I'm surprised that such a simple concept is lost on a woman who seems to enjoy the world of stats, numbers and probablilty so much.

Fact is that some teams will already have played more of the top teams than others, hence will be considered to have an easier run in than others and may be expected to pick up more points in that run in and finish in a higher position than they're in now.

Seems fairly simple to me but I'm not an accountant so am used to dealing in facts, not trying to make them up

Until everyone has played everyone twice though the fact that some teams may have played their "harder" matched already and may have an easier run in will skew league positions at this stage.

Anyway, we'll see who the best teams are come play off time. Recent seasons have certainly proven that the team who finished top of the tree certainly weren't the best team in the comp

I take your point to a certain extent, but Leeds still have to play Wigan, Warrington, Huddersfield and Saints, whereas we're done with Saints and Huddersfield. They also have the potential distraction of the cup. We also still have to play each other, in the week after the cup. So on that basis you could say that Leeds have had a softer set of fixtures than us so far and their league position flatters them.

We have played 5 of the other 6 top 7 teams away from home, our home record is only equalled by Warrington and we're 6th on away games only. These are facts that point to a top 4 team, which is what we are right now.

Like us you mean? There are 6 other teams in the top 7, we've played 5 of them away from home.

I'm not disagreeing with that, it's the concept that any given team's position in the league on a given day seems to be taken as irrefutable evidence of that team's standing in SL. So, for instance a team may play a game on Friday night and win and be, say, 5th in the league, but by the time that the weekend's games have played through be 7th. Does that mean they have become a worse team in a couple of days even when they haven't played?

It's completely flawed. I know it, you know it and everyone else does. Can't see why people are arguing about it.

Once all of the games are played through then I can see your point, until then it simply isn't the case.

And if we finish 4th at the end of the season we'll have been the 4th best team during the season

We have been 4th for a number of weeks now. Of course what matters is where we are come round 27 but we can only comment on how things are not and we are 4th!

I'm pointing out that league tables can throw up false positions until all fixtures have been fulfilled. I fail to see how what sport it is makes a blind bit of difference. Unless you're saying that at Christmas 2008 you'd have been happy to proclaim Hull City as the 6th best football team in the country?

But at this stage it doesn't mean we're the 4th best team, which is what kosh was implying

Correct, but at present we are the 4th best team in the league based on games played so far. IF Leeds were only a point behind us and won today to go above us then, yes, [ithey[/i can justifiably claim to be the 4th best team. That is how a league table works.

Are you suggesting that media organisations shouldn't publish league tables during the season?

They know they're wrong, just won't admit it