Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 105

Thread: Every game matters...?

  1. #76
    Got A Season Ticket
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    427
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    There is no way all teams put in 100% effort for every league game. You only have to look at Hull who conceded 55 points to Huddersfield at home and five days later stuck 50 on Catalans in the cup. You can afford to blow off multiple games in the league and still win the big prize. Not sure of the best solution but to me if you win the league the reward should take you straight to the grand final and 2-5 can play off for the remaining spot. This would make the league more valued.

  2. #77
    Learning All The Songs RJM25R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Royton, Oldham
    Posts
    1,171
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ffs View Post
    There is no way all teams put in 100% effort for every league game. You only have to look at Hull who conceded 55 points to Huddersfield at home and five days later stuck 50 on Catalans in the cup. You can afford to blow off multiple games in the league and still win the big prize. Not sure of the best solution but to me if you win the league the reward should take you straight to the grand final and 2-5 can play off for the remaining spot. This would make the league more valued.

    If you rest players, maybe have a short turnaround, play unfit players, bad refereeing (I know, I know.....) or have difficult conditions (wet pitch for example, or 30 degree heat......(!!!)) it’s possible to get an absolute spanking whilst trying your very very best.

    Did Wigan give 100% on Good Friday when we pasted them? I’m absolutely certain they did. Wire tried their hardest against Salford the other day with a tired squad missing some players......
    Posted by paulscnthorpe
    Thompson made more metres than Isa, clubb, Byrne, partington, o loughlin, Powell and flower combined

    Posted by SaintJon
    And he only played 50 minutes...

  3. #78
    In The South Stand
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Wilts
    Posts
    4,150
    Rep Power
    18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mancunian Saint View Post
    Was chatting to a few saints fans on facebook before and I'd say 50% of them thought we might struggle to make old Trafford,, i wonder what people's thoughts are on this forum?
    I think the CC cup shook a few people. Personally, I think it will be a struggle to win the first game though I'd be surprised if we blew 2 opportunities to get there.

  4. #79
    In The West Stand Belgian Saint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    6,118
    Rep Power
    21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ralph Fridge View Post
    Honest mate I've had enough although as Grey has pointed out, the GB Lions might just keep me interested. A full Aussie tour would be amazing.

    There was one planned for 2001 but they only did the 3 tests in the end as it was after 9/11.

    The RFL will still find a way to cock it up I'm sure
    You can't pack it in, you would be bored to tears without the ingenious promotional strategies from the RL, the consistency of Referees, and the love shown for Saints fans by Wigan and Wire.
    I am in a different situation to you I can only get to about 6 games per year and therefore wouldn't dream of missing any of those. I have just arrived in St Helens today and can't wait for Fri.

  5. #80
    In The South Stand Ralph Fridge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Around
    Posts
    3,124
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Belgian Saint View Post
    You can't pack it in, you would be bored to tears without the ingenious promotional strategies from the RL, the consistency of Referees, and the love shown for Saints fans by Wigan and Wire.
    I am in a different situation to you I can only get to about 6 games per year and therefore wouldn't dream of missing any of those. I have just arrived in St Helens today and can't wait for Fri.
    Glad to hear you're home sir.

    Good to see it still means a lot to people. I do feel a bit like a spoiled kid saying what I said but I do think the sport is in a right mess
    Dave Woods: the guy who makes Eddie Hemmings look like a decent commentator

  6. #81
    In The South Stand Ralph Fridge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Around
    Posts
    3,124
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mancunian Saint View Post
    An interesting point that was raised was the rfl could boost next years cc final attendance by offering anyone attending this years grand final a discount on their Wembley tickets?
    Don't see how that's not a good idea to be honest. I'm all for it
    Dave Woods: the guy who makes Eddie Hemmings look like a decent commentator

  7. #82
    In The South Stand Ralph Fridge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Around
    Posts
    3,124
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mancunian Saint View Post
    I fear playing Salford more than Wigan in the play offs
    I can cope with losing to Salford
    Dave Woods: the guy who makes Eddie Hemmings look like a decent commentator

  8. #83
    Upside
    Non Members

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mancunian Saint View Post
    An interesting point that was raised was the rfl could boost next years cc final attendance by offering anyone attending this years grand final a discount on their Wembley tickets?

    Good idea but not without risk. If you have 20k people wanting to return regardless of team that's a good start. If we give those 20k 50% reduction we need to seek 40k at that price

    The casual viewer who is undecided learns they need to pay double that of reurners they may feel tricked

    Simply reducing ticket fee isn't always a good business plan

    Some businesses have gone bust lowering prices, you devalue your products the new low fee is seen as the market value

  9. #84
    Upside
    Non Members

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mancunian Saint View Post
    Personally, i think ticket prices for the grand final are quite reasonable,, i mean anyone could watch the biggest game in the rugby league calendar for as little as 20

    I don't believe ticket prices are the issue, if we lower them more we make our product look worthless

  10. #85
    Upside
    Non Members

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mancunian Saint View Post
    I agree, but as a one off gesture, it might attract new fans. And a few fans of other clubs have suggested maybe changing the gf kick off time as the see 6pm on a Saturday as being too late,, personally i dont have an issue with it
    I would prefer it earlier with a curtain raiser

    2.00pm curtain raiser, 5.00pm match

  11. #86
    In The South Stand Ralph Fridge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Around
    Posts
    3,124
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    I'd have to be in the pub at 8am with a 5pm kick off.
    Works for me
    Dave Woods: the guy who makes Eddie Hemmings look like a decent commentator

  12. #87
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Macclesfield
    Age
    42
    Posts
    7,165
    Rep Power
    26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Upside View Post
    But people didn't want dead rubbers, straight league creates that particularly this year

    The premiership wasn't taken seriously, it was the festival game at the end of the year, the least desired comp and a bit of a joke
    The most watched and most financial pumped up league in the world is the Premier League, which has 4-5 'dead rubber' games every weekend from about December to May. After about 15-20 games only 6 sides can qualify for the CL and only about 6-8 sides can be relegated. The 6-8 teams in between are basically playing half the season knowing they are playing to finish somewhere between 7th and 13th.

    I find the 'dead rubber' argument so bewildering when it comes to RL. We have a salary cap, there is no excuse for clubs to not be able to compete (unlike the PL) but we then make it even easier for the under-performing clubs by setting them an artificial bar which we deem as success. Now, Top 5 is the best play off system we've had, but a team will finish 5th and find itself 3 games from the Grand Final after probably losing at least 40% of their league games this season. That isn't success, it is mediocrity.

    Some years a team will win the league comfortably (like the PL) but most years the race for 1st would be alive for at least 75% of the season. I would rather have a system where vitally important games are played by the best teams going for a league title for 3/4 of the season than the current one. You seem to favour mediocre clubs playing artificially important games to reach 5th place over the best teams playing genuinely important games to reach 1st.

    I can't work out why anyone would favour the focus of a salary capped competition to be on underachieving teams that struggle to win half their games over the focus being on the ones competing to be the best. Instead, allow these mediocre teams to jockey for positions in the Top 8 to then qualify for a trophy that is less important than being champions or winning the Cup, which is exactly what the Premiership was. It allowed the crap teams to keep their seasons alive in the way that you advocate, encouraging them to finish Top 8 or even sneak 4th to get a home tie, with the reward being that they could maybe win the 3rd most important prize. Under the current system these crap teams are being encouraged to maybe win 55% of their games in order to have a chance of winning the most important prize.

    As for the Premiership not being taken seriously. No, it was taken seriously, it was just not taken as seriously as the League and the Cup, which is entirely justified. But, for a comp that wasn't taken seriously it managed to pull in around 40,000 every year at OT for the Final (2 weeks after 90,000 were at Wembley for the Cup Final) and QF and SF games in the late 80s were getting crowds we'd consider good for play-off games now.

    I got into RL in 1985 and I was wondering whether I'd overblown the kind of crowds Premiership QF and SF games got back then, so I had a little look. In the first 5 years that I was a fan (85-86 to 89-90) the 30 Premiership QF and SF ties averaged 10,790. Only 8 of the 30 games pulled in less than 7,000 with 12 of them getting above 10,000 including 4 crowds over 15,000 and one at Wigan of 22,000. Premiership games got bigger crowds than most league games, and fans turned out for them.

    To be fair I then had a look at the crowds of the last 30 non Grand Final Super League play off games to see the average compared with those non-Final Premiership games from 86-90. The Super League play-off average was 9,760. So, the comp that was purposefully designed to keep clubs seasons alive and was known by everyone to be less important than the league and Cup drew bigger average crowds back then than modern day play-off games have over the last 5-6 years, despite the apparent differences in seriousness that people put upon them. Add to that the fact that average crowds in the league are higher now than they were back in the late 80's and you'll see that the Premiership most certainly was not a comp that fans didn't take seriously.

    Now I know you'll say 'but you've left out the Grand Final', so I won't. The GF is replacing the CC Final as the go-to game of the season, by virtue of it being closer to home for most fans, it isn't in the Summer holidays and it of course is the game that crowns the Champions. But it's succeeding in a bubble, because the play-offs that come before it are only being watched by crowds that you'd see on an average weekend, if you're lucky. But, compare the cumulative attendance at the Cup Final and Grand Final over the past 5 years and then look at the cumulative attendance at the 5 Cup Finals and the 5 Premiership Finals played at OT between 1986-1991 and you notice that the numbers are very close. 690,000 have been to the last 5 Cup Finals and 5 Grand Finals combined, whereas 620,000 went to those 5 Cup Finals and 5 Premiership Finals combined. A slight edge to the modern day, but nowadays those Finals represent the 2 top prizes and are 6-7 weeks apart whilst back then the two Finals included the 3rd biggest prize and were only 2 weeks apart most years. The Grand Final is a success in it's own right, but it's not added to the fanbase of the sport but simply pulled fans away from the Cup Final. We've seen a change in the priority fans give to which marquee Finals they go to rather than the sport attracting more fans.

  13. #88
    Learning All The Songs RJM25R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Royton, Oldham
    Posts
    1,171
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Superblue View Post
    Good call

    Salford have moral and justifiable good reason to have it in for you.
    Yes absolutely, Salford are a big club, and a very successful club in the history of the league as Warrington are the 11th most successful rugby league club in England behind Wigan Warriors, St Helens, Bradford Bulls, Hull FC, Leeds Rhinos, Salford Red Devils, Widnes Vikings, Hull Kingston Rovers and Swinton Lions.

    In fact in current Superleague teams only Wakefield, Cas, Huddersfield, Catalans and London are less successful than Wire in the history of rugby league.
    Last edited by RJM25R; 3rd September 2019 at 19:22.
    Posted by paulscnthorpe
    Thompson made more metres than Isa, clubb, Byrne, partington, o loughlin, Powell and flower combined

    Posted by SaintJon
    And he only played 50 minutes...

  14. #89
    Got A Season Ticket
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    208
    Rep Power
    1

    Default

    For every Wire Scum Troll that in black and white is what history you have NONE you have bought a bit of success with iffy people at the helm.

  15. #90
    In The West Stand Belgian Saint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    6,118
    Rep Power
    21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RJM25R View Post
    Yes absolutely, Salford are a big club, and a very successful club in the history of the league as Warrington are the 11th most successful rugby league club in England behind Wigan Warriors, St Helens, Bradford Bulls, Hull FC, Leeds Rhinos, Salford Red Devils, Widnes Vikings, Hull Kingston Rovers and Swinton Lions.

    In fact in current Superleague teams only Wakefield, Cas, Huddersfield, Catalans and London are less successful than Wire in the history of rugby league.
    Ignore the tosspot and maybe he will go away.

  16. #91
    Learning All The Songs RJM25R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Royton, Oldham
    Posts
    1,171
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Superblue View Post
    Fair summary, but in reality I would say it’s not as good as that , as you are only as good as your last game, which we lost.
    Get yourself back over to RLfans where you’ve been telling Wigan’s lot you hope they win the GF.


    Call yourself a fan?
    Posted by paulscnthorpe
    Thompson made more metres than Isa, clubb, Byrne, partington, o loughlin, Powell and flower combined

    Posted by SaintJon
    And he only played 50 minutes...

  17. #92
    Upside
    Non Members

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gray77 View Post
    The most watched and most financial pumped up league in the world is the Premier League, which has 4-5 'dead rubber' games every weekend from about December to May. After about 15-20 games only 6 sides can qualify for the CL and only about 6-8 sides can be relegated. The 6-8 teams in between are basically playing half the season knowing they are playing to finish somewhere between 7th and 13th.

    I find the 'dead rubber' argument so bewildering when it comes to RL. We have a salary cap, there is no excuse for clubs to not be able to compete (unlike the PL) but we then make it even easier for the under-performing clubs by setting them an artificial bar which we deem as success. Now, Top 5 is the best play off system we've had, but a team will finish 5th and find itself 3 games from the Grand Final after probably losing at least 40% of their league games this season. That isn't success, it is mediocrity.

    Some years a team will win the league comfortably (like the PL) but most years the race for 1st would be alive for at least 75% of the season. I would rather have a system where vitally important games are played by the best teams going for a league title for 3/4 of the season than the current one. You seem to favour mediocre clubs playing artificially important games to reach 5th place over the best teams playing genuinely important games to reach 1st.

    I can't work out why anyone would favour the focus of a salary capped competition to be on underachieving teams that struggle to win half their games over the focus being on the ones competing to be the best. Instead, allow these mediocre teams to jockey for positions in the Top 8 to then qualify for a trophy that is less important than being champions or winning the Cup, which is exactly what the Premiership was. It allowed the crap teams to keep their seasons alive in the way that you advocate, encouraging them to finish Top 8 or even sneak 4th to get a home tie, with the reward being that they could maybe win the 3rd most important prize. Under the current system these crap teams are being encouraged to maybe win 55% of their games in order to have a chance of winning the most important prize.

    As for the Premiership not being taken seriously. No, it was taken seriously, it was just not taken as seriously as the League and the Cup, which is entirely justified. But, for a comp that wasn't taken seriously it managed to pull in around 40,000 every year at OT for the Final (2 weeks after 90,000 were at Wembley for the Cup Final) and QF and SF games in the late 80s were getting crowds we'd consider good for play-off games now.

    I got into RL in 1985 and I was wondering whether I'd overblown the kind of crowds Premiership QF and SF games got back then, so I had a little look. In the first 5 years that I was a fan (85-86 to 89-90) the 30 Premiership QF and SF ties averaged 10,790. Only 8 of the 30 games pulled in less than 7,000 with 12 of them getting above 10,000 including 4 crowds over 15,000 and one at Wigan of 22,000. Premiership games got bigger crowds than most league games, and fans turned out for them.

    To be fair I then had a look at the crowds of the last 30 non Grand Final Super League play off games to see the average compared with those non-Final Premiership games from 86-90. The Super League play-off average was 9,760. So, the comp that was purposefully designed to keep clubs seasons alive and was known by everyone to be less important than the league and Cup drew bigger average crowds back then than modern day play-off games have over the last 5-6 years, despite the apparent differences in seriousness that people put upon them. Add to that the fact that average crowds in the league are higher now than they were back in the late 80's and you'll see that the Premiership most certainly was not a comp that fans didn't take seriously.

    Now I know you'll say 'but you've left out the Grand Final', so I won't. The GF is replacing the CC Final as the go-to game of the season, by virtue of it being closer to home for most fans, it isn't in the Summer holidays and it of course is the game that crowns the Champions. But it's succeeding in a bubble, because the play-offs that come before it are only being watched by crowds that you'd see on an average weekend, if you're lucky. But, compare the cumulative attendance at the Cup Final and Grand Final over the past 5 years and then look at the cumulative attendance at the 5 Cup Finals and the 5 Premiership Finals played at OT between 1986-1991 and you notice that the numbers are very close. 690,000 have been to the last 5 Cup Finals and 5 Grand Finals combined, whereas 620,000 went to those 5 Cup Finals and 5 Premiership Finals combined. A slight edge to the modern day, but nowadays those Finals represent the 2 top prizes and are 6-7 weeks apart whilst back then the two Finals included the 3rd biggest prize and were only 2 weeks apart most years. The Grand Final is a success in it's own right, but it's not added to the fanbase of the sport but simply pulled fans away from the Cup Final. We've seen a change in the priority fans give to which marquee Finals they go to rather than the sport attracting more fans.

    Couple of points as much of this has been discussed before

    I haven't advocated anything, I've shared the reasons given for these formats, whether they are good arguments or not is up for debate

    The premiership from memory had two games and was a spring afternoon

    The GF hasn't taken over from the CC, it is however another event for the RL community along with magic, CC and Catalan away games, all of which would also affect attendance at the old premiership games

    Many things have affected attendance at sports events over the past three decades, so difficult to draw direct comparisons, for example, keeping the same system may have led to a drop in numbers anyway. Winter v summer etc, I believe numbers attending a winter afternoon game would drop as we now have more TV, X boxes etc to keep people away from sports

    Sky didn't want to pay us big money for the old system, only the new, so unless we wanted to remain semi pro we had to accept the new system

  18. #93
    In The South Stand Ralph Fridge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Around
    Posts
    3,124
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mancunian Saint View Post
    Ralph matey, if you're going to the grand final this year, i shall be in the toll gate at about 2ish with a few saints fans from norway
    Norway I'll be going in there then...

    Only messing, I'll bear that in mind pal, not sure what our plans are. I say this because if I've had a skinful, I'll end up somewhere where I didn't plan on
    Dave Woods: the guy who makes Eddie Hemmings look like a decent commentator

  19. #94
    In The South Stand Ralph Fridge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Around
    Posts
    3,124
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gray77 View Post
    The most watched and most financial pumped up league in the world is the Premier League, which has 4-5 'dead rubber' games every weekend from about December to May. After about 15-20 games only 6 sides can qualify for the CL and only about 6-8 sides can be relegated. The 6-8 teams in between are basically playing half the season knowing they are playing to finish somewhere between 7th and 13th.

    I find the 'dead rubber' argument so bewildering when it comes to RL. We have a salary cap, there is no excuse for clubs to not be able to compete (unlike the PL) but we then make it even easier for the under-performing clubs by setting them an artificial bar which we deem as success. Now, Top 5 is the best play off system we've had, but a team will finish 5th and find itself 3 games from the Grand Final after probably losing at least 40% of their league games this season. That isn't success, it is mediocrity.

    Some years a team will win the league comfortably (like the PL) but most years the race for 1st would be alive for at least 75% of the season. I would rather have a system where vitally important games are played by the best teams going for a league title for 3/4 of the season than the current one. You seem to favour mediocre clubs playing artificially important games to reach 5th place over the best teams playing genuinely important games to reach 1st.

    I can't work out why anyone would favour the focus of a salary capped competition to be on underachieving teams that struggle to win half their games over the focus being on the ones competing to be the best. Instead, allow these mediocre teams to jockey for positions in the Top 8 to then qualify for a trophy that is less important than being champions or winning the Cup, which is exactly what the Premiership was. It allowed the crap teams to keep their seasons alive in the way that you advocate, encouraging them to finish Top 8 or even sneak 4th to get a home tie, with the reward being that they could maybe win the 3rd most important prize. Under the current system these crap teams are being encouraged to maybe win 55% of their games in order to have a chance of winning the most important prize.

    As for the Premiership not being taken seriously. No, it was taken seriously, it was just not taken as seriously as the League and the Cup, which is entirely justified. But, for a comp that wasn't taken seriously it managed to pull in around 40,000 every year at OT for the Final (2 weeks after 90,000 were at Wembley for the Cup Final) and QF and SF games in the late 80s were getting crowds we'd consider good for play-off games now.

    I got into RL in 1985 and I was wondering whether I'd overblown the kind of crowds Premiership QF and SF games got back then, so I had a little look. In the first 5 years that I was a fan (85-86 to 89-90) the 30 Premiership QF and SF ties averaged 10,790. Only 8 of the 30 games pulled in less than 7,000 with 12 of them getting above 10,000 including 4 crowds over 15,000 and one at Wigan of 22,000. Premiership games got bigger crowds than most league games, and fans turned out for them.

    To be fair I then had a look at the crowds of the last 30 non Grand Final Super League play off games to see the average compared with those non-Final Premiership games from 86-90. The Super League play-off average was 9,760. So, the comp that was purposefully designed to keep clubs seasons alive and was known by everyone to be less important than the league and Cup drew bigger average crowds back then than modern day play-off games have over the last 5-6 years, despite the apparent differences in seriousness that people put upon them. Add to that the fact that average crowds in the league are higher now than they were back in the late 80's and you'll see that the Premiership most certainly was not a comp that fans didn't take seriously.

    Now I know you'll say 'but you've left out the Grand Final', so I won't. The GF is replacing the CC Final as the go-to game of the season, by virtue of it being closer to home for most fans, it isn't in the Summer holidays and it of course is the game that crowns the Champions. But it's succeeding in a bubble, because the play-offs that come before it are only being watched by crowds that you'd see on an average weekend, if you're lucky. But, compare the cumulative attendance at the Cup Final and Grand Final over the past 5 years and then look at the cumulative attendance at the 5 Cup Finals and the 5 Premiership Finals played at OT between 1986-1991 and you notice that the numbers are very close. 690,000 have been to the last 5 Cup Finals and 5 Grand Finals combined, whereas 620,000 went to those 5 Cup Finals and 5 Premiership Finals combined. A slight edge to the modern day, but nowadays those Finals represent the 2 top prizes and are 6-7 weeks apart whilst back then the two Finals included the 3rd biggest prize and were only 2 weeks apart most years. The Grand Final is a success in it's own right, but it's not added to the fanbase of the sport but simply pulled fans away from the Cup Final. We've seen a change in the priority fans give to which marquee Finals they go to rather than the sport attracting more fans.
    First trophy I remember Saints winning was the Premiership in 1993. 10-4 against Wigan. My dad was skipping down the street until August
    Dave Woods: the guy who makes Eddie Hemmings look like a decent commentator

  20. #95
    In The South Stand Ralph Fridge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Around
    Posts
    3,124
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mancunian Saint View Post
    Yes matey, mainly all women too so if you're married, dont tell your Mrs lol
    I see. Im not married like just with someone. She was on about tagging along. Best tell that it's just me & the lads...
    Dave Woods: the guy who makes Eddie Hemmings look like a decent commentator

  21. #96
    Moderator Div's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sintellins
    Posts
    11,069
    Rep Power
    28

    Default

    I'm with Gray but I think we are backing a loser. There is no way they are going to scrap the Grand Final.

  22. #97
    In The South Stand Ralph Fridge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Around
    Posts
    3,124
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Div View Post
    I'm with Gray but I think we are backing a loser. There is no way they are going to scrap the Grand Final.
    I don't know you know. I think the format is tired. It works for the Aussies because their comp is so ridiculously intense that you'll end up way down the league if you lose 3 on the spin.

    The whole thing is a bit of a joke. Looped fixtures and a random set of fixtures for magic. When you think about it it's bordering on farcical.
    Dave Woods: the guy who makes Eddie Hemmings look like a decent commentator

  23. #98
    WARNING! WOLF FAN!

    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    189
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ralph Fridge View Post
    I don't know you know. I think the format is tired. It works for the Aussies because their comp is so ridiculously intense that you'll end up way down the league if you lose 3 on the spin.

    The whole thing is a bit of a joke. Looped fixtures and a random set of fixtures for magic. When you think about it it's bordering on farcical.
    Good post

  24. #99
    Upside
    Non Members

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ralph Fridge View Post
    I don't know you know. I think the format is tired. It works for the Aussies because their comp is so ridiculously intense that you'll end up way down the league if you lose 3 on the spin.

    The whole thing is a bit of a joke. Looped fixtures and a random set of fixtures for magic. When you think about it it's bordering on farcical.

    Agree with the loop fixtures, over familiarity with playing the same teams

    I think it is fixed by going to a 14 team league, and I've heard the arguments against as in players and don't agree

    And changing the CC to a champions league type approach with mini leagues at early stages with championship clubs

    I really don't think we should lose the GF, it's a big occasion, particularly for the broadcasters, to remove that then try to sell our sport to a broadcaster or a new deal with Sky would be catastrophic in my opinion.

  25. #100
    Learning All The Songs RJM25R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Royton, Oldham
    Posts
    1,171
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ralph Fridge View Post
    I don't know you know. I think the format is tired. It works for the Aussies because their comp is so ridiculously intense that you'll end up way down the league if you lose 3 on the spin.

    The whole thing is a bit of a joke. Looped fixtures and a random set of fixtures for magic. When you think about it it's bordering on farcical.
    Absolutely, whereas a mediocre team can lose 12 games in Superleague and still be in 2nd.
    Posted by paulscnthorpe
    Thompson made more metres than Isa, clubb, Byrne, partington, o loughlin, Powell and flower combined

    Posted by SaintJon
    And he only played 50 minutes...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •