Joined: Jan 24 2007 Posts: 6309 Location: Over there
Dougy wrote:I#m pretty sure one year in the 70's Dewsbury won the title from 8th. If anyone has a link to that league season to find out their win/loss ration i would find that interesting.
Also I agree with McManus! It is a much greater acheivement to finish top 4 years in a row than to win 2 playoff finals.
Stevo was captain, I think.
Some very valid points, although tarnished by it coming from McManus, as he has been on the receiving end of two defeats and smacks of sour grapes.
The question I would pose is when it was a "normal" league, when was it actually exciting? We all get to tune in to see whether Saints can beat Celtics at home to make themselves certain of the title, or whatever? The top 6 was no different to the top five, as even with the six, a team at sixth would still have to play all the team away from home.
Joined: Jun 17 2006 Posts: 717 Location: warrington, but wigan through and through
would EM be saying this if it was saints, who had finish 2nd and went on to win the grand final, other then the other way round?
I see peoples point and i wouldn't disagree with the whole credit should go to top of the league.
But we had that at the very beginning of superleague and sometimes you will end up with the season finished with 6,8 games left, plus most teams will know there not going to win anything half way through a season, making half their season meaning less also, which then cancels out some of the points made on here.
By having not just the likes of leeds and saints but the other teams something to play for it makes the competition better in general.
Look at the premierleague, they have the top team as champs, but even they had to introduce european places and give the cup competitions extra incentive so that half the teams in the league didn't just gave up. Added to that they have relagation which superleague no longer has, giving teams extra incentive to "play". Yet we all moan that its boring and over with half the season left with simlar problems as superlegue that only 3/4 teams will ever win it.
Without the play offs you would irradigate some of the best games we get e.g. Bradford v wigan. It also means when catalan, huddersfield etc get into the play offs it creats an underdog feel to games which fans, neutrals etc enjoy. Also only one team outside the top 2 have ever won the league, so from past years you can actually say the most consistant teams have been crownd champs, without getting ride of the hope that maybe, just maybe one year someone outside of the top 2/3 might get there.
Stevo on a Craig Smith intersept, "that was like throwing tomato seeds out of a moving train window and coming back a year later and tomatoes have grown!"
Eddies reaction, "I don't know what he's been taking but i wants some"
Wayne Rooney, meanwhile, says he has failed to be gripped by England's rugby union World Cup bid.
"I've not seen it," said the England striker. "I've been watching the rugby league."
Rogues Gallery wrote:The top 5 system was easily the best. It rewarded the team that finished top in that they only had to win one game to reach the grand final.
To win it from third was difficult.
To win it from fourth or fifth was almost impossible.
What's changed there? Fourth and below remains impossible.
Joined: Jan 04 2003 Posts: 4957 Location: At home, listening to Elvis.
I think the captains of all the teams should play a game of musical chairs, the winner becomes 'Champions', I have forwarded this suggestion to the RFL and it is being considered !!
Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery.......
I will look to the moment, and miraculously, the future will take care of itself.
Radio 5 Live, Sat, April 14th, 2007,...Dave Whelan, "In Wigan, rugby will always be king"
'I was certain, positive, convinced, and yet..........unsure'
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
