6th after the play-offs.

Repetition, feigned exasperation, smileys, refusing to discuss the points raised...I'll take it as you have no argument then, one down... does anyone have a reasoned argument against what I'm saying?

But the league doesn't lie

Correct. The truth must be that that there were 10 truly awful teams last year.

What's the point?

It has already been suggested that [iusually[/i after three quarters of a season when clubs have played half of their opposition both home and away - and the others [ieither[/i home or away - the league table is a fair representation of how each team is doing. We are 4th best at present, that may change.

You have quoted examples of how a club can fall away towards the end of a season but these are exceptions rather than the norm. The top six now will very likely finish in the top six albeit perhaps in a different order.

I stick by my point I made a few pages ago - to suggest that a league table means nothing in terms of how strong teams are until the end of the season is bollox.

But only one truly awful team in Hull

Yes.

You're making a subjective judgement of our worth/quality compared to the other teams in SL. Our league table position is an objective assessment. It's also the only assessment that counts.

Right now we are the 4th best side in SL based on the only criteria that matters - league position. Simplez. No amount of sophistry will change that indisputable fact.

There's no sophistry, I'm just taking a view that looks beyond the obvious. I agree that objectively up to this point in the season we have performed the 4th best, my issue is that a league table is not always a particularly accurate guide to how strong one side is in relation to other sides, especially when the fixtures aren't complete.

There's a big difference between having [iperformed[/i better for a period of time and actually [ibeing[/i better. Now in a straight league that doesn't necessarily matter because at the end of the season you finish where you finish, but we have playoffs to contend with so surely we should be basing our judgments with that in mind instead of claiming to be the 4th strongest team in the country based on a season that's nowhere near finished?

Where we end up will dictate on what we can claim to be.

You're not right and rarely are

Fans are saying we are 4th best as of now, not at the end of the season but now. Any comments about the end of the season are speculation unless you have a crystal ball.

That's not what this debate was originally about though until people started back tracking, I was replying to this comment:

I agree to the extent that being 4th at this stage shows we are at least amongst the top 6/8 teams in the league (as it would take a disaster of epic proportions for us to fall out of the playoffs altogether), but as an indicator of how we match up against the opposition teams in terms of actually winning the competition it's a very weak indicator.

Oh OK they're the same thing then? You'll be telling me that form and class are the same next!

Must try harder.

The way I see it is that we're in 'the 4th best' position right now, I certainly don’t think Hull Fc are the 4th best team in the league.

Does anyone think we have the 4th best coach as well?

Hallelujah.

Better than 4th best obviously, given the position the team is when they are apparently not a 4th best team.

sums up my thoughts exactly, and no i dont think we have the 4th best coach!!! lol

I'm flatly denying it because league position isn't evidence with 1/3 of the season to go of exactly how strong a side is in relation to the rest of the teams. Are you suggesting that warrington are 2nd best team despite not being able to beat any of the top 5 teams except us?

This isn't about having a go at agar, it's about common sense. If we finish 4th, then we'll be the 4th best team this season, likewise 5th, 6th, 3rd or whatever, but not with only 2/3rds of teh season gone.

I would have thought someone with an education as great as yours would understand this very simple concept

Which all goes to prove that league positions aren't necessarily the best indicator of how strong a team is. Going by yours, and most other people's logic, we should have trounced cats, what with us being 4th best team and them being 14th

This thread is full of fools. They're so desperate to defend agar they've left common sense in the changing rooms

Doesn't quite tally with what you said on Friday:

Od course they don't, there isn't one, except the concept of the 4th placed team being the 4th best midway through the season only counts in Rugby League. All other sports use a common sense approach

The fact we are 4th is indeed a FACT. The assertion that we are the 4th best team is opinion only until the season finishes

Bull.

Personally I was against Agar's appointment from the start and my position hasn't changed. However I can rationally accept improvements that have been made.

Your view that the league table means nothing in terms of teams' relative strengths until the season is over is clearly rubbish.

I'm right more times than you bud, and this thread is a shining example

So by paulm's logic after 18 games the league shows how strong you are but after 27 rounds it doesn't