Yes

In a word, no.

You shouldn't be given a reward for losing, in my opinion.

I hate it personally, as ESO says, it rewards failure

So using the old 2-1-0 system you could have five teams that fail to win a game yet some of them will be "rewarded" for scoring more or conceding less points (or both) than the others. The reward being escape from relegation.

Thanks for your input, sorry the link didn't work. I'll try it again www.totalrl.com/forums/index.php ... mpionship/ Cheers

Thanks for your input, sorry the link didn't work. I'll try it again www.totalrl.com/forums/index.php ... mpionship/ Cheers

If memory serves me right, and at my age that is dubious to say the least

I think that not so many seasons ago, thanks to the bonus point system, the Eagles scored league points in every league game.

Correct, despite losing half of our games.

We didn't deserve to finish where we did that season, a loss is a loss in my opinion, I don't take any pleasure by losing by less than 12.

Yes. Because it differentiates between teams who get battered every week and teams who may lose but are trying to compete and not throw in the towel.

Compared to the 2-1-0 system ? No it doesn't. You get two points more for winning than losing, just the same.

Going back to the old system would reward clubs who get stuffed

- they'd be the only teams to gain from it.

Why do you want to do that, Doctor ?

I don't really care, it doesn't make that much difference anyway.

My system would be:

3 points for a win in regulation
1 point for a draw, but the game goes into golden point extra time and the winner picks up an extra point
0 points for a loss in regulation

Saying that, knocking over a drop goal to lose to Castleford 15-27 was quite fun.

Exactly, how pathetic is that?

Imagine a conversation with someone who doesn't follow RL:

"Did you win?"
"No we lost."
"Oh so have you gone down a place now then?"
"No, because we only lost by 12 so we got a reward for it, one point."
"...Right...so you're still top of the league then...think you'll get promoted?"
"No, we don't have promotion, someone just goes up once every three years on sky sports news."

And people wonder why RL gets ridiculed.

We're not the only sport with bonus points.

Cricket's had them for forty years.

I agree entirely with this.

Scrap licencing now and save what dignity (if any) our sport has left.

Exactly,i am really underwhelmed by this season,Really lost interest,The realisation that we could win the competition and you don't go up really bugs me,All were missing is the crowds,They won't come,especially at don Valley,We had hope at Bramall Lane,We have no chance for the next application,You shouldnt apply to go up a league,you win it on the field,If a fan who has been for years is struggling to get any enthusiasm for it,then what chance of attracting new fans,Super League is only helping clubs in the super league,It is pushing the clubs in leagues below even further down,you go along with it for a while but after a bit which is what has happened to me,You just can't see the point,No chance of going up or down,Wasteing money on somthing that really doesnt have a point to it.I will still go to the odd home game but if i have somthing else to do then i'll do that,I'd always work around games with things to do with kids etc,Now it's the other wayround.

It's hardly comparable though, is it Griff?

Four day cricket has bonus points, but it's played over FOUR DAYS, and is reliant on the weather. Rugby league is played over 80 minutes.

One day cricket doesn't have a bonus point for losing by less than 12 runs, because that would be stupid, just like our system.

I was ambivalent towards it all until I watched Barrow get within 12 points of us at DVS and just kick drop goal after drop goal to secure the point they needed to win the league. That's not entertainment, that's not rugby. It's crap. And it's destroying the sport, along with the franchising system.

When franchising first came in I thought it was the way to go. Now I've changed my mind. Opinions like yours have made me see what is being done to the clubs outside of the SL. The massive stumbling block is the fact that the SL is a full time comp and no Championship club is ever going to bridge that gap in a single closed season. Just witness Widnes who will struggle to win a game all year. Even Fev would go straight back down. I think the way forward has to be conferences where all teams that meet the criteria are allowed to play in the top flight. If that means having a twenty team SL then so be it.

I'd go along with a Conference system hopefully with the weaker teams getting the sort of support from the RFL that the late unlamented Crusaders did. How much money was wasted on that exercise in vanity? There again whichever planet the RFL live on it's not usually Planet Earth.

The whole point of having divisions is to have teams of similar ability playing each other. If you had a support programme on a wholesale scale, to be really effective, you'd need to give the weaker teams the most money. Which $uperleague teams will be voting for that ?

If you have a play-off system to determine the Champions (which we do) then a Conference system is a good idea, as you don't need to play each team twice.

Yup. Soccer makes me so envious.

Sack the manager because third place is just tantamount to failure.

Of course, Rugby League doesn't have owners who make bizarre decisions do they?!!. Im sure our friends in Barrow might think of one....

The fact it's taken you most of the week to come up with that, which is quite frankly completely irrelevant to the argument, speaks volumes.

I'm right Griff, just admit it.