71:
53:
22:
166:
Qualifiers are over a much longer period so there might be more merit in indication possible outcomes but not when it's all over in 6 days. There is also too much, imo, OR goes on in tables like this where people include what is likely to happen rather than relying on verifiable published information from reliable sources. We report fact not speculation.
129:
My two cents is that while it is true that "theoretically anyone of the top 6 could still be relegated", one of those teams cannot be relegated directly and is guaranteed a place in the
Million Pound Game. To me at least, that's interesting/useful, as I like to know who is up & down for definite,
184:
I do take your point regarding the status symbols being transitory - although having said that, there are times when qualification statuses *are* used on such a short timeframe, e.g.: in the WC Qualifiers, there's typically 4 days between the penultimate and final round of games, but editors usually
204:
In any case, I'm going to leave the changes I made (except to use the built-in status as you suggest), as it was the info I came here looking for, so it might help another person :) I've added a source which includes reference to Leeds' status, though, because you're right that my previous work was
165:
If you really insist on using parameters like this when it'll all be known for definite in less than a week then use the built in status of T but again this time next week we'll have removed all the status symbols as the competition has ended - it's so transitory as to be irrelevant. The World Cup
226:
Firstly an apology my "we report fact not speculation" wasn't aimed at you so sorry if you took it as such as it looks like we agree on that point - no OR. I'm not going to argue my viewpoint any further save to say I disagree with microanalysis and labelling of such transitory nature, mainly
133:
This seems to be fairly standard for many league-based competitions - see for example the 2018 World Cup
Qualifiers (UEFA), which have statuses like (Y) "Assured of at least second place, but not assured of play-offs" or (Z) "Cannot qualify directly, but can still qualify via play-offs" etc...
194:
Not sure I agree with "we report fact not speculation" point, though - I mean, it is after all a fact that Leeds are qualified at least for the MPG, not speculation! I saw a couple of edits here marking Leeds/Salford as "promoted", and I agreed with removing those since they are speculation -
144:
To give an example: *if* Salford beat
Toulouse on Thursday, then Salford will actually be promoted for sure (even if Hull & Toronto both win), due to their points difference. Meanwhile, Toulouse won't be out of it, but will have switched to status "L", can only qualify via the MPG.
140:
In any case, I think the different statuses will be particularly interesting & relevant over this final week, since the four games are on different days, to keep track not just of who's in/out, but who could still be in/out pending other results.
137:
That's actually the reason I first came to this page, to find that info, and then upon seeing it wasn't there I created it! Unclear if that counts as own research or not...
261:
266:
271:
92:
233:
situation with labels being created for more and more convoluted possibilities and I prefer a more broad brush approach until the dust has settled.
81:
58:
33:
242:
214:
175:
159:
39:
229:
70:
52:
221:
206:
151:
210:
155:
238:
171:
130:
but also who has secured a place in the MPG, who can *only* qualify via the MPG etc...
255:
87:
234:
167:
195:
although it's very likely, it's not certain, which is what counts.
15:
185:
still update the qualification scenarios for that period...
85:, which aims to improve the quality and coverage of
32:does not require a rating on Knowledge (XXG)'s
8:
47:
100:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Rugby league
49:
21:
19:
7:
262:Template-Class rugby league articles
267:NA-importance rugby league articles
38:It is of interest to the following
77:2018 Rugby League Qualifiers Table
14:
272:WikiProject Rugby league articles
103:Template:WikiProject Rugby league
69:
51:
20:
243:10:47, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
215:00:58, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
176:20:19, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
160:20:03, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
125:Promotion/Relegation Scenarios
1:
288:
64:
46:
82:WikiProject Rugby league
79:is within the scope of
227:because it becomes a
106:rugby league articles
88:rugby league football
230:Reductio ad absurdum
91:related articles.
34:content assessment
122:
121:
118:
117:
114:
113:
279:
225:
108:
107:
104:
101:
98:
73:
66:
65:
55:
48:
25:
24:
23:
16:
287:
286:
282:
281:
280:
278:
277:
276:
252:
251:
219:
127:
105:
102:
99:
96:
95:
12:
11:
5:
285:
283:
275:
274:
269:
264:
254:
253:
250:
249:
248:
247:
246:
245:
199:
198:
197:
196:
189:
188:
187:
186:
179:
178:
126:
123:
120:
119:
116:
115:
112:
111:
109:
74:
62:
61:
56:
44:
43:
37:
26:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
284:
273:
270:
268:
265:
263:
260:
259:
257:
244:
240:
236:
232:
231:
223:
218:
217:
216:
212:
208:
203:
202:
201:
200:
193:
192:
191:
190:
183:
182:
181:
180:
177:
173:
169:
164:
163:
162:
161:
157:
153:
149:
146:
142:
138:
135:
131:
124:
110:
94:
90:
89:
84:
83:
78:
75:
72:
68:
67:
63:
60:
57:
54:
50:
45:
41:
35:
31:
27:
18:
17:
228:
150:
147:
143:
139:
136:
132:
128:
97:Rugby league
86:
80:
76:
59:Rugby league
40:WikiProjects
29:
256:Categories
148:Thoughts?
93:Join us!
30:template
222:Mojo87
207:Mojo87
152:Mojo87
36:scale.
235:Nthep
168:Nthep
28:This
239:talk
211:talk
205:OR.
172:talk
156:talk
258::
241:)
213:)
174:)
158:)
237:(
224::
220:@
209:(
170:(
154:(
42::
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
