The word “attitude” has been used a lot on this thread but I don’t think that’s anything to do with why we lost. If it was anything to do with a poor team or individual attitude I can’t understand why Brad Arthur would go unscathed on the forum. He instills  the attitude, he prepared and travelled with the team, and he had chance to address a “poor attitude” at half time if that was the case. I think we were beaten in all aspects of the game on Friday, physically, technically, the dark arts, structure, decision making and any other areas we competed in. It might have just been a bad day, they happen, or it might be a truer indication of where we are compared to our rivals. We currently sit 1-2 down against Saints this season, if we get turned over in a few weeks time then it’s pretty unequivocal for me where we are quality wise compared to Saints. Beat them and it’s 2 apiece, sweet revenge and  it hopefully means this was just a bad day at the office after a pretty good run.

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. 

but it does give an indication of where teams are at e.g. Wigan /Hull KR are out front, Leeds, Saints , Leigh, Hull and Wakefield are chasing playoffs, Warrington, Catalans and Cas are poor and Hudds /Salford are garbage according to the current table. I think that sounds about right.