New Scoring System

[Matthew]

It seems the National league are adopting a points system similar to the one in use in RU

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 248231.stm

Whatever your feelings about RU; the "bonus point" system works pretty well - as it encourages team that know they have lost the game to keep playing; rather than giving up - I don't know if they intend to put a bonus point for scoring above a certain number of tries...

[DaveO]

Matthew posted:
Whatever your feelings about RU; the "bonus point" system works pretty well - as it encourages team that know they have lost the game to keep playing; rather than giving up - I don't know if they intend to put a bonus point for scoring above a certain number of tries...

The press release about this from the RFL quotes Nigel Wood extolling the virtues of the new system and that is no surprise to me. He is a lunatic that should not be let near RL administration IMO.

Nigel Wood is the idiot who while at Halifax (he is a former chairman) came out with the hair brained idea of awarding a point for the team who was leading a game at half time! This is more of the same nonsense.

I can't see why a team that loses a game deserves a point. It is a reward for failing a little less badly!

How this scheme would have affected the league positions of teams last season (in all leagues) would be an interesting thing to see and at the end of the day that is what is important in a system were P&R exists not whether a team pushes for a point in the last 10 mins.

It is obviously possible in the new system for a team with no wins and all losses of 12 points or less to amass more league points than a team who wins several games but loses others by a wider margin with the latter being relegated.

That is a ludicrous state of affairs to have a team with say 5 wins being relegated in place of a team with none (which would require 16 fixtures lost by 12 or less).

Dave

[adrenalinxx]

I don't like the idea of awarding points for a loss, a team can play well and lose by more than 12 points but a team can play badly and lose by 1, there is no consistancy in awards points for a loss, I hope this idea doesn't continue

Also this new points scoring system could lead to negative tactics like those in football. Some "Lesser" clubs instead of trying to win might instead try and keep the score low so that they get atleast 1 point from it, for example Wigan beat Huddersfield by quiet abit twice last season, with the new points system Huddersfield might have turned up to the JJB and deleriabtly waste the game to make sure they atleast get a point from the match (I know tha points system does not effect SL it was just a example).

[GeoffN]

Seems a bit strange to me, too. There's no extra incentive for a team to win by more than 12 points, which makes it unbalanced.

[Mike]

What a stupid idea! It was these sort of administrators that used to change the rules/number of teams/number of divisions/number of competitions every season before the Super League era. It never works and even when the ideas had potential, the idiots in charge used to drop them after one season if it hadn't miraculously quadrupled every clubs income overnight!

When will they learn that stability and steady growth is a far far better option than gimmicky one-season "great ideas" that will almost certainly be dropped in 2008. I'd not be supprised if this idea was thought up "the other day" and been rushed thorugh without being giving a proper analysis of how it will work.

Its no coincidence that Super League has managed steady if unspectacular growth by maintaining stability of its core competitions. Decisions like increasing the number of teams, or altering the salary cap are giving time for consideration allowing a good decision to be made (albeit a little slowly for some of our likings).

What they have effectively done here is allow opponents of the game an opportunity to criticise the sport in much the same way as I criticise RU - the complicated league points system in RU is only in place to cover-up the fundamental deficiencies in the game itself. It is neccessary to artificially encourage attacking play by the structure of competitions, rather than the rewards of attacking play within games being sufficient in themselves (i.e. tries should be worth 4, goals 2 and drops 1!). Now I can't argue that, as the NL seems to think the laws of the game need ammending by the back door as well.

This rule change is totally unneccessary and is an insult to players who are effectively being accused of regularly "giving up" when behind. Apparently points difference means nothing in the NLs.

Stupid, stupid, stupid.

[cpwigan]

A ridiculous idea. we have never needed 3pts for a win because draws are few and far between. Bonus points for losses is crazy. It will produce negative tactics.

If it is not broke ....

[mike binder]

sts will be handing all our competition at the bottom of the league a point then come out and murder us dont think it will happen

[DaveO]

mike binder posted:
sts will be handing all our competition at the bottom of the league a point then come out and murder us dont think it will happen

The scoring system does not apply in SL. However if it ever does you can bet your bottom dollar people will be flinging accusations about teams letting others get a point because it suits them.

Even if we assume the clubs would never stoop to this the fact the new system could allow this to happen means it's inevitable such accusations will be made.

Dave

[Mike]

It you ask me, it may even be dropped after the qualifying rounds of the trais cup and not even be used in the NL leagues proper. The holes in the system are glaring.

[the RL kid]

Can some 1 pls tel me wot is the point of having bonus points in the national league?