Re: What does Leeds' victory mean for the regular season? : Sun Oct 07, 2012 7:43 pm  

Omar Little wrote:

It's such a British outlook to think there must be something wrong with the comp for Leeds to win from 5th rather than it being a phenomenal achievement.

Just to get some perspective Leeds have beaten the following teams without any second chances in the last 2 years of playoffs, and with only 2 games played at home:

Hull (H), Huddersfield (A), Warrington (A), St Helens (N), Wakey (H), Catalans (A), Wigan (A) and Warrington (N) again.

All but 2 of those teams finished above them and both times they had to win away at top spot to get to the grand final.

Another amazing statistic is leeds record in knock out games under mcdermott, they've only lost 2 out of 19 i think. Leeds have played an enormous amount of games in the past few seasons.

Another feat that leeds have acheived (twice now) is winning the grand final on the back of winning the WCC in the same season, no other team has done this because it requires you to win back to back titles and win the WCC at the start of the season and the only other team to win back to back titles was saints in 99-00 and they lost the wcc in 00.

It's very hard to peak for 2 big games like that nin the same season.

Re: What does Leeds' victory mean for the regular season? : Sun Oct 07, 2012 7:47 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

If it isnt hard enough, its too easy. Surely this isnt new information for you? If you are arguing it wasnt hard enough, you are arguing it was too easy. You are arguing it wasnt hard enough, you say so above, So you are arguing it was too easy. Exceot it wasnt, it was harder than anyone else has managed.

You claimed I'd said it was easy, which I hadn't, and in fact I'd specifically said it wasn't easy. You must have one massive chip on your shoulder to keep going with this one in the face of those facts. Christ knows what you'd have been like if Leeds had lost.

Your point is clear, you have made it plenty of times, 5th werent punished enough for finishing 5th. To use your word it wasnt 'hellish' enough. 1st isnt rewarded enough for finishing 1st, 2 home ties guaranteed, a possible week off, the possible club call, and playing teams below them in the table isnt enough of an advantage.

I haven't mentioned anything about 1st not being rewarded enough. Once again your comments are incongruent with that to which you are responding. Is your MO here to simply post enough gibberish that people get fed up of trying to guide you into an actual discussion? I'll ask again, if you're just going to use my posts as a platform to argue against something that I haven't said, what is the point, really?

Your evidence of this is Leeds are SL champions again after finishing 5th, and the teams finishing 1st and 2nd arent, because they didnt receive enough of an advantage and Leeds werent disadvantaged enough, this removes credibility from the qualifying competition as why would you bother finishing 1st if finishing 5th wasnt properly punished/rewarded.

I'm flabbergasted that someone could respond so many times and still not grasp the argument their opposing. Are you for real?

Now stay with me here, Your argument, and your use of supporting evidence is predicated on the premise that were the play-offs in a different format, Leeds wouldnt have won them. If we discount that premise then Leeds victory is evidence of nothing. Now you can say you accept that Leeds could have won the play-offs under any format, but if you did, you would need to accept that means Leeds winning in the play-offs isnt evidence that the play-offs arent hard enough on the club playing 5th. That had your idea been the one used, Leeds could still have ended up champions, in fact, in a 1st v 8th knock out which you propose here Leeds, as the 5th placed team, would have played 4th, Les Catalans, then as the lowest ranked team, the top ranked team, Wigan, and then the next ranked team in the final, Warrington. All in knock out games. Which is what happened and Leeds won them all, and a game against Wakefield. Why you are complaining the system isnt hard enough for a team to win from 5th and then proposing a much easier one?

Maybe if you spent more time reading people's arguments instead of trying to present your own version of them you wouldn't have just made yourself look so much of a tit. I did advise you in my last post to stop jumping in head first, but there you go.

To move on to what you say you want, a sliding scale of difficulty depending on where you finish. Well we have that. 1st and 2nd get home games and 2nd chance if necessary, 3rd and 4th get a 2nd chance. 5th and 6th get no second chance, need to win 4 and not 3 games, will only play one home game, 7th and 8th get one shot, every game away from home. Which makes it more difficult for the lower ranked team than the system you want.

5v8 is not more difficult than 5v4. Christ I realise you don't want to let anything detract from Leeds' victory but that's just bizarre.

Re: What does Leeds' victory mean for the regular season? : Sun Oct 07, 2012 7:50 pm  

tenerifeRhino wrote:

Regular Season is just fine

Just look how happy, grateful and proud Wakey were in reaching the play-offs

not everything in RL is just about winning the biggest prize...sometimes just being invited to the party is a massive achievement for alot of clubs and supporters....should fans of like Cas, Wakey, Widnes, Salford just not turn up anymore just because they realistically don't have a chance of winning SL?

Should fans of Leigh,Fax,Fev and all the others just not turn up anymore because they are denied the chance of SL?

Re: What does Leeds' victory mean for the regular season? : Sun Oct 07, 2012 7:57 pm  

tenerifeRhino wrote:

Regular Season is just fine

Just look how happy, grateful and proud Wakey were in reaching the play-offs

not everything in RL is just about winning the biggest prize...sometimes just being invited to the party is a massive achievement for alot of clubs and supporters....should fans of like Cas, Wakey, Widnes, Salford just not turn up anymore just because they realistically don't have a chance of winning SL?

All those clubs were invited, they had 27 rounds to book the taxi, or maybe everybody should get invited, I know exactly how the Wakey fans felt, I was sat with nearly 2,000 of them at Leigh and they never shut up all game

Re: What does Leeds' victory mean for the regular season? : Sun Oct 07, 2012 7:58 pm  

TheElectricGlidingWarrior wrote:

You claimed I'd said it was easy, which I hadn't, and in fact I'd specifically said it wasn't easy. You must have one massive chip on your shoulder to keep going with this one in the face of those facts. Christ knows what you'd have been like if Leeds had lost.

You have said it was too easy. I dont know why you are pretending there is a difference between too easy and not hard enough.

I haven't mentioned anything about 1st not being rewarded enough. Once again your comments are incongruent with that to which you are responding. Is your MO here to simply post enough gibberish that people get fed up of trying to guide you into an actual discussion? I'll ask again, if you're just going to use my posts as a platform to argue against something that I haven't said, what is the point, really?

So you didnt say this?

TheElectricGlidingWarrior wrote:

My main gripe is that finishing lower down the top 8 should make your route to the final increasingly difficult, making teams want to avoid doing so at all costs; in contrast finishing higher up should give you a very easy route to the final, making for an exciting race for the top. We don't have that at the moment and nobody really minds too much as long as they finish in the top 8, and most of those places are all but guaranteed, hence why people are questioning the weekly rounds.

or this?

TheElectricGlidingWarrior wrote:

I think that's exactly the type of convoluted system we need to drop tbh. Seriously, what is wrong with 1v8, 2v7, 3v6, 4v5 straight knockout with home advantage always going to the highest placed side. That way the biggest advantage goes to the side finishing top, with that advantage decreasing in increments the lower down the table you finish.

I'm flabbergasted that someone could respond so many times and still not grasp the argument their opposing. Are you for real?

Maybe if you spent more time reading people's arguments instead of trying to present your own version of them you wouldn't have just made yourself look so much of a tit. I did advise you in my last post to stop jumping in head first, but there you go

You should probably re-read your own argument and decide whether you want it to be easier or harder to win it from fifth. Because you cant seem to make your mind up.

5v8 is not more difficult than 5v4. Christ I realise you don't want to let anything detract from Leeds' victory but that's just bizarre.

this year it went 5 v 8, 4v5, 1v5, 2v5. Under your proposal it would go 4v5, 1v5, 2v5. It would be exactly the same but Leeds would play one knock out game less. It would make Leeds job 'harder' by removing an elimination game, and make Les Catalans job 'easier' by removing their game against Wigan and a possible week off you silly banana.

Re: What does Leeds' victory mean for the regular season? : Sun Oct 07, 2012 8:32 pm  

I really don't know how people can be ar$ed with endless p|ssing contests and points scoring on message boards, I'm really not cut out for it at all. Maybe why I've so few posts in 8 years being on here, just a thought I was having as some of you guys have real comittment pushing 25000 posts!

Re: What does Leeds' victory mean for the regular season? : Sun Oct 07, 2012 8:37 pm  

Seth wrote:

I really don't know how people can be ar$ed with endless p|ssing contests and points scoring on message boards, I'm really not cut out for it at all. Maybe why I've so few posts in 8 years being on here, just a thought I was having as some of you guys have real comittment pushing 25000 posts!

25,000 ! , just beginners mate

Re: What does Leeds' victory mean for the regular season? : Sun Oct 07, 2012 8:40 pm  

Starbug wrote:

25,000 ! , just beginners mate

Bloody hell I only registered 1 week after you!

Re: What does Leeds' victory mean for the regular season? : Sun Oct 07, 2012 8:44 pm  

Seth wrote:

Bloody hell I only registered 1 week after you!

26,000 have been ' love spats ' with smokey

Re: What does Leeds' victory mean for the regular season? : Sun Oct 07, 2012 8:46 pm  

Starbug wrote:

26,000 have been ' love spats ' with smokey

Is that a picture of you at your computer after those 26000 posts?