I'm not too conerned about the ghost of 2005 and here's why...

It was suggested by just a few posters at the beginning of the season that the early dominance was partly due to Leeds being several weeks ahead of the rest of Superleague as they'd sought to be playing at a high intensity from the off due to the desire to win the WCC. It was also suggested that that level of performance couldn't be maintained from February through to October. No athletes can mentally and physically peak for the full 8 months. Some sought to dismiss that as the same objectivity could be applied to the WCC victory itself as Melbourne were even further behind in their preparation, but I digress...

Its like a 1 mile running race. If one runner sets off at a sprint then after 1/4 mile or even 1/2 a mile he'll have a huge lead and look pretty much unassailable but he'll be tiring and by the last 200 yds others will have caught him and have enough energy to pull away with a kick to the line. That was 2005.

So, how about this for a theorydid [/iin 2004 and 5). Ultimately Leeds couldn't hang on and came away with nothing bar the WCC.

But I think the club will have learned from 2005. They've clearly stated that a big aim for the year is the Challenge Cup. It might be a genuine desire to hold that trophy, or be because they felt keeping up the intensity until the end of August would be achieveable, and that would give a decent stab at the CC and maybe the League Leaders too,but accepted the GF might not be realistic.

I think there may be more to it than that though.

In 2005 Leeds used (I think) fewer players than this year yet didn't start to show a drop in performance until early June or a consistent change in results until the end of August. Thats a number of weeks later than this year despite using the squad more in 2008. I think that was largely burnout but this lull seems too premature for that to be the case.

I wonder if there has been a recognition that simply 'hanging on' wont work and that the staff have decided to start fast, bringing home the WCC in the process, but then by the end of May dropping the training and mental intensity a bit. That carries the risk of a drop in form and resultant defeats but maybe allows the intensity to be raised again later in the season as the players will have had a mental and physical 'breather' before trying to peak again. Obviously not aiming to lose any games but not risking a fatal burn out for the season by pushing 100% all the time.

Are they aiming to peak twice and the current lull is a necessary risk in targetting this? I'm optimistic.

Point taken - it will have some effect on the game, but dropped balls? One man rugby? Would it reduce our gameplan to basically nothing?

We may yet do it this year, but it would take one hell of a turnaround - more so than in any other year.

I'm not holding my breath.

dropped ball is hardley a coaching issue though mate!! im pretty sure thats not in blueys game plan

Hardly a coaching issue?

Dropped ball is exactly the sort of thing the coach should be eradicating in training. If a team consistently drops the ball it's the coach that should do something about it.

I'm sure it's not in Bluey's gameplan as well but the fact we're doing it so much shows that something's not right.

Either players aren't familiar enough with plays (the coach's fault), the players lack confidence (partly the coach's fault) or the players can't be ar5ed (the coach's fault).

Or maybe we're dropping the ball because the backs are under more pressure from defences due to the forwards not doing their jobs and so are trying miracle passes and offloads?
IMO its much more a mental thing than a lack of skill.