Hello, I am looking into writing a book about the idea of play-offs deciding the Champions in sport. I was wondering what the opinions are of fellow Rugby League fans on the play-offs. Do you think play-offs are the best way to decide the champions or do you prefer whoever finishes top being champions? And what do you think of the current format?
Personally I think play-offs are a great concept, sport is about peaking on the big occasion and beating your biggest rivals head to head when it matters.

I like the play offs but I don't like the format that could simply see two fixtures from week one repeated in week three.

I think playoffs are a good idea but the team that comes 1st does not get enough credit

I think the team that finishes top should be straight into the semi finals of the play-offs where they just have to win 1 game to make it to the grand final, thats fair reward for finishing top.

This club call thing is laughable, also getting a second chance in the play offs is laughable in my opinion as that rewards losers. To win the grand final you should have been an unbeaten side during the play-offs, champions shouldn't be a team thats lost a game in a knock out series they should be champions for a reason.

I think 8 is too many teams and although it kept the season exciting until last day of the season 7 would be better.

The way i would do it would be:

1st into the semi final
2 v 7
3 v 6
4 v 5

Then 1st place picks who they want in the semi final

I think the play offs are a good idea, and the Grand Final a great climax to the season, but the current system is wrong, in my opinion - simply there for sky?

Currently I believe we have 9 games in the play offs in total - but the problem is, there's a big possibilty that the Wigan v Leeds games, and Saints v Wire games will just be repeated two weeks later, so a lot of people won't attend the first match, as there'd either rather watch the 2nd weeks game if they lose, or the thrid weeks game if they win (or both), as those games actually mean something, i.e. elimination.

I don't see why we can't just go back to the old systme - 1st v 8th, 2nd v 7th, 3rd v 6th, 4th v 5th in week one, then the winners of game one play the winners of game four (highest placed league finish at home) and the winners of game 2 play the winners of game 3 - for a place in the final. Would still have 7 games, but there's no games with little meaning, i.e. ALL games are for elimination.

Just my opinion

Champions to me is the team that wins the LEAGUE ,grand final winners to me win an end of season play off competition winning the league imo is far superior than winning the play offs , grand final used to be called the premiership play offs which we won in 85-86 season it is just under a different name now no difference imo !

Absolutely spot on in my opinion - the team that is the highest placed at the end of the season has every right to call themselves Champions.

the play offs are a great idea.

the team that wins it are the true Champions you all know the format before the season starts.
Fair play to St Helens for never bitching about topping the league and missing out on the big prize.... If wigan dont win the Grand final this year can you only begin to imagine how such a bad idea the Superleague is and its sky's fault blah blah cry cry....

the fact is Wigan won the challenge cup and league loads of times from 88 to 95ish, and Wembley is the competion that all the fuss was made about 8 times in a row and all that.....
that not a peep about 7 league titles in a row.

Same With Widnes they were called the cup kings....they never won the challenge cup back to back...but they won the league two years on the trot....who knew??

the Grand final has given us Two Major Competitions they are both very high profile and thats what we need. ...

go back to a league format and watch the champions get a five line write up between darts and snooker if we are lucky...

people who dont follow our game know about the grand final and thats all thats needs to be said

....but even under a 'top of the table' system the champions have usually lost some games along the way.

Quote PADDERS="PADDERS"Champions to me is the team that wins the LEAGUE ,grand final winners to me win an end of season play off competition winning the league imo is far superior than winning the play offs , grand final used to be called the premiership play offs which we won in 85-86 season it is just under a different name now no difference imo !'" Perhaps we should put a 'sticky' on this, but the years of the 'premiership' were short lived. Fans in their twenties and thirties were not around earlier to see how things used to be, but just check here for one ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rugby_League_Championship ) to see that for the vast majority of its history the RL champions have been decided by a play-off of one kind or another. I don't especially lile the current top-eight system, as it can lead to 'repeat' matches, but play-offs are historically the way to go and the most exciting and attention-grabbing. As others have said, during the 80s/90s there was zero glamour in winning the league as the only match/occasion that mattered to the press or passing public was Wembley. Now we have two great occasions - we should not throw that away.

Quote PADDERS="PADDERS"Champions to me is the team that wins the LEAGUE ,grand final winners to me win an end of season play off competition winning the league imo is far superior than winning the play offs , grand final used to be called the premiership play offs which we won in 85-86 season it is just under a different name now no difference imo !'" Perhaps we should put a 'sticky' on this, but the years of the 'premiership' were short lived. Fans in their twenties and thirties were not around earlier to see how things used to be, but just check here for one ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rugby_League_Championship ) to see that for the vast majority of its history the RL champions have been decided by a play-off of one kind or another. I don't especially lile the current top-eight system, as it can lead to 'repeat' matches, but play-offs are historically the way to go and the most exciting and attention-grabbing. As others have said, during the 80s/90s there was zero glamour in winning the league as the only match/occasion that mattered to the press or passing public was Wembley. Now we have two great occasions - we should not throw that away.

Fact of the matter is, Sky dictate a lot of how our sport is run. Whether that's right or wrong is up to personal opinion but look at it this way.

Sky's main interest is to keep ratings high, and to keep brining in subscribers. Therefore the product Sky show has to be one of a quality standard. Rugby League is a product to Sky. If in Sky's opinion more viewers will watch and subscribe to their satellite service if rugby league had an exciting play off system in place then thats good for both Sky and the RFL. Sky bring in the viewers increasing their advertising rates for Super League games making themselves more money, and those viewers that are enticed by watching rugby league may decide to go to a game brining in more money for the clubs and the RFL at major games (Grand Final and the Challenge Cup.) Its win - win for both parties.

There are side effects to having a major broadcast partner like Sky, but financially as long as Rugby League keeps getting the ratings for Sky they will continue to invest in the sport therefore keeping the sport afloat.