We have played 5 of the other 6 top 7 teams away from home, our home record is only equalled by Warrington and we're 6th on away games only. These are facts that point to a top 4 team, which is what we are right now.

Like us you mean? There are 6 other teams in the top 7, we've played 5 of them away from home.

I'm not disagreeing with that, it's the concept that any given team's position in the league on a given day seems to be taken as irrefutable evidence of that team's standing in SL. So, for instance a team may play a game on Friday night and win and be, say, 5th in the league, but by the time that the weekend's games have played through be 7th. Does that mean they have become a worse team in a couple of days even when they haven't played?

It's completely flawed. I know it, you know it and everyone else does. Can't see why people are arguing about it.

Once all of the games are played through then I can see your point, until then it simply isn't the case.

And if we finish 4th at the end of the season we'll have been the 4th best team during the season

We have been 4th for a number of weeks now. Of course what matters is where we are come round 27 but we can only comment on how things are not and we are 4th!

I'm not looking at the current season or any season, just pointing out that a league position at any time other than after the final fixtures isn't absolute evidence of the team's overall standing.

You know I'm right but the bean counter in you won't let you admit it

I'm pointing out that league tables can throw up false positions until all fixtures have been fulfilled. I fail to see how what sport it is makes a blind bit of difference. Unless you're saying that at Christmas 2008 you'd have been happy to proclaim Hull City as the 6th best football team in the country?

But at this stage it doesn't mean we're the 4th best team, which is what kosh was implying

Correct, but at present we are the 4th best team in the league based on games played so far. IF Leeds were only a point behind us and won today to go above us then, yes, [ithey[/i can justifiably claim to be the 4th best team. That is how a league table works.

Are you suggesting that media organisations shouldn't publish league tables during the season?

They know they're wrong, just won't admit it

How convenient. You said:


I took your hypothesis, based on your subjective view that FC are misplaced, and tested it on the team directly below us, Leeds. What that test showed was that Leeds have had an easier set of fixtures than us thus far as they have still to play all the teams above them (plus Huddersfield). If Leeds are indeed better than us, using your hypothesis, they should be well ahead of us in the league table due to their soft fixtures thus far and more difficult run-in. But they're not. How strange. Even stranger that you then try to squirm out of actually applying your theory when it's disproved

So far this season based on performances/results we are 4th best. Why is that difficult to understand. You know we are all right you just can't bring yourself to admit it.

So you're flatly denying that after 19 games of the season we're not the 4th best team? Also Wigan are not the best?

I honestly thought you had more about you Jake.

He has the ability to see more than what's right infront of him which is something you seem to lack. I could list at least 4 teams that I'd put money on beating us in a playoff game, are you saying you couldn't do the same?

Before the Catalans game in response to hullbg saying it was a game we should win comfortably you said



What was this based on? The top three in the league?

Completely missing the point as usual.

The argument is that at this time in the season we are the 4th best team. Are you intentionally being this stupid?

Are you daft?

The playoffs come in September, we are saying we are the 4th best side right now as we are 4th, come the playoffs we might be 6th, so then we will be saying we are the 6th best side.

Get it!!

If the league table at the pesent moment [iisn't[/i a indication of how strong or weak teams are please could you rank all 14 in order of how strong they are and explain the rationale?

I don't think he will TBH.

I agree, its why we smashed the abyssmal bottom club by 60 points on Friday night.

I think you all know that Jake is implying that he does not believe that we ARE the 4th best side, despite us being 4th in the league table. I agree with him, I don't think we are the 4th best side.

That said, with a full strength side, I think we can beat anyone on our day, but can also lose to anyone as well

And yet we've beaten saints twice, or is it just failing to win over teams below us that count on this as yet unseen ranking system?

This is the post I was originally responding to, since then there's been some horrific backtracking going on:




But I think I'm with you guys now I mean five games into last season we were the best team in SL, I still get a warm feeling inside about that and the club reaps the rewards to this day!

I'd be happy to if you're willing to ignore the league table just for a moment and write a justification of how you can see us having a better chance of winning SL than Wigan, Warrington, Saints, Leeds and Hudds?

you obviously missed the words "usually" and "rarely" from the post you refered to.

I really hate pulling apart our big wins as it opens me up to the 'you're gutted when we win' clowns but we beat Saints on opening day which is known for freak results and then with a once-in-a-generation epic comeback win.. do you genuinely think this means we'd have any better chance of beating them in a playoff game?