Aviva Premiership 2011/12 Draw

See here for the fixtures for the Jeff next season

No worries.

Looking at this year's finalists, they meet during the World Cup period and during the Six Nations, which in my opinion is very much advantage Saracens, as they have a lot fewer England Internationals.

Some great matches lined up on the last day as well in Bath Vs Leicester and London Irish Vs Gloucester, which could potentially decide play-off or Heineken Cup places.

Bath have got Wasps on the 21st of April, but as opposed to previous St George's Day games (and I know this one hasn't fallen exactly on the day) it appears to be at the Rec and not Twickenham. Are they likely to move the match?

My prediction is for Saracens to top the regular season, with Northampton, Leicester and Bath making the play-offs, Gloucester and Quins taking the automatic HC spots. Irish 7th (ready to cash-in when an English club lifts European silverware) and probably Newcastle down.

Robbo,

I think its a given that the St Georges day game will be at Twickenham

Overall, I suspect that draw has marginally done the Chiefs a few favours, so I'm fairly pleased with it tbh. While the RWC is on, we have Tigers away, Falcons at home, Bath away, Wasps at home, Saracens at home, and Saints away - defo some opportunities for points on the road

AsLong....
How many of the Cheifs players will be at the WC though? I must admit I have no idea if your Pislanders are likely to feature.

Not too many, PSW - Mitchell (but we've still got Budgie, Tui and newly-re-signed Andress), Polu (Thomas and Barrett), plus Naqer (Rennie and new recruit Tatupu) - so we ought to be ok, I hope

So long as there's play-offs it will be sham.

But I'd concede that it is less so on a RWC year.

Portnoy wrote:So long as there's play-offs it will be sham.

But I'd concede that it is less so on a RWC year.

Ah-ha, so you like the playoffs when it suits you, Portnoy?!

Portnoy wrote:So long as there's play-offs it will be sham.

No more so than the Booker prize vote

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

Portnoy wrote:So long as there's play-offs it will be sham.

No more so than the Booker prize vote

Interesting. A literary prize analogy. There are usually enough weekends in the year to play out a league season and strangely more than enough without a play-off. What a lovely chance that would be for an FA Cup style comp to give a bit of hope to yer Sales and Worcesters etc.

The play-offs are a fantastic way to attract new fans to the game. I watched the Super Bowl this year, and I'm definitely going to be watching more of the NFL season this year.

The play-offs are how I got into domestic rugby. I don't think there is any chance of them being abolished.

DaveM wrote:The play-offs are how I got into domestic rugby. I don't think there is any chance of them being abolished.

The play-offs are showbiz. Not sport.

DaveM wrote:The play-offs are how I got into domestic rugby. I don't think there is any chance of them being abolished.

Portnoy wrote:

DaveM wrote:The play-offs are how I got into domestic rugby. I don't think there is any chance of them being abolished.

The play-offs are showbiz. Not sport.

Well, they are sport. It's the same game played with the same rules.

Portnoy wrote:

DaveM wrote:The play-offs are how I got into domestic rugby. I don't think there is any chance of them being abolished.

The play-offs are showbiz. Not sport.

No they are sport.

Portnoy wrote:

DaveM wrote:The play-offs are how I got into domestic rugby. I don't think there is any chance of them being abolished.

The play-offs are showbiz. Not sport.

They are sport. What they're not is the most accurate possible way of finding who is the best team over a full season but given the problems with limitations on player availability a fair league isn't possible despite it being how one truely tests sporting excellence.

Might just as well put it to the public vote.

You play through all seasons, all weathers over months and months and then can't decide a winner?

In a league system there's virtually no dead rubbers what with relegation a and the two Euro competitions to scrap for.

It' chuck a dog a bone time. Why not a realistic alternative trophy?

Because neither trophy would have the same prestige as the Aviva Premiership Trophy has now.

Portnoy wrote:In a league system there's virtually no dead rubbers what with relegation a and the two Euro competitions to scrap for.

If there wasn't a play-off in the ML this year it would have been all over bar the shouting by February or so. Plenty of dead rubbers would have been played out if that happened.

With a league system where everyone is fighting for at least 4th spot even weaker teams can push themselves to make the knock-out stage. A team who's considered 5th best or so has it within their power to put in an extra effort for huge gains, not just finish the season out at a jog with nothing to play for.

From a purist (and maybe a pedants) point of view I'd agree that league means league. But to say play-offs isn't sport is just churlish.

Portnoy wrote:

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

Portnoy wrote:So long as there's play-offs it will be sham.

No more so than the Booker prize vote

Interesting. A literary prize analogy. There are usually enough weekends in the year to play out a league season and strangely more than enough without a play-off. What a lovely chance that would be for an FA Cup style comp to give a bit of hope to yer Sales and Worcesters etc.

Or if the winner were voted on by a panel who have as much repsonsibility to drumup controversy and media interest in the prize as they do for picking a fair and credible winner who is genuinly "the best", instead you endup wth the author of Portnoys Complaint winning it.

Any systemis pretty arbitrary, the competition has to promote itself to exist. The playoffs are more interesting than them not esxisting, and people only follow rugby because its interesting. The pure sports like running, jumping, throwing, shoving and faliing over are generaly pretty dull and lacking in human drama. Infact they should probably get endemol in to run rugby. Or possibly try and strike a reasoned balance between entertainment and the intergrity of the game, like thety do.

The only two real arguments against the playoffs are :
Its not fair i dont like them because.
and its not fair that I paid for a season tcket and now I have to pay for two extra games which if they had been in my season ticket pricve i would have complained about had we not made the playoffs.

can anyone explain why LI vs Quins round 1 at twickers counts as a LI home game? Last year LI had the double header as a home game and at the end of the year finished 6th to Quins' 7th so why advantage to Quins?

Portnoy wrote:

DaveM wrote:The play-offs are how I got into domestic rugby. I don't think there is any chance of them being abolished.

The play-offs are showbiz. Not sport.

Don't talk rubbish. The play-offs are sport, attract interest in the game and generate money for the clubs. Last season was a prime example of the play-offs working for the good. I'm a Tigers fan so it pains me to say but if a play-off system was not in place, Tigers would have lifted the Aviva title. Would that have been fair? Sarries won more matches than Tigers, Tigers were top on bonus points, so you could easily argue that because of the play-offs, the best team actually won.

rugbyman wrote:can anyone explain why LI vs Quins round 1 at twickers counts as a LI home game? Last year LI had the double header as a home game and at the end of the year finished 6th to Quins' 7th so why advantage to Quins?

Because they chose to play it at Twickenham to make money, which isnt Harlequins home ground either.
You could ask why would games played at Reading count as home games for a London club for Irishmen?

rugbyman wrote:can anyone explain why LI vs Quins round 1 at twickers counts as a LI home game? Last year LI had the double header as a home game and at the end of the year finished 6th to Quins' 7th so why advantage to Quins?

rugbyman

when Irish, Quins, Wasps and Sarries signed up to agree to the London double header to kick off the season the plan was to rotate the home and away teams each year. However, as none of the teams make any money from the gate receipts even if they are deemed the home team, one of them, I believe Quins only agreed to be part of the London double header if it was always an away fixture for them, meaning they did not lose a home game from their season and therefore do not lose out financially. That means it is always uneven in terms of rotation for home and away teams and one team will end up as the 'home' team 2 years in a row.

Surely part of rugby being on tv is showbiz?

As in when you get down to it, they're there to entertain us, it's why we watch it. The play offs mean that the whole season is entertaining, rather then 2 thirds of the season as may have been the case otherwise.

In a pro sport that's all about entertainment play offs are the way forward.

Still looking at that fixture list this years Big Game is going to be depressing.

LDCPete wrote:

rugbyman wrote:can anyone explain why LI vs Quins round 1 at twickers counts as a LI home game? Last year LI had the double header as a home game and at the end of the year finished 6th to Quins' 7th so why advantage to Quins?

rugbyman

when Irish, Quins, Wasps and Sarries signed up to agree to the London double header to kick off the season the plan was to rotate the home and away teams each year. However, as none of the teams make any money from the gate receipts even if they are deemed the home team, one of them, I believe Quins only agreed to be part of the London double header if it was always an away fixture for them, meaning they did not lose a home game from their season and therefore do not lose out financially. That means it is always uneven in terms of rotation for home and away teams and one team will end up as the 'home' team 2 years in a row.

cheers for clearing that up, seems a bit unfair but well played by Quins i guess