Obviously. After all, it's much easier to win a Grand Final from there than from 4th as you repeatedly try to convince us.

That the club has been so successful in securing this coveted 5th place two seasons running says a lot about the commitment and desire to achieve their goals possessed by this group of players.

Your failure to seize the opportunity to enlighten me with new insight on any changes in ethos at the club - particularly with regard to their approach during the regular season - is noted.

Correct. The evidence is incontrovertible.


Correct. The evidence for that commitment and desire among this group of players to achieve those goals is unrivalled in September and October. Finishing 5th is the effortless prelude - that's the the easy part.

I don't have the insider knowledge that would be required to substantiate such a claim, but since I have at no stage indicated that I thought any change in ethos had taken place it is as relevant as me asking you to enlighten me on new theories of the origin of the universe and then trying to look smug when you didn't do it.

My point was that you keep recycling the same tired material over and over again.

I think it would be fair to say that most regular posters (and probably most occasional visitors) on this forum are more than adequately aware of your opinions on this matter. Since you yourself say that nothing has changed, there is no reason for you to change your opinion. There is also, however, no real need for you to keep re-stating it every couple of days. We get it. Honestly. We'll keep it in mind, but you would entertain people a little more if you perhaps turned your ample wit to finding something new to talk about.

Even if you insist only on winding people up (which you're very good at, if that's something you want to take pride in) you could at least find new ways to do it.

Your lookout really, but consider this more audience feedback than anything else.

Not so. It is entirely circumstantial. Given that the phenomenon in question has occurred only twice, the fact that both occurrences involved the same team (including the same coach and most of the same players) you have a serious problem of confounded variables in your theory. This doesn't in any way disprove your theory, but it does leave you woefully short of having enough data to prove it to any satisfactory degree.

If you had that information available, that would at least give you something new to talk about.

Your lack of insider knowledge didn't prevent you from substantiating your praise of Delaney with reference to his understanding of the Leeds ethos.


Perhaps you could enlighten me instead on the characteristics of Leeds ethos in it's current unchanged state then?


Which is irrelevant in it's entirety in relation to the topic being discussed.

This same discussion took place last year. The only difference being that it was argued that this particular phenomenon had occurred just the once, was a complete one-off and very unlikely, if not impossible, to happen again. Well it did happen again. How often does it have to occur before it is deemed incontrovertible that finishing 5th is a relatively comfortable reward and play-off journey for such a lowly-placed finish on the ladder? And given the huge disparity which exists between the comparative play-off results of teams finishing 4th and 5th, how much further data is required before one concludes that finishing 5th provides an easier play-off journey than finishing 4th would provide?

I think this Leeds team offer the perfect formula for fans.

We can enjoy the solidarity and whinge potential of following a poor team in the regular season - except when they're winning the WCC and getting to the final of the CC, of course. Then there's the cathartic ecstasy of beating all the dutiful plodders in the play-offs. Best of both worlds.

When you vanished for a few weeks after the Grand final i waited in great anticipation for your return and with new material......only to find you have copy and pasted last seasons drivel

Insider information offered up by the coach in an interview I read when he extended his contract. He neglected to mention whether they were trying or not during games.



Why should I? It has nothing to do with whether you're repeating yourself.

To very briefly humor you, it has, in my speculative, message board opinion, based on some interviews with players past and present, a lot to do with the team ethic and the solidarity between players in the group. I may, of course, be being lied to, but I believe it is supported by what I see on the field.

It would take a little while to do it justice, but you can read about confounded variables in predictive statistics on wikipedia if you're keen.

To help you out, the variables which are confounded are 'league ladder position of champions' and 'name of club crowned champions.'

Another club finishing 5th and then winning the title would offer some support for your theory (it wouldn't be incontrovertible though, I fear, nor would it for many years of occurrence - so to answer that question the only likely answer is 'never'), otherwise the argument that Leeds are more likely to win the title from any position is at least as good at explaining the observed events. In fact given that stretching our sample back a few years shows Leeds winning 3 of the previous 4 titles (before the 2011 5th place triumph) from positions 2, 2 and 1 probably offer more support for the latter theory than yours.

I'm not going to claim the evidence is incontrovertible though. It isn't. It's still highly circumstantial given the number of possible factors in explaining the process of deciding the championship.

So because Leeds finished 5th that means that, in a 17 man sport, 1 individual couldn't have possibly put a ton of effort in throughout the year?

As for the reality of the situation, feel free to try make it out as if i'm claiming all is great at Leeds and that i might see things through blue & amber tinted glasses but on other threads throughout the season and afterwards (you wouldn't know because you went into hiding) i've been critical in the areas i think deserve criticism. But unlike yourself i don't have some deep personal issues that make me hate praising other peoples efforts and success or begrudge or look down upon others who still get enjoyment out of the game.

Your opinion is not based on facts. But then as you profess to only watch Leeds in a one or two of the big games each season it is to be expected you are a bit flaky when comes to sound judgement regarding the Champions.

With the notable exception of JP no other Leeds player "gets stuck in" as consistently as Brett Delaney IMO ....an opinion that can be backed up with facts that made him Leeds top tackler (14th in SL) and our top Marker tackler (8th best in SL) He was our 2nd best forward both for carries and metres made.

Your notional accounting is as flaky as your judgement regarding the Champions. What you still fail to accept is that only Leeds have become Champions from outside the comfort of the top four. That they have done it twice from the handicap of 5th position is more a testimony to the exceptional talents of this Leeds team than your one eyed attempt to belittle this historic achievement by trying to make out it is an easier path than from the top 2 or top 4 positions.

They did just enough in the regular season to ensure they were fresh enough to get to the GF.. they knew damn well they could beat ANYONE in the playoffs.. home or away.. they had to just do enough in the regular season because the squad size was lacking a little.

Don't ask him that for I fear the answer


Fortunately unless someone 'quotes' him (please don't) I'll never find out.

Maybe you could tell us exactly what you expect from a champion team? Given your obsession with the NRL I thought I'd check how Melbourne got on this year in the regular season & how they treat their supporters. I had first hand experience of seeing the Storm in June/July, incidentally in the middle of their 6 game losing streak. They were rubbish.

Are they worthy champions despite having the audacity to play below par in a few fixtures?

Oh. You might need to wear a bib to collect all that spoon-fed dribble, courtesy of a compliant and obsequious RL media correspondent. Wasn't an interview with Peter Smith of the YEP by any chance was it?


I doubt GH would willingly sanction such an honest appraisal to the media of how the team approach regular season fixtures - with reference to the ethos in operation at the club of course.


Because you're the one who brought the subject up in the first place?


If you can't answer the question, just say so. Oh, what's this below?


So do you think tossing it off during the regular season and finishing 5th has a lot to do with team ethic and solidarity between players in the group? Or, if not, then is it a case of that team ethic and solidarity only kicking in during the games which really count?

Are you claiming that Delaney doesn't understand the Leeds ethos in operation during the regular season?

Five game losing streak actually - Rounds 16, 18, 19, 20 and 21 - they had a bye in Round 17. Such losing streaks in the NRL mid-season are not unknown at clubs who provide key players for Origin duties. Melbourne were handicapped by the loss of Slater and Chambers to injury, whilst Cronk and Smith were missing for a few games or backing up from Origin when they did play. They were forced to re-jig their 1, 6, 7 and 9 combinations. Apart from the big loss to the Raiders (after backing up from the Origin 3 decider just 3 days earlier), the other losses during that period were still only by small margins. There are no such handicaps for a team like Leeds in SL where 3 out of 4 fixtures are against whipping boy SL rabble.


Playing below par in a few fixtures (due to circumstances beyond their control), finishing 2nd and becoming champions on the back of that in a highly competitive league is distinctly more worthy than tossing it off throughout the regular season in an uncompetitive league, finishing 5th and just turning up for a couple of finals fixtures at the end.

I'll freely acknowledge that it isn't much to go on, but then I'm not the one claiming my evidence is "incontrovertible" am I? Acknowledge that your opinions are just that and we have no more debate do we?



Probably not. It's all the information I have at my disposal, so I'll have to decide what to read into it. As will you. Neither of us can claim it to be "fact" though can we? I believe, subjectively, that I see evidence of a strong team unity in Leeds performance, tested (and thus revealed) more when the chips are down. I can't prove it, it's just my interpretation of what I see.



And you were the one who claimed that you had "incontrovertible" evidence, when you had nothing of the sort. Which you're now trying to deflect attention from. I wasn't addressing you with my earlier comment, I can choose to answer you if I want to. I have no deigned to do so. I'm not sure why I've done this.



I don't know, let's see shall we?



No, but then I don't think anyone at Leeds is "tossing it off" during the regular season. I personally think it has more to do with being unable to maintain peak form throughout the season and still carry it into the play-offs. There are no doubt various mechanisms for this, possibly including intensity of training etc.

See above for it only kicking in when the games really count. I do believe that those are the times when your team spirit and unity are most sorely tested.

Note my continued refusal to claim that any of this is "incontrovertible" but it's based on as much as your opinions are.

We have simply interpreted the same observations in two slightly different ways.

No i'm claiming it's an opinion that you're trying to pass off as fact as per usual.



Well if we're going down the 'missing key players' route may i point out the win/loss ratio without Danny Mcguire this year during the Regular Season, a player you like to mock.
With McGuire = P18 - W14 - L4.....Win Percentage 77.7%
Without McGuire = P9 - W2 - L7....Win Percentage 22.2%



Did Leeds toss it off or at times did the opposition toss it off against are rivals compared to when they played us? Look at what top of the table Wigan got served up compared to us on some of Leeds' travels.

HULL FC
LEEDS - Round 13 - MAY 5th - LOST 34-20
WIGAN - Round 12 - APRIL 22nd - WON 12-56

WAKEFIELD
LEEDS - Round 22 - JULY 30th - LOST 38-18
WIGAN - Round 20 - JULY 8th - WON 10-52

BRADFORD
LEEDS - Round 10 - APRIL 6th - LOST 12-4
WIGAN - Round 3 - FEBRUARY 19th - WON 16-54

Leeds didn't play well in these defeats but, especially in the case of Hull and Wakey, they arguably saved their best showing of the year for the current reigning SL and WCC holders. Now i can't claim to have seen the Wigan games in question but judging from the scorelines i think it's safe to say the Warriors didn't face the same kind of efforts throughout the year from the opposition.

Yes, I accept it was a 5 losing streak. They lost 6 out of 7, the only win being a SL esque score line of 26-22 against Manly.

You seem to have conveniently forgotten that Leeds too had players on rep duty in the mid season, and 5 extra games in the CC. Would also appear that Melbourne have a distinct advantage in terms of league games too, playing only 24. There cant be any excuses for below par performances with so few games, can there? Incidentally, how a league of 16 teams can only have 24 fixtures is somewhat strange, surely (as with our former crazy system of playing some teams 3 times per season) this is open to debate as to a true reflection of the seasons achievements?

Finally let's look at the final league tables for 2012. In SL there was a 16 point difference between top (Wigan - 42) and 8th (Wakefield - 26) Had Bradford not gone bust Hudds would have been 8th on 28 points. In the NRL there was a 12 point differential between 1st & 8th. Not that much difference in my book. Looking at each divisions whipping boy rabble, SL had an 11 point difference between 9th and bottom, NRL a 10 point difference. Again, very similar. The wooden spooners managed 12 points (SL) and 16 (NRL). I'll give you that one, Parramatta not quite as bad as Widnes.

So, perhaps the NRL isn't as superb as you'd have us believe. Leeds lost / chose not to bother in 12 games this season from a possible 37 (32%). Melbourne lost / chose not to bother in 7 from a possible 27 (26%). Again not too dissimilar

Against whipping boy SL rabble = P14 - W13 - L1..... Win Percentage 92.8%
Against the others = P4 - W1 - L3..... Win Percentage 25.0%
No surprises there.

Actually Parramatta only won 6 games (12 points) - the other 4 were from Bye's. So they are as $h!t as Widnes.