Not a personal jab Jon but the peaks and troughs in your post did resonate with me.
I’m in the first past the post are the champions guy. The playoff system more or less makes certain that some games/results aren’t important. I didn’t turn up today because watching effectively a poor championship team versus a team playing for “troughs” just didn’t appeal to me. I started watching on tv but after 5 minutes switched over to the athletics where for some unknown reason a guy decided to peak after the olympics to break the 3000 metre world record that had stood for over 20 years.
I don’t buy a ST for peaks and troughs. I will accept losses and loss of form but for the life of me I can’t accept “planned” troughs.
This season and particularly the last month have on the whole been pretty forgetful from a league perspective. Obviously injuries have played a part but the more I think about it the more I feel that I’ve got to accept peaks and troughs. I can on the whole, predict the troughs so this season I didn’t attend the following home games Castleford, Hull, Huddersfield and Leyth part 2. That’s over 25% of home games where I wasn’t remotely interested in the game either because the result was a forgone conclusion or I’d understood that those games were the “trough” games.
I want us to win and I’m more than happy sometimes just to get the win because it’s unrealistic to assume that we can peak every single game. What I can’t accept is that we “plan” for troughs.
For what it’s worth I think our current lethargy isn’t down to peaks or troughs I just think that our strength in depth, particularly in the front row, is due to lack of quality versus quantity available.
I still think that we are more than capable of winning the GF but that’s probably more due to a very low quality competition rather than we can just flick a switch to turn the magic on.
For me the reason why we are struggling to click at the moment is due to the loss of Cooper, Isa and O’Neil plus the interim losses of French and Field ie lack of experience rather than tiredness. If you tell people that they should be tired then the natural reaction is to feel tired. Peet and his staff hopefully can get us on the front foot starting from Saturday at Catalan. To do that he can start by letting Farrimond play his natural game rather than be a supporting role particularly from a kicking point of view. Take the shackles of Matty or at some point(s) we will lose the arm struggle over the next 6 weeks or so.

I don't get the criticism applying to Mago. He never fails to make an impact when he comes on and the fact that he has been playing short minutes is down to the coaching staff as shown on Sunday. He did half an hour first stint and came back on for the last 20 (albeit he got the sin bin). There was no drop off in performance during either spell.

I think Sunday was slightly different as he was playing 13 and in a different role to normal

in regards to performance, i agree with NK, because Thompson and Havard are setting a high bar, and with real intensity, its difficult for the others to appear to be making the same impact, and this isnt necessarily criticising their performances, although in some instances they could be better.

the game i really looked at was at home v Saints where i think Thompson, Havard and Ellis, alongside Lees and a couple of the Saints pack played the full 80, although Lees was binned for 10. The subs on either side didnt really make an impact because the game was so intense, and they struggled to get into it. From memory we rotated Dupree that day, with Byrne, Mago and Hill as we started with no recognised hooker, and then Walters came on with about 15-20 to go for Junior, and again struggled to make an impact

i suppose another way of looking at things is Walters has appeared to have struggled all season coming off the bench, but when he started the last 2 games, he's looked a lot better and had more of an impact / influence on the games

I don't think the roles are disimilar enough to make that conclusion Mark. Mago still ran the ball in from 13, carrying 3 or 4 players with him as he did so. You could argue that 13 is actually more aerobically challenging as you're on the ball far more often but still have to run it in like a prop. 13s traditionally have good engines for that very reason.

Mago is never going to be an 80 minute prop. We didn't sign him expecting him to be, so I think criticism because others are is a little unfair. The question should be "is he fulfilling the role we expect from him" and the answer to that is yes. I have rarely over the last 12 months or so seen him come on and not make an impact. He dents the defensive line better than any other prop, and that includes Thompson. That he hasn't done it for big minutes in many matches is, as I say, down to tactics. Peet, quite understandablely, likes Thompson, Harvard and Ellis on for as long as possible. Whether that's the right tactic long term is another argument and I've said many times that I think it carries risks.

He was much better on Sunday to be fair and before that, I will give him plenty of leeway because his minutes have been extremely limited. In his time on the field though, he hasn't been as good in recent months as he was in that first half of the season but he isn't on his own. I think he's a victim of those limited minutes in many ways because he looks like a guy that needs time on the field to build up his match sharpness. Sunday could well do him a lot of good and help him keep a place because if Cooper does come back this season and with Ellis back this week (and Faz at some point) a few guys are going to miss out.

i agree Mago isnt ever going to be an 80 minute prop and i personally wouldnt assess him against one, but i also think we all expect him to be skittling the opposition every time he takes the ball in, so are probably putting too much expectation on him on that front. there is no doubt he gives us a different option in the front row, with 3-4 men regularly in the tackle on him and his ability to offload, although i think he has probably been asked to be more controlled with it y the coaching team

re the 80 mins, i agree that there is an element or risk, and personally i would have given Thompson the Hull game off, as it feels like we are very reliant on him doing 80 each week. The coaching team however, are probably looking at the other options, and not seeing them replacing Thompsons intensity if they give him the week off at the minute,. We all know Bryne can do good minutes as he played most games last year, Dupree i'm not sure about, but he was very good when spelled and Hill is still learning his trade