Theres still one more game in the cup to go, so still time.

I doubt any pro club would do 80 minutes of full contact training. They usually only do full contact pre-season.

But then last week was far and away from a training session. As I said the impacts these guys are taking are massive and continuous. It's not surprising it takes them a week to recover to a position to be able to play to a high standard again.

Whilst other issues such as youth production and reserves comps etc all benefit the quality of the NRL, another reason is that they play fewer games. Even with 3 SOO games the NRL top teams are playing 27 games per year. SL's top teams are playing around 34.
Over 5 years our top players have played the equivalent of an extra season.

You're assuming they will go five years without injury in a collision sport.

There's also the assumption that playing a game of rugby is equal regardless. Whether it's the style of play, or the individual players, Leeds have made ~600 tackles and ~1000 metres more than Saints and Wigan so far this season - that's the equivalent workload to 2 extra games in itself.

So I'd say the assumptions balance (broadly speaking)

That's kind of the point though, the collisions are big enough to cause injury and massive stress upon the body.
People on this thread have said players should be able to play once a week. I don't think all can anymore. Some need a rest to recover, especially if you want them to play toward their peak ability.

Players should be able to play once a week.......providing they come out of the previous game without carrying a knock.

If you tweak a hamstring, or bang a shoulder, or twist an ankle, or damage your back then does a 6/7 days turnaround to then play in a Cup final at Wembley sound like fun?

That's WEMBLEY vs SL opposition with 30,000 odd of your fans there......not whatever weekend amateur team somebody played for on here in front of 100 people and their dogs.

These are professional players their training should prepare them for the intensity of what takes place during the gladitorial exchanges.

Players do get injured and that is a valid reason for not playing - fatigue should not be a genuine reason in an elite professional sport for not playing

On the NRL the scores are not an indication of the physicality of the contest. The scoring differential between the top teams in the premiership and the rest and the top teams in the championship and the rest will be similar but the speed and intensity will be very different

You watch the match highlights and tell me that the team wasn't capable of beating London, we were fully capable but we completely switched off. With full team I agree we would have won, but on the other hand our team was completely capable and showed that in parts. The team selection wasn't the issue for me, it was the switch off which in the end is down to the players.
Zak Hardaker, Ryan Hall and Ian Kirke the experience was there to not lose. No question.

Training can never prepare a player fully for a game. Or players would be effectively playing a game in training.
15 years ago pro RL players were playing 1 game per week. That is still the same now. Despite a huge increase in the speed and power of players over those 15 years. Whilst modern training and recovery methods can help alleviate that strain, I don't see it as unreasonable to think that we might have reached the point where some players on some occasions in the season need to be rested even without an injury. Especially when there is a game where you want to get the most out of that player.
That seems obvious as most people on here have called for players to be rested during the year, even when not injured.

As I said, I'm sure most of the Leeds players could have played in the London game, but do you want your key players in as good a condition as possible for a Cup Final?

But games that are close usually aren't cruises for one team. Which was the assertion. The difference between the Premiership and Championship is in quality not in fitness or effort. Leeds United players will work just as hard for a win as Man City players will.

Just seen the video of McDermott's post match interview on the Leeds website. That definitely isn't a man who doesn't care that we lost, he did seem very annoyed with individuals.....he kept emphasising the word "individuals".

Reporter "will this have any bearing on next week?

McDermott "it'll have a bearing tomorrow when I drag those blokes in who played, those that we feel were culpable, it'll absolutely have a bearing."

TBF to the guy he's been accused of not sounding too angry or upset post defeat/poor showing but watching that he really wasn't happy and quite angry at what happened.

The whole point of training is to prepare players for the job in hand surely? Players should be able to manage one game a week - many don't even need to do 80 minutes as they are substituted for significant time during the game. On here some are suggesting players are rested after 3/4 games into the season. Some were suggesting Sinfield needed resting despite having two games off only a week ago

The play offs have shown a week off is not always a positive move for a team - Mcdermott was in a no win position today, i for one thought he got it about right, the players let him down

On soccer the players at Leeds simply wouldn't be able to live with the physical speed of the premiership especially for the whole 90 minutes

I am the proudest man alive tonight after todays slim victory - and almost throwing it away in the last play. It's as if London's victory equates to winning the League Leaders Shield, the Challenge Cup Final and the World Club Challenge in the same week. Hats off to all the Leeds fans I was surrounded by for being so supportive of the London team and the good natured banter after the final whistle.