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

TBH I think there has to be an element of momentum. If it was just a case of big game mentality there would be a few challenge cups in there as well. Leeds have usually lost momentum in July /August in the period between semi finals and finals and this hasn't helped their cause.

Perhaps some our fans woudl just be happier if we didn't win the GF. Certainly feels that way a lot of the time.

I remember when Wigan were winning the league year after year (and the challenge cup) and I didn't enjoy that period, whilst I am glad of Leeds winning the GF especially from 5th for last two years after being written off I want SL to be competitive with different teams winning. I also want that to come from an improvement overall in standards, particularly from English (British) players for the benefit of RL as a sport. How that is achieved i'm not sure we all seem to be divided on how the game currently pans out and how to take it forward.

On topic about Watkins, I thought he was very good tonight both offensively and defensively. If only we could get the ball his way more often though. That really gets to me.

A difficult task for anyone else given that Leeds practically OWN 5th.

Really? You thought the performance of the team was poor, but Watkins was very good?

Thought he was a bit of liability to be honest. Looked like he was going to lose the ball every time he got it. Not surprised the ball to him was limited.

Looked decent once ball caught and then had space. But certainly didn't come close to others performance wise.

He never looked like he was going to lose the ball. He made 3 good runs and apart from that forward pass, always looked dangerous. His defence on the edges was very good all night too. I don't get how he looked like he was going to lose it every time he got the ball though. I never picked up on that.

And yes, in general, the team were very poor last night. It doesn't mean a few individuals couldn't play well. Fosters work rate in defence really stood out to me too. So much so I was wanting him to calm it down at one point because I thought he was going to kill himself

OMG! At least this is proof that the negativity stick Gordon Strachan spoke about actually exists

Has the potential to be the best centre we have produced in 40 years but seems to lack self belief. Seeing him laughing with the Wire players straight after a game like that just doesn't seem right to me. I noticed Sutcliffe puts out beautiful passes to his right well in front of the player, probably to make sure Watkins actually takes them while moving forward rather than stood still with no space in which to move.

You pretend to watch and analyse the game objectively but you still give in to your man crushes. Leeds were starved of possession in the Warrington half during the second half last night. We got camped in there three times. Once for Hardaker's try, one possession lost by Foster and one lost by Hardaker's knock on from a ridiculous pass/brain fart from Watkins.

If you took your Watkins tinted glasses off you'd have realized what a momentum killer that Watkins decision was, on the 1st tackle when we had been under the cosh. One might also say he should have been "ashamed" to make such an error. I'd have though an objective expert such as yourself would have mentioned this in your analysis of Watkins display.

Some people are hard to please. Watkins has class written all over him and sure at times he is guilty of the brain fart unlikely pass....but much rather him than a play it safe, run it in Delaney like centre. This is not a criticism of Delaney; undoubtedly he has a starting spot in the current 13. His talents and abilities are just elsewhere of course.