Talk:2009 Super League season results

Number of teams in playoffs?

I can't remember, or research, when the playoffs expanded from 5 to 6 teams. If anyone knows, can they edit the copy in the playoffs section appropriately please? Or post it here and i will. Julianhall (talk) 22:30, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Found it! Julianhall (talk) 22:46, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2001 had 5 teams from what I can tell from RLP. 2002 defo had 6, according to the Yearbook. When SL first started, I think it had eight teams in the play-offs. GW(talk) 22:53, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, according to the Top six play-offs article, it expanded to 6 in 2002. I'm not concerned with the playoffs that didn't decide the title at the moment, just the ones introduced in 1998 that actually had a bearing on the Super League trophy. Julianhall (talk) 22:57, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Towns?

Are we adding the towns that the stadia are in too? The NRL pages don't, they have their own article pages, we can tell who's home just by looking at the table, and they do make the rows wider than they need to be. GW(talk) 19:18, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Great minds think alike! I was just in the process of removing the towns and tinkering with the column width to tidy the table up. Take a look and let me know what you think. Julianhall (talk) 19:26, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My great mind thinks it looks much better. GW(talk) 20:08, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent, cheers! Julianhall (talk) 20:39, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Time Chart

I don't know how you've created the graph showing league position at the end of each week, but some of the colours are slightly confusing. For example, Saints, Wakefield and Hull FC all have the same shape and colour of marks on the line. Also, i cannot work out from the key at the bottom of the graph which team is the denoted by the mark at second place on 15/02. Is it possible to change the colour and/or shapes of the markers so there is more distinction?Julianhall (talk) 20:01, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm... I've changed the shapes of those markers that have the same main colours (if you look closely, they have differently coloured borders, but I'll admit it's difficult). I've also shrunk the size of the markers considerably to make the colour of the border "stick out" more. See what you think.[1] The second placed team on the 15th Feb was Huddersfield. GW(talk) 21:55, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Much better, i think. Julianhall (talk) 22:27, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Where's it gone??!?!? Julianhall (talk) 13:40, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Long story cut short: I was editing the file and something I did made the chart look messy and unreadable. It didn't actually say much, and violated so many guidelines anyway. So instead of correcting it, I decided my efforts were better spent elsewhere, than on something which any admin or editor would be fully within their right to remove. GW(talk) 15:05, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fair play. Julianhall (talk) 16:43, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Progression Table

What order are the teams displayed in? League position at the end of the most recently completed round? Julianhall (talk) 20:01, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The table is displayed in order of current league position (so at the end, it'll be the final league positions). I think I forgot to put Leeds top - that's embarrassing! May as well make their third round cell green too since they can't mathematically fall to ninth. GW(talk) 21:55, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Play-off summary

I've made a play-off template that I hope other contributors will see as a good addition to this article. I've adapted if from the AFL version (used here). My template is here: Template:Super League play-offs 8 system. I've made a couple of minor changes so far and I've put two further ideas on the talk page. Please let me know any thoughts you have. LunarLander // talk // 19:04, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I think it looks great, and it does a fantastic job of simplifying a complex format. I second the idea to put a key in explaining line colours, even if the red and green lines are fairly obvious, the blue ones mean nothing to someone with no prior knowledge of the playoffs' format. Perhaps another idea would be to clarify which team gets to choose their opponent from the winners of the PSFs (which I understand is the highest placed of the two QPO winners at the end of the regular season), although this could just as easily be done in the article's text. GW(talk) 19:50, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback! I've made a couple of changes. The blue lines have been changed so they both can lead to either of the QSFs. Also, I now have the match details function being utilised only to clarify which team chose their opponents for the QSFs. There is an example at the bottom of the talk page.

Adding a key might be a bit trickier because of all the code needed but we have until the end of the regular season to sort it.LunarLander // talk // 15:18, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]