If we had played a better team on mon and won would that have altered it. Not good with percents ... thanks
If we had played a better team on mon and won would that have altered it. Not good with percents ... thanks
It's something that I said in a Whatsapp group on Monday. He may well have rested the players for the wrong game, especially as we face Catalans in the next midweek too.
We needed two wins to get in the four and Salford away and Hull at home would have done that. If we now lose to Wigan and Catalans, we could find ourselves needing to win the last two against Hull and Warrington to make the four.
It all depends whether going for first is priority over safeguarding four. Wigan had no qualms in resting players for the last derby and maybe if we'd known Alex was going to miss the Wigan game before Monday afternoon then we'd have done the same.
THIS YEAR LENDING SUPPORT TO:- St. Helens RLFC, Manchester City, Celtic, Alemannia Aachen, Steps 1 to 6 Non-League Football
I suppose 1st is a better deal if we assume Wigan and Wire are going to finish 2nd and 3rd. I’d rather play Leeds or Catalans and let Wigan and Wire deal with each other. But that’s over complicating things I reckon. I said a while back on here that because we had the best win percentage to begin with, we didn’t need to prioritise games with our nearest challengers because every win means the same. Prioritise the ones you think you’ll win and worry about the other games as they come along. Getting to 15 wins from 20 (when we thought 20 were going to be played) would have given us top spot, regardless of who they were against. Instead we’ve gone with the theory that it’s a better idea to try to knock our rivals out of contention by prioritising beating them directly, but if you do that by sacrificing a winnable game to do so you could end up doubly messing up. If we lose on Friday we’ll have stuffed this week up royally, because a win on Monday was just as valuable in this system.