The league table doesn't lie and I think we are about where our collective talent would indicate we should be. We haven't got the squad to compete at the business end of the table, it's as simple as that.

I’d predict 7th/8th. However, we are generally defending okay even with other teams having ALL the possession and territory due to our discipline.

If we can cut out the errors and indiscipline, we concede even less tries. How we sort out the attack I really don’t know I hope it’s just the time of year and the lack of practice together. To be fair to Paul Cullen his teams’ attacking qualities were something to enjoy (if you ignore the defence and attitude and drinking etc)... maybe we can bring him back as a consultant

Don't get me wrong, not a personal attack I was just interested to know who would replace him if we were to go that way. I would have thought it an equally uninspiring choice had it been Chester instead of Price to begin with, but given it looks like another good season for Wakefield I'd snap him up in a heartbeat now. Only difference now is we don't have the luxury of plenty of time for the change. Would he come? Would board be happy with another expensive payoff to the current manager, and presumably to Wakefield? He'd still be stuck with the core of Tony Smith's team so would it make any difference? All hypothetical as there's no way the club is gonna ditch a manager after 6 or 7 games.

Too early to judge Price after 6 games anyway, as bad as things may seem.

By the time of the split, if we are 8th it above and then improve during the 8s we can get a better idea of what the future holds.

Cullen's team had the players to support that sort of game: Briers, Gleeson, Bridge, Grose, Fa'afili, Penny plus ball handling forwards like Vinnie Anderson, Wainwright and Leikvoll.

It was similar with Tony Smith, the business about "turgid rugby" only started being said about TS teams towards the end of his time, when Briers, King, the Monaghans, Hodgson, Hicks, Myler, Solomona, Waterhouse were there we played much more exciting stuff. Back then the complaint about being "predictable" was that the results were too predictable (we pretty much always won easily against the lesser sides) and only a small number of games in the season actually mattered, so the fans switched off a bit in some of the routine league wins.

Last season I thouht I was falling out of love with the game id followed for over 50 years. This year thankfully we're back together again - and that is not down to how many games we've won or lost - it's because I can see commitment from the players.

Two very good posts above. The players do look committed and I think the "flair" we previously showed was due to the individual flair of the players we had then as Sally said.
Right now the solution is going to be drilled moves and not "play what you see". This will take a long time on the training field to get right.

In terms of flair in the halves, I wish we had acted earlier and got Justin Holbrook. He was half back coach back in Australia and you can see how Danny Richardson has flourished under him. He may have made something of Patton.

Sooner or later I knew I'd reel you in.

Come on RD you weren't fishing

He was. His mind works on a superior level to us. We are merely pawns to be toyed with in his ideological game of forum chess.

Need to watch W71, he's smart.