McDermott is going. I actually think he is more relaxed because of it, and seems to have let the shackles go. He apparently asked to finish the season, and that is what they agreed.
The difference in quality between the respective leagues is irrelevant. The argument put forward is that a team winning from low in the playoffs with a "low" percentage of wins "ruins" the regular season. That has categorically not been the case in the NRL where teams have won the Grand Final from lower in the league more often than in SL and with teams with lower win % than Leeds.
How is the difference in quality irrelevant? The more evenly matched the teams are, the less difference there will be between 1st and 5th, obviously. In a more evenly matched league, like the NRL, you would expect the win ratios of the top teams to be lower in comparison to SL.
No matter how much these Pie Eaters complain, the problem isn't Leeds or having a play off system. The "problem" is that substandard, bottle-less teams can get to the top of the league but fail in the play offs. Wiganers feel this is a fault of the play offs themselves. I believe it is a fault of the teams who can go so far but do not have the true qualities that champions need to display. When the chips were down, when they encountered a tiny bit of adversity, they failed to win in the biggest games of the season. By definition, they were unworthy of being champions.
I believe it is a fault of the teams who can go so far but do not have the true qualities that champions need to display. When the chips were down, when they encountered a tiny bit of adversity, they failed to win in the biggest games of the season. By definition, they were unworthy of being champions.
Not to be an arrse or anything, but 80 minutes with two evenly match sides - it can go either way. The referee is hugely influential in a RL match, and momentum is not something that can self-accounted for half the time. You either get it or you don't. Leeds only beat Wigan by 1pt via late penalty and were outscored by 2 tries to 1. Who knows it all might have been a different story if Ryan Hall had been penalised for holding down in the 79th minute.
Whether the system is right or wrong. You can't always justify it by saying the "champion teams always find a way to win. no matter what" - especially in a condensed space of time, with variables occurring outside of either team's hands.
Not to be an arrse or anything, but 80 minutes with two evenly match sides - it can go either way. The referee is hugely influential in a RL match, and momentum is not something that can self-accounted for half the time. You either get it or you don't. Leeds only beat Wigan by 1pt via late penalty and were outscored by 2 tries to 1. Who knows it all might have been a different story if Ryan Hall had been penalised for holding down in the 79th minute.
Might also have been different if the three ball steals Silverwood awarded as knock ons had been correct, given they took Wigan from defending their own line to scoring a try.
A pure league format means the most important games are the ones where you beat sides you should beat. Leeds lost some of these-away at Huddersfield, Wakefield, Hull FC & Bradford. The current system means the champions are decided by their ability to beat the best teams, not the weakest.
As you'll see in the Premiership, titles are decided not by the winners of the big games, but by which team 'slips up' against weaker opposition.
Might also have been different if the three ball steals Silverwood awarded as knock ons had been correct, given they took Wigan from defending their own line to scoring a try.
A pure league format means the most important games are the ones where you beat sides you should beat. Leeds lost some of these-away at Huddersfield, Wakefield, Hull FC & Bradford. The current system means the champions are decided by their ability to beat the best teams, not the weakest.
As you'll see in the Premiership, titles are decided not by the winners of the big games, but by which team 'slips up' against weaker opposition.
Spot on. It comes down to their ability to dispatch teams they should be dispatching, and then not lose against their rivals.
Well whoopdy f*ckin do. I never really understood the (almost relentless now) opinion that ''da best team should be da team that finishes top''.
Why is being able to dispatch wakefield, huddersifled, salford, london widnes with consistency any better a measure of champions than being able to beat your closest rivals, with it all on the line?
Spot on. It comes down to their ability to dispatch teams they should be dispatching, and then not lose against their rivals.
Well whoopdy f*ckin do. I never really understood the (almost relentless now) opinion that ''da best team should be da team that finishes top''.
Why is being able to dispatch wakefield, huddersifled, salford, london widnes with consistency any better a measure of champions than being able to beat your closest rivals, with it all on the line?
I'm pro-playoffs. I think champions should be able to do both - consistently beat the rest and succeed at sudden death matches. imo, the current system places too much emphasis on the latter.
Why is being able to dispatch wakefield, huddersifled, salford, london widnes with consistency any better a measure of champions than being able to beat your closest rivals, with it all on the line?
This would, sort of, make sense if Leeds only lost to those weaker teams, but they don't. They have taken 3 from 24 points against Saints, Warrington and Wigan in the 12 regular season games over 2011 and 2012.
Of course, those games weren't on the line. But the issue and the question being asked is; why should people turn up to watch to watch those games, where even you imply that's there no real incentive for either team to 'dispatch' the other?
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 178 guests
REPLY
Please note using apple style emoji's can result in posting failures.
Use the FULL EDITOR to better format content or upload images, be notified of replies etc...
