I wouldn't be so sure at that to be honest. Warrington look a very aged team right now. Despite rotating the side through the year, they look absolutely fatigued.

If and buts, but, for all the complaining about how we've played this year, it's already our best season in 3 years and had the Wire away game not slipped away from us and the Wigan magic game had a few decisions go our way we would already be 2nd. This has been with the injury run we've had too!

Wherever we finish though, The playoffs don't worry me. The only team that's been better than us all year has been Hudds and I fancy our chances against anyone anyway when we turn it up a notch in September.

Well said Harrigan.

Absolutely agree H!!

People seem supremly confident but i have a sense of impending doom that it will go tits up (which after 5 from 6 is probably overdue?).

With wigan and warrington seemingly losing form, and in many peoples eyes hudds still unproven, i guess you could argue things are slotting into place for leeds with injuries returning. With saints in 5th and improving, are they a big threat?

I've a feeling they are going to really come good in the playoffs.

I can't decide about wigan and warrington. Whether they've learnt from last year and this is just a lull before they gear up for the playoffs, or whether they are both on the slide. Last night, looking at the reaction of the wolves players on the sidelines and the frustration of the players on the field, it certainly wasn't in the script for them to be so under par, let alone losing the game.

Leeds have always tended to try and go into the playoffs in decent nick. Of all the title wins, only 2011 and 2012 was form scratchy entering the playoffs, but by then leeds had already built a winning playoff mentality so could cope with that handicapp.

I'm not sure you could describe the 2011 league form in the run up to the play-offs as 'scratchy'...

they only lost one SL game following the horror show in France in early July right through to the Grand Final - and that was the week before Wembley at Harlequins!

Oh, and x3 for well said Harrigan!!

FW-To be fair i think this squad has "earned" the fans confidence come play-off time but i dont think its a "supreme" confidence just confident that we AND the Squad more importantly know how to win at that time of year irrespective of form or odds.
It could go t!ts up as could any game of RL but whoever we face will have that % of doubt knowing full well that our boys are "THE TEAM" come play-off time.

I love how Wigan fans, among others, did nothing but criticise us for supposedly choosing which games to win, aiming for a low finish and that we only played to win in the Play-Offs, yet it looks like they're doing the same thing this year, especially with the lack of Tomkins in any games not deemed 'important'. Now, I know we didn't aim for that, in the same way Wigan probably aren't doing so now, but the evidence is very similar to how they came up with conclusions about us last season.

I had the same thought about finishing second last night - I don't think it's likely, but if we win our last few games, we've done everything we can. No point worrying about other teams results that we can't change or effect.

That's because squad rotation reduces stamina.

Don't be stupid. They are athletes.

Age is playing a big part with Warrington. And the fact that they are still resorting to poop like Chris Bridge who appears to be a permanent fixture for them.

Age? Explain that theory to Jamie Peacock.

Stupid? Counter-intuitive, maybe, to give your team an edge in end-of-season play-offs by pushing a cadre of experienced players beyond what seems sensible during the regular season.

Fortunately, in this one sense, you and Wane, Anderson et al still have something in common.

Exactly. I don't know if we'll win the playoffs but I'm confident we'll turn up and put up a strong challenge. When we won in 2011 & 2012 we were the best team in the playoffs....but we weren't unbeatable, so there was/is room for an opponent to step up and play a blinder against us and win. If we do get knocked out though I think it'll be in very stark contrast to the CC exit when we underperformed badly at Hudds.

The playoffs will have a sub-plot running alongside the usual 'who will win?'. 'Who can/will stop Leeds?'.

Jamie Peacock is a freak, not a norm. Compare and contrast to how Morley has gone this season.

Anderson is the one doing it correctly. Selected rotation, where injuries and fatigue does not become an issue.

Sorry, how does being an "athlete" mean you can't fail to be in optimum condidtion?

I run fairly seriously (although 'athlete' may be stretching it a bit) but I can more or less guarantee I'm in better shape a week before a target race than I am for an ordinary race 6 weeks earlier. This will be true of elite athletes too, in any sport.

Ok, so tell us how all that relates to what I said was stupid?

I don't dissagree with your point. It just has nothing to do with what was said.

Just to be clear, the don't be stupid response was to this:

Your response seemed to be that squad rotation couldn't reduce stamina because they're athletes. Or did I misunderstand?

If that was your point then my response was relevant, in that whether you're an athlete or not your fitness has peaks and troughs related to your training and preparation. The fact that they are athletes does not render Fetlar's point stupid. I think the point might be over-simplistic, but I think there probably is some truth in the theory that there's no fitness like match fitness, so playing less matches could reduce your stamina.

If your point was something else, then my response may well not relate to it.

No, you understood the point, just your example had no relevance at all to it then. There is a difference in peaking for a certain point, and missing the odd match in a 8 month season.

You seriously believe that missing a few matches per season through squad rotation will have an effect on the players stamina come the play offs? That is what Fetlar was saying.

Christ god help Leeds then, considering how many mataches have been missed by players with the injuriess. We better not bring back McGuire, JJB, Delaney, and Bailey then. These missed Challenge cup weekends must be a right bugger for our players stamina. But at least Hull must be a shoe in for the Grand final then.

Gotcha in misunderstood posting shocker



McDermott's squad handling may defy conventional wisdom and see some re-thinking in sport and re-writing of the coaching manuals. My belief is that his approach is all about toughness. Leeds players don't get the easy option of a rest every few weeks. They tough it out. They don't get the easy option of dropping down for a confidence boosting run in the lower leagues if they have a bad game. They tough it out until they turn things around. Leeds players might even find themselves playing long minutes without using a sub, and they'll just have to stick to it and tough it out. There is no easy option.

Perhaps it's all co-incidence, but come September and October, when the weather is a little worse and bodies are aching a little more and some players might even be thinking of an upcoming holiday, our team gets a little tougher and more determined than the opposition.

No, not at all. I did say that the point of view was over-simplistic. There are other factors at play. But no relevance at all? Really? You make a point about athletes being exempt from losses of stamina from aspects of their competition and training schedule, and it is not relevant to point out that athletes are as susceptible to that as anyone else?

I wasn't agreeing with Fetlar, but I was disagreeing with your premise for dismissing the idea as stupid "because they're athletes."

I think personally that Fetlar was wrong, but it's a theory with some viability - and it probably depends on how many matches you're missing. There are problems with it relating to other factors - there's also a balance to strike between being match-fit and being fresh. But McGuire's absence, for example, certainly isn't ideal, and match fitness is an issue there.

There is a difference between missing the odd match in an 8 month season and peaking at the right time. On the other hand, there are clearly competing theories among SL coaches (and forumites) on the role of missing matches in peaking at the right time.

Stamina has both a physical and a mental aspect. The edge Leeds possess is a mix of the two and they have reinforced both through McDermott's unusual selection policy. Their physical and mental toughness develops over the season and this might explain the mysterious disparity between our performances in the Cup and in the play offs...

And yes, I think the severity of injuries to key players during the course of the season will seriously hamper our chances this time around.

Spot on.

Strange and interesting fusion of military and sports psychology, I reckon.

Richie in foot in mouth shocker.

What did my response have to do with McDermott and Leeds?

I said it was stupid to say that squad rotation reduces stamina, that was general, as the comment from Fetlar was general, not related to Leeds. It is stupid. If these players miss a week of playing, they are still training all week, and working to a schedule of fitness. Infact injuries, which are not planned for, is going to effect far more.

So as you agree that rest effects stamina, then how is the missing challenge cup weekends going to effect Leeds?

You would probably draw a bit less fire if you were better at differentiating between "I don't agree with this" and "this is stupid."

While I don't entirely subscribe to the "rest reduces stamina" theory, I suspect that the Leeds coaching staff would rather have not had the CC weekends off, and would certainly rather not have had the injuries. But that's where they are so they'll have to deal with it.

The less fire isn't an issue for me. If you believe that resting a player a few matches a season effects their stamina then you are thick as fook, simple as that.

If that said player was also not training, then I will grant you the argument. But the argument was not that, because if you choose to rotate your squad, you do not also say have a week off mate training and all.

Your argument previously, was on your running and getting to a peak condition for a race. That I agreed on. You are not an athlete looked after by sports conditioners. I know very well, that if I go on holiday, I come back and struggle at the gym in comparison to before I went. But I am not an athlete also.

The stamina for these players is built up from the training they receive in the main, and the continuance of that. Not the match its self. Otherwise like I said, the players we have had out now, could not possibly come back for the play offs.

I commented on your post. I wasn't responding to it. The fact that I didn't quote your post should have been a big clue to that. Nor did I say your post had anything to do with McDermott and Leeds. Your post not having anything to do with McDermott and Leeds does not mean McDermott and Leeds cannot be mentioned in this post. In this case I quoted your original post and am responding to it. Notice the difference?

Your response fails to differentiate between not having a game one weekend and being left out of a game that weekend for a rest.