tad rhino:

even the league table is seriously flawed because of the extra games

leeds owl:



That would have been a good gauge between 1974 and 1996 Simmo, but as Saints fans will testify, you can finish 10 points in front of a rival and lose to them when it matters and you’re consigned to the category of losers. Both of our theories are ultimately out of the window until play off time, lose to Saints then and previous results and league positions become irrelevant. 

YosemiteSam:



If all concerned are comfortable with the current structure of fixtures, and hence the resultant league table, then fine, but unless each team plays each other team the same amount of times, then in purist terms the league table has no integrity at all. 

Simmo71:



Yeh, fair enough OWL.
And we know that better than anyone.


The point I was making is that should we lose to Saints in a couple of weeks doesn't necessarily mean we are way behind them, as you had suggested.
The final league table (before the play offs) would be a better gauge of that.

(Quote)
I didn’t say we would be way behind them if we go 1-3 for the season against Saints, but it would indicate to me they are a better team with a greater chance of silverware. They have had their travails this season, but when it came to a “must win” game against us, it was pretty conclusive despite the final score in The Challenge Cup. If we put in a real display against them in a few weeks and make it 2 apiece I would be encouraged that we  are a similar level of quality.  I think head to heads do indicate levels of quality, and to go 1-3 down against any team in a season would probably be a good indicator whoever we were playing.