We scored some sensational tries at Hull and [ieveryone[/i, Wire fans, Hull fans, media agreed we were brilliant, which we were.

So, I don't think the team is being told to suddenly throttle it back, more likely that the team has reverted to basics to feel it's way back to form. Fine by me.

Cue lots of "we weren't that good at Hull" posts.

TBH I don't think we were all that good at Hull.

I too am on both sides with this. Our tries v hudds don't seem to be all that industrious tactics-wise, just more reliant (as mentioned) on opposition mistakes, ref calls and in the main for me, individual skill/power. Against better performing sides, we'll struggle to break them down without a few more tricks/moves in the book. Also, our passing can still be a bit clunky and miss-timed where the runner has to slow in order to recieve the ball. I would ideally like to see us move the ball a bit better, like Hudds did on a couple of their tries; it makes the moves more dynamic and difficult to read, and presents a tougher challenge for the defence to adjust to tackle incoming runners.

I'm not complaining though, just pointing out some areas where we could improve, like others have. At this point in time, I honestly think we'd struggle to compete with saints on full power. That said, Holbrook has been with them for 2.5 years to sort things out.

Serious question...how does the current team match up against Tony Smith's team of 2016 which topped the league and reached two major finals?

I'm not getting drawn but I think his point is, come GF time when the opponents don't have weaknesses to exploit we could end up struggling to score running the risk of going over an hour scoreless in 2 GFs. He could cite the following to back up his case.

2018 - GF 4 points, CC 14 points.
2016 - GF 6 points, CC 10 points.

Avg points per final - 8.5 - isn't going to win a lot.

Hard to tell. It's better than his 2017 team I know that, and we don't have the smug "I couldnt give a " gurning.

Far greater chance of winning a grand final IMO, than the 2016 team. The league was pretty poor that year, and Warrington (bar the first couple of months) weren’t clear leaders or anywhere near the best team for most of the year.

Smith’s teams 2011-2013 were the peak of his stewardship and if we were going to win the big prize under Smith, that was the period in which it would happen IMO. He had a great few years and we were a joy to watch, but the title didn’t come and that’s in the past.

Now we have Price, and although I can’t be sure we’ll win the elusive title with him in charge, it was definitely the right decision to replace Smith and I think we made the right choice from the coaches available. Price has changed the mentality of the team, and although we won’t be the flat track bullies we could be in our pomp under Smith, I think we have the toughness to win a GF when the chips are down on a cold night in October. I’m hoping we can keep Austin fresh if that opportunity arises - he’s lived up to all expectations and despite having to take responsibility for organising all the attack (since Brown is injured) he’s also top try scorer, high on assists, leading MOS contender, a joy to watch and even a top asset off the pitch.

Times are good IMO.

I’m still struggling to understand the point being made. Who is more likely to make a final (bearing in mind you have to “be in it to win it”). The team that scored 3 pretty tries ( when exploiting opponents injury weakness), or the team that put 50 past them?
We scored some delightful tries in 2011, and were a joy to watch, but didn’t win the GF.
There is an argument to be made that in tight games it is a kick or individual moment of brilliance that breaks the deadlock.
As for W71, it seems your “I’m not going to be drawn” is your new “time to move on”. None of my posts are specifically aimed at you (unless I reference you) but you do seem to struggle with the idea that someone else’s opinion may have some validity, or even that by grown up debate a clearer view may be achieved.

Agree that it’s important to capitalise on opponent’s mistakes and weaknesses. What happens though when our opponents don’t make mistakes and/or cut out defensive weaknesses as their side gels over the season?- we’re going to need something else.

On the training pitch, you’d hope/imagine we’d be practicing some slick moves and passing movements to take into games and to see evidence of this in our performances. Against Hudds, there didn’t seem too much of this- more the capitalising on errors to score tries. Great if we have both; but against well drilled defences we’re going to have to create our own opportunities.

Someone mentioned about the improvement in attitude amongst our players under Price. I’m still not entirely convinced that this has been sorted. Take our recent games: saints, salford and Huddersfield- there’s still plenty to work on where our commitment has fallen short of the full 80.

I’m not trying to be negative, but, come the play offs; we really need to address some of these points if we are to achieve any success.

No I meant I wasn't going to get "drawn into" criticizing a 50 point win. The would be churlish. I just wanted to discuss the subject without receiving caustic responses aimed at me. I enjoy reasoned debate and think the O/P makes an interesting point.

True, but let’s take a step back and look at the big picture:

There’s only one team in the league who seem to have a more ruthless attitude than us and steam-roller other teams consistently. That team is not a huge way in front of us, and they did the same last year yet failed to make a final when it counted.

As far as I am concerned we can slowly learn lessons as we plod through the season in second place winning by a few points less per game than the top team, but as long as we peak in the playoffs I won’t be too bothered about Easter.

It’s really not a bad season so far on reflection is it?

Exactly where I am at. I would love us to add that slick passing movement that Huddersfield showed into our nal for attack. Yes lets have off the cuff "play what you see" rugby but some slick drills like Hudds showed could only be a benefit. I would also love it if we could deliver full 80 min performances on a more regular basis without the obvious "foot of the gas" complacency which is becoming our hall mark across a number of coaches/teams now.