However, given the asymmetric nature of the fixture list this is not possible.

What should remain though, imo, is a massive advantage to the team finishing top with a general reduction in that advantage for teams finishing 1-5 or 1-6.

Six is the absolute maximum position that a team should qualify for the playoffs from, and it should be very very hard for them to do so.

I agree and I don't know why they changed it.

Oh yes I've just remembered, more games = more gate money = more profit.

Probably so that Wigoon could get into them

They best make it the top 10 get in then

We're only losing so that Longy can get good odds on us at the bookies.

C-

See me

The P/o set up this year is ridiculous IMO....

taking last years scenario.........
we would have gone to saints as 4th place and probably lost.... Then even finishing in forth place, we would have been afforded the luxury of losing but remaining in the play offs!!!!! and more still would have just been one game at home(or widnes ) away from a final eliminator.

Lets for arguments sake say hull kr win through in week one, play them and your back to in what essence is a final eliminator against leeds or saints (which if 'picked' by saints, you actually have an added advantage in that you've already got a tactical insight into them cos youve played them two weeks earlier)?!?!

So all you have to do to get to a final eliminator is beat one mid table side at home!! and in the process of the play offs you can actually afford the luxury of LOSING your first game even coming 4th!!! Ludicrous IMO but typically RL!!

compare to last year or the year before when you had to beat 2 top sides one home one away just to make an eliminator!!! in the top 4 now, each team roughly has the same chance of winning (which could actually work in our favour, but still PATHETIC!)

Its always hard to justify anything other than a first past the post system anyway, but at least the old top 5 could be argued with some effectiveness, that every team had to beat every team above them at the very least to become champions!!!

To win from 5th you would have to beat 4th, 3rd/2nd, 2nd/1st away...followed by 1st/2nd at Old trafford!!

I hope the Play offs reduce the RFL to a laughing stock this season and the top 5 is brought back in...only playoff system that ever made sence

I don't agree with the top 8 play-off. They didn't go far enough.
There should be a top 14 play-off:
1 v 14
2 v 13
3 v 12
4 v 11
5 v 10
6 v 9
7 v 8
The team that wins with the widest margin gets a bye through the next round, while the other six play in 3 matches, the best winners of the first round having home advantage.
The last 4 would then play in the semis with once again home advantage given to the 'bye' team and the best of the other 3.
The final needs no explanation.

The top 5 was the best sytem.

Failing that, the top 8 should be the NRL method or not at all.

Top 5 (only through gritted teeth) ....purely to maintain interest and cash flow, it does nothing to enhance the integrity of the sport.

Provided everyone plays everyone else home and away.....from Feb through to Aug/Sep....you've had good luck....bad luck...injuries and suspensions ....dodgy decisions for and against....and so has everyone else, and after all that, if you finish top of the pile..you're the best !

Earlier poster was out of order saying Halifax won the league in the mid 80's when there were other teams who were better.....Drivel....if they'd been better ...over the whole course of the season....they'd have finished in front of them ....but they weren't ...so they didn't.

Seem to recall a discarded Colin Whitfield featuring for Halifax that season, and kicking them to a vital win (or was it a draw ?) at CP in that season.