If I heard "... chimes into the line ...." once I heard it about ............ 7 times.

He's a top lad on the telly pointing out what's happening but he never was able to dream things up on the pitch like the better coaches out there.

If only PC had accepted the importance of a strong defensive unit and coached the players in that way. Instead he seemed to follow the belief that "attack is the best form of defence". We used to let in 25pts per game under PC and Widnes are doing the same now.

It's really odd when considering when he played he was superb defensively.

What we need to remember is that you or I could pick holes in any defensive line if we watch it a hundred times then write a comment on it. Cullen was too robotic with Warrington in his sets and and that is why he is at Widnes now and we have the Lord Tony Smith.
In Smith We Trust

possibly a reaction to being 'a defensive player' certainly i was concerned about this when he was appointed that you didn't associate paul cullen and attack and was fearful that we wouldn't be much cop going forward.

Maybe this is why he's like he is, over compensating and wanting to be the most attacking-ist possible.

His knowledge of the games structures etc is very good to be fair. But when he was with us, as some have eluded to, perhaps his efforts to balance his former playing style of Defense with an attacking approach may have backfired. On the couple of occasions Ive watched Widnes on a Thursday, especially against Barrow last week, some of their traits are eerily similar to ourselves when Cullen was in charge. For example, that Ned Catic try from the second half restart. That was Cullen all over!