I think the recent tough matches and close finishes will have been good mentally for the youngsters who may well be needed to hold their nerve in the playoffs.

The return of Burrow and JJB (and both in good form too) is a real boost and I expect Sinfield's enforced rest will have him mentally and physically ready too. We must use the Bradford game to continue our improvement and get back that steely defence and keep building our confidence.

Nope we shouldn't, but I think that had a lot to do with Wigan having to play again on Thursday vs Salford. We'll have a full 7 days and Bradford will have the shorter Sunday-Friday turnaround vs us.

Interesting.

From that, warrington have the toughest run in, with cas the most favourable. Wigan and hudds in second behind cas for favourable run in.

Very hard to make an accurate prediction but based on the fact theres no CC for them to worry about, there's a reasonably favourable run in (in comparison to others) and a superior points difference I'd say wigan will finish in the top 2.

The priority for leeds (besides the CC) should be securing a home tie in the playoffs and so a top 2 finish.

It'll be a squeeker based on that run in though.

The points difference is no longer something we can rely on, and saints although they have lost walsh have a good record at headingly. Then we finish with tricky games at hull and wigan.

You would like to think we would beat bradford and london and not suffer an upset, and then beat saints on account of 'home advantage' and no walsh, which hopefully would be enough (based on other teams dropping points in other games) to secure top 2.

Can't ever remeber a run in as tight as this.

Wigan forum are now saying its a conspiracy because we Always get a longer turnaround.I only looked on there to see their reaction from todays game and lo and behold

TBF whilst Sky have a say in some games regarding which are on tv then all clubs have a certain say in when they play their home games and some prefer Fridays and some Sundays.

Those on the Sunday always risk a short turnaround whilst at worst playing Friday you'll have a 6 day turnaround to a Thursday game but more likely a full week to Friday again.

Granted when you're the away team like Wigan were (and Cas were when we faced them on a short turnaround at the Jungle) then you can't really change it but is that anybodies doing apart from the team who arranged the game? Did they ask Bradford if they could've played it Friday instead?

It's quite good for Leeds to mostly play on Fridays. With a large chunk of our away games inevitably on Sky (thus usually moved to Friday too) then you'll mostly have a 7 day turnaround throughout the year. Don't actually think this is why we have our home games mostly on Fridays as I believe it's more to do with better corporate gigs attending or something along those lines but it does work out better for us I believe. But their isn't anything from stopping others from following suit as it's not like Sky demand anybody play on Sunday for tv reasons.

It's also worth noting how certain teams perform in "big games". Having a tough run in is one thing, but failing to take advantage of "simpler" games is also problematic for some sides - you'd expect the top 6 to be in a similar order to the "top 6" table yet currently:

[size=100[code
Win Draw Lose Pd Points
Saints 6 0 2 45 12
Huddersfield 5 1 2 14 11
Wigan 4 0 5 21 8
Leeds 3 2 4 2 8
Castleford 3 1 5 -20 7
Warrington 2 0 5 -62 4
[/code[/size

It shows that whilst Leeds are about average in those "big games" they have avoided far more banana skins than Huddersfield. It should be a very interesting run in

Whilst a "Top 6" league table does bare some thought, we've already seen Saints thrash Warrington and Warrington thrash Saints back so I'm not sure this particular year we can take much from that.

I think all the teams near the top are quite closely matched (compared to 07-09 when Leeds and Saints were miles ahead of the rest) so it can just be a case of facing teams at the right/wrong time. Would Saints be 2 points better off had HKR stuck with Sandercock a week longer for example? Without injuries surely some results would be different.

Nothing I've seen so far this year in terms of play has pointed at any team being clear favourites over any of the others when the playoffs arrive. The only piece of clear evidence I've seen effecting the playoffs so far is that Saints will have to do without two main men in Walsh and Lomax.

The top 8 looks to really have kicked in......just as we're about to scrap it.

Problem with some RL supporters is very short patience.

During the top 5/6 era people complained that the GF was mostly just 1st vs 2nd and the playoffs were meaningless as the teams in 4th and 5th had no real chance of reaching Old Trafford.

Skip ahead a few years and 4th and 5th win it and people complain that the top 2 don't have enough of an advantage in the playoffs.

Except we're not scrapping it per se, just changing the reward you get for being in it.

There was nothing wrong with the 5 team play off IMO.it should be that with a 12 team league 1 up 1 down.not overly convinced by the new structure but am willing to see how it goes and give it a chance.

Plenty of interest left on the end of this regular season though which is nice to see.

But we are really. If the 8th placed team can't mathematically make the top 4 after the super 8 stage they can't make the GF can they?

Totally agree with this. All it needed, as quite a few said a couple of years back, was to reduce to 12 clubs in Super League, and this is what we would have had each year.

The new format will be a dead rubber for a lot at end of the season, after the split.

Wigan always have to blame Someone, it's a culture wane has introduced to the club. Anybody in the top 8 could take them out home or away and it's getting to them lol on and I believe Cas have had the most short turnarounds

Haven't done the research on it, but I would be surprised if after 23 rounds the 8th placed team has ever been 14 points behind the 4th place team very often, if at all.

Even if it was 6 points, it still means you have to win three more (assuming your points difference is as good) than the 4th place team over just 7 games. And four of those 7 are away from home. Of course you are also relying on 5th, 6th, and 7th, not doing aswell also. Next week is the 23rd round of this season, and the fourth placed team is likely to be 11 points ahead of the 8th placed team. Not going to happen is it really?

If the 8th placed team want to reach the Grand Final under the current system, they have to win three consecutive away games against higher ranked opposition. How often does that happen?

I thought the discussion, as pointed out by Gareth, were that things were improving further down the ladder. Therefore what happened previous isn't really cut and dried. However, the point is that top 8 Is top 8, and once there all in with a chance. Now it is only top 4.

Just to highlight this further. I absolutely hate the idea of bonus points scoring, yet it appears likely that this will be brought in next year under the new structure.

Had that being in place this year, we would go from a likely 11 point gap under current scoring by round 23 between 4th and 8th, to a 16 point gap. Again highlighting how pointless those end fixtures are. The 8th based team would have put everything into avoiding relegation, and nothing to play for come the extra 7 rounds.

I haven't read anything about that. Hope it's not true because, like you, I hate the idea of bonus points.

if someone is so far adrift that they can't qualify from 8th they should have done better in the previous 23 rounds. I would think that the point of this new system is so you have to put effort in to getting results all year instead of just at the end

I recall having a similar debate a few months ago with a fan of ones of those teams around 8th place on the VT who complained that the system was poor as his team could most likely enter that top 8 period 10 points adrift and very little chance of making it up in the extra remaining games thus they were meaningless games.

The obvious reply to him was don't find yourself 10+ points adrift in the first place. Think it's sadly eneviatable that in 12 months time we'll see threads on the VT with fans of the 7th/8th teams complaining they can't catch the top 4 when the split down to 8 happens.

I agree with a 12 team SL and P+R but that's as far as it goes for me.
Imo the Play Offs should be top 5/6 with top spot playing just 1 game at home to get the GF (in a 5 team P/O).
I also think this bottom 4 SL playing top 4 Championship is loaded way too much in favour of the SL teams again rewarding failure and adding fixtures for the sake of it.
For me the top team in the Championship comes up automatically and replaces the bottom team then 2nd plays 2nd bottom in the "Do or Die" final with the winner getting a SL spot.
On a slight detour I'd also make it compulsory for SL teams to run an u23 team with the allowance of 3 over-age players included.
Then it would be u18's u16's & u15's at that level I'd introduce the Yorkshire and Lancashire cups and also a war of the roses series.

I have said the same thing myself previously, and wholeheartedly agree with this. It just makes complete sense. The roses series is a no brainer for me, and for the cup if not Yorkshire/Lancashire then a challenge cup at those levels, with a finals day for all three age groups on the same day and venue.

As for tough if they are so far behind. What is the point of the new structure then? they are behind now and will be then, so why change. If one from below does manage that higher up then it will be the expense of someone higher. I bet the same people on here saying tough now, won't be preaching the same if it was Leeds. The whole point of the season is the Grand Final, so why restrict to just four teams.

As for tough if they are so far behind. What is the point of the new structure then? they are behind now and will be then, so why change. If one from below does manage that higher up then it will be the expense of someone higher. I bet the same people on here saying tough now, won't be preaching the same if it was Leeds. The whole point of the season is the Grand Final, so why restrict to just four teams.'"

And what about the dead rubber extra seven games in that scenario, which is what we are talking about? you do understand the structure don't you? if you want a top 4 for the play offs, then all fine, but don't bother with the extra 7 games then, just go as finish after 23 rounds.





I think the idiot part is the only part that fits your name, so best leave where is.