Try not to be so tribal dear, who's the sore one.

2011 was a great season for many clubs, Pies, Saints all in their own way, and by far the most competitive for while, a great spectical, especially the DW stadium one, my hands are still sore from clapping.

But a series 27 rounds of games with only a portion being relevant is odd and that's the point of this post isn't it?

Warrington failed, i get that, let's move the debate on

Scrapping the LLS would mean the point of striving to win all your games is gone, then why pay your hard earned pounds to watch a regular match

What if you figure out a few days before your team is not going for a win because the team sheet fields a weakened side.

Unintended consequences such as the Leeds example, they were poor per Playoffs, shows what can be achieved fron 13 points off the top, I wonder if Warrington will prioiritise the GF this season, deliberately fielding weekend sides towards back end of season, if I was the boss, that's what id do, if the top position is irrelevant.

Maybe playing youngsters and taking a loss is a good thing for the team overall ?

Erm, except the point, the real point, is to finish as high in the league table as possible to earn the resultant advantages as you enter the playoffs. Nobody is striving to finish top for a big dinner plate.



I'm not sure what point you're trying to make or, indeed, if you have one but if you genuinely think Warrington didn't prioritise the GF last season above all else then I'm not sure how you can benefit further from this discussion. Do you really think Warrington prioritised the Leage Leaders Shield ahead of the Grand Final? For real?



Oh, and you might want to look at Leeds results through July to the Grand Final. After the loss at Catalan on July 10th Leeds only lost one more league match the week before the cup final. Leeds were not poor heading into the playoffs or in the playoffs themselves. Leeds were one of the hottest teams heading into the playoffs, something they seem to have perfected over the last seven or eight years.



Again, I'm not sure what point you're trying to make but why does playing youngsters equate to a loss? In case you hadn't noticed, Leeds and Saints play a lot of youngsters and, guess what, it doesn't necessarily equate to losing.

The point I'm making is that a team can lose a third of its matches and be crowned Champions as Leeds did very well as you say. Does that not then show the irrelevance of 11matches in your season ? Leeds lost 11 matches in 2011.



If as a supporter I'm thinking should I go to the match or do something else with my weekend, or maybe watch it on sky instead of going to the ground because it doesn't really matter so long as your team win 15 games out of 27, then I can see some fans taking the non rugby weekend. Is that good for RL ? I think not.

In these difficult times, its important as many fans as possible think their year supporting their team has been worthwhile.

As a Wire fan, I do for 2011, as I'm sure do Wigan, Saints and a few others who had something to play for.

Wire spent many years winning nothing, I for one don't mind admitting it darn difficult to watch your team if they finish the year trophy less.

I should know we were the best at it.

You're totally missing the point here. What Leeds did was extraordinary, but they didn't choose to do it the hard way.

Those 11 matches were not irrelevant. Leeds didn't choose to lose them. They would much rather have been in Warrington's position at the end of the regular rounds, not to win the hubcap, but to have the massive advantages that league leaders have going into the playoffs.

Leeds and Saints also didn't choose to play youngsters just for the hell of it. They were forced to do so 'cos of pretty severe injury problems. Had Peacock and McGuire been available at the start of the season, or if they could have played first choice centres and props for most of the season, I'm pretty sure you wouldn't even be talking about Leeds losing so many matches anyway.

The bottom line is Leeds couldn't match the others until they had a settled, relatively injury-free team and got used to a new coaching team and new playing systems. Once that happened they were as good as (and results would suggest better than) the rest.

End of debate

I'm not talking about flipping Leeds, I'm talking about the games as a whole, give me strength !

My point is if 11 games can be lost and you still win the ultimate prize as its regarded, then it follows a third of all results don't matter, I don't think that's good for the game, only my opinion, I see RL as under a serious threat to other distractions, this issue adds to the game's demise or don't you notice the empty seats ?

Except that's not the debate.

Maybe I'm a bit thick, but when someone posts two paragraphs, one of which is about Leeds losing 11 games, I assume that they are talking about 'flipping Leeds'!



You just don't get it do you? The championship is won by winning the play-offs. The league determines who will play in and have the greatest advantage going into the play-offs. In this sense no game is irrelevant. They all matter in terms of the greater objective...having that advantage going into, and ultimately winning the play-off series.

The relevance of those 11 games is that Leeds had to play all but one of their play-off games away, and that to win the GF, they had to play and win more games than those above them. This would be true of any team whether it's 'flipping Leeds' or 'blooming someone else'.

Yes maybe you are ! As I said I get it, Leeds are the bees knees, the dog's danglies, whatever you want, great season, Mc Dermott' a genius. I heard all that.

But as you don't get it, I'll give up, I wouldn't want you to have a heart attack.

The LLS is just a precursor to the GF



When i go for an Indian it's not the Prawn Puri i'm looking forward to but the Lamb Madras that comes after, i enjoy both but i can do without the former.

Strange how average crowds have increased massively since 1997 which was the last year where the champions were decided by league position?



Unlike you however I won't attribute cause and effect to one single issue as the whole business of Rugby League is much more complicated than that.