Do you know what I think tvoc's big problem is here?

He has all this data and all those stats.

But none of it seems to relate to cake.

Not even a lemon drizzle count. Or a Victoria Sponge ratio.




What's all that aboot?

I think tvoc sticks to the recipe book but delivers a cake that can look good on the surface but has a bitter after taste. Perhaps he uses too much lemon drivel (sorry drizzle) but he can usually cook up a classic upside down take (sorry cake) that really takes the biscuit!

Quite. Every team should attack the playoffs to win, not just make up the numbers.

Then we will have an intense competition.

Fans need to lose their obsession with league finishing places.

Why is it ridiculous to expect someone to justify their claims?



I pointed to the results - that's all the results not some self-selected sub-set.



Play-off momentum, yes. Which is why =#FF0000I'd rather finish 5th and 6th than 3rd or 4th

I have no issue if others take an alternative view, no issue whatsoever.

6th is better than 3rd now?

How many teams have made the Grand Final from 6th?

Indeed.Probably the same amount as have reached the final eliminator.

Can't say i would fancy us finishing 5th or 6th this year.The prospect of playing Saints or Hull on the first weekend looks a bit tougher than years gone by.

How many teams have reached or won it from 5th, as its apparently so easy

If we finished 5th we could feasibly have

Saints (h)
Catalans (a)
Huddersfield (a)
Wigan (final)





FWIW I think we'll finish 4th.

5th and 6th have a similar path to follow - home V lower ranked opponent in week one followed by away V higher ranked opponent (coming off a loss) in week two.

Under this current format it's five to three in favour of the lower ranked teams prevailing in week two.



None.

___________

I perfectly understand that the two 'top four' losers in week one are guaranteed a home game in week two V a lower ranked opponent and you'd expect that should offer a clear advantage to the higher placed team but that is to ignore the physical battle/battering they've been through in week one and the psychological blow of losing.

I've rarely seen a team take a physical battering and shattering loss as the Leeds team took at Knowsley Road in 2008. How did they react to that?

Are rugby league players really such delicate wall flowers these days?

Psychological blow???

Seen as the 4th place team in the last 2 years (Hudds @ Wire & Catalans @ Wigan) played like a team who had already accepted and expected defeat I doubt they were too 'crushed'. I would actually say that the 2nd place team in the last 2 years (Wire & Wigan both against Saints) would've felt more of a 'psychological blow' when they lost as they weren't expected to......yet both returned the next week to win........what was the key difference???.......Oh yeah 2 of those teams had to play Leeds the next week and 2 didn't.

......its still the format though

Having top four teams playing like they are expecting and accepting of defeat is what can happen when you give them the second chance. That is not a good look for the Play-Offs, IMO.

Must be quite tempting for coaches and players to mentally switch off in these games once the result is beyond them knowing they are coming back next week no matter what the magnitude of defeat. Hardly surprising then if/when they are slow out of the blocks in week two against the team bringing the momentum of a win along with them.

Yet in 5/6 team playoffs the loser of 1st vs 2nd always had a 2nd chance yet people are asking to revert to that.

Coincidentally, Leeds were hammered by Hudds the week before the playoffs against a Wakey team on a several game winning streak. Why didn't the momentum rule apply here? Oh right it only applies to 'Playoff games'......so why then in probably the biggest psychological blow of Top 8 history did Wigan after finishing first but losing to Leeds manage to regroup to win the GF in 2010???.......Could it be that 'psychological blows' & 'formats' are desperate attempts by McDermott haters to downplay the last 2 playoffs because they predicted Leeds' downfall and it didn't happen and they're a bit P O'd they got proven wrong (they'll cry at this suggestion BTW).......sadly that seems to be the main theme on SouthStander this year.....keep slating the efforts and eventually they'll slip up and won't win the GF and they can claim to be right all along. Hey like a game of roulette they'll eventually be right!

But what made that format much better was that the winner of that game would go straight to OT.In the current format the winners of the first weekend of games between the top four still has the big game to come a couple of weeks down the line.There is not enough at stake in these games therefore leading to half d efforts from the 3rd and 4th placed team in general.

I still don't understand the advantage of coming top at the end of the regular rounds. OK, so you get a nice shiny hub-cap and that daft 'Club-Call' thing, which so far has turned out to be a bit of a poisoned chalice.

...and, I'm with tvoc with this one, I'd rather us finish 5th than 4th.

I'd rather we finished first. First being the winner at Old Trafford.

Were Leeds slow out of the blocks against teams with momentum in 2004 and 2008?

There's a thread developing here in my mind. It's not about finishing places. It's not about numbers one, two three four or five. It's about a special set of lads in blue and amber socks, shorts and jerseys that consistently show a big game mentality. Maybe some credit should be given to Leeds players by their supporters rather than simply putting their consistent success down to finishing places.

When you're on the pitch at Huddersfield, Warrington or Wigan and Eorl Crabtree, Ben Westwood or Sean O'Loughlin are running hard at you I don't thinnk it crosses your mind that you have an advantage because you won last weekend and they didn't. You have to tackle them and you have to hurt them. That is where these matches are won, not on league tables.

Well said sir

Correct. The Regular Round finishing place for Leeds was already decided and they produced arguably their most h[ialf-[/id performance of a season littered with h[ialf-[/id performances but for once understandable as it was just an eighty minutes to survive without overexerting themselves or putting their bodies on the line.

Anyone who witnessed the Leeds-Wakefield game that followed saw a closer contest than the final scoreline suggested with Leeds losing for most of the first half and again early in the second and being extremely grateful for a poor execution from Danny Washbrook bombing a certain score which would have given us a nail-biting finish - even though Wakefield were tiring badly.



They lost in a good game to Leeds by a point. Hardly season over stuff for that year's best outfit - it was a game they could have and from their perspective probably should have won.



I don't know you'd have to ask them.

I don't downplay the achievements of any team winning the Grand Final but do question whether we currently have the best play-off format - a legitimate concern, IMO.



I presume from this then that you've never criticised the current coach?

__________



I'm talking about the current play-off format where in week one the top four and next four are kept apart.



Credit is always given to the Leeds players.

Credit is also given to all the week two victors under this current format who have confounded their final League placings and won away at a higher ranked opponents, who incidentally are coming off a loss in week one - Leeds, Les Catalans, Wigan and Huddersfield.

I personally think there is not enough data to draw conclusions from. Any analysis of note would draw conclusions from a greater set of data than 4 repititions

When someone other than Leeds does it from 5th, I'll give them credit for it.

So far, they haven't.

Exactly not enough data available.

Far too many trying to over analyse. The current playoffs are an end of season knockout competition which rewards those teams finishing highest in the table. The Grand Final is the target and the team that becomes Champions is the best side period. To try and suggest that finishing in 5th place has advantages over those that finish higher based on notional stats is just not credible and indeed was started by supporters of the losers who having had been consistantly good over the earlier rounds failed when it mattered in the crunch games.

For Leeds to become back to back Champions 2 years running from 5th place proves them as historic and worthy Champions having overcome the handicap. However for some this is just too much to swallow so rather than give the credit to a Champion side and a Champion coach they seek to belittle these outstanding achievements by suggesting we somehow took it easy in the earlier rounds to remain fresh for the playoffs or manipulated a 5th place finish which somehow makes it easier or there was a full moon, or... etc etc.

I can understand our disappointed rivals coming up with these sort of silly excuses as it was always the way with the losers. But what I find sad is the clique of Leeds supporters who have jumped on this wonky bandwaggon because they, as The Printer suggested, have an anti McDermott agenda perhaps because he proved their predictions of doom to be wrong 2 years running. G1 has pointed out that this group of players have a winning mentality which should be celebrated. Why try and discredit it?

With regard to the current playoffs my understanding is that they were brought in for the following reasons: (in no particular order)

1. Financial - more teams, more games, more revenue

2. Having ditched promotion and relegation the SL was increased from 12 to 14 teams so to try and make the end of season more meaningful to more clubs the playoffs went from 6 to 8 sides.

3. It was also hoped that giving mores sides high intensity playoff rugby then standards would improve. It was often stated that one day a team from 8th place might become Champions and if so that would prove the overall level of competition was better.

Reducing the number in the playoffs without bringing back P & R would have a negative effect for the majority of sides.

I think that was what the team were aiming for too till the injuries kicked in

Yes the winner at OT are the team who finishes first.Also I have heard one or two players say they wanted to head the table this year and go into the playoffs as league leaders