timmyh:
Anyway, I'm done with this but I'm still going with the Chiefs being the more consistent side across the competition, beating Crusaders comfortably in two matches and only just losing the 3rd despite huge penalty count and 3 yellow cards, yes one of which should've been a red.
What part of the competition is unfair if the most consistent team loses in the grand final, to the second ranked team? Are you saying we should have skipped the Grand final because if they lost it's unfair?
It's unlikely the scoreline would have been as tight as it was with the Chiefs having to play 14 men for yet another 10 minutes. The knock-on effect would have been much more significant at the end of the game.
You're not making any sense to me.