At the moment you remind me of wire 2009. Not in a bad way to the point where I am nervous about Sunday. That season was our turning point. We finished 10th if I remember correctly but won the challenge cup and that piece of silverware seemed to catapult us forward giving us the belief that we could win something. So back your team sing loud and proud and let's have a great game of rugby.

Not wanting to pee on your chips but that is the 2nd worst record against the current top 8 within the division, only London with 3 points have taken less of the top 8 sides. Cas have 9, Bradford 5, Salford and Wakey 6 and widnes 7. All of these teams have also give the 'big boys' a run for their money in games.

If Warrington bring their A game then they win and of, Hulls hope is that wire miss fire and FC really turn up.

Thanks for the clarification - no one on here realised our record was that bad - really they didn't.

Your last comment is basically garbage in that the way one team plays is inextricably linked to the way their opponents play. It's eminently possible for Hull, as they already have done this season, to reduce the overall level of Warrington's play by themselves performing to a high standard. So in the unlikely event that Hull win on Sunday it will be everything to do with how Hull played and not how poorly Warrington played as one leads to the other. The opposite is true for the most likely outcome.

I'll agree to a point that an improved performance can reduce the oppo's performance yet there is thread upon thread on here stating that you have lost your last 5 games due to yourselves being poor against poor opposition. Should that be you played your best game yet the opposition just had a game plan that made you play so poorly??

Quite possibly. We are superb in training when there is no real opposition so I'd have to think that it's a lot to do with the opposition on match day.

I really do believe that most sides in the league of the type who are unlikely to feature in the play offs see Hull as a real target when they play us. I think it's fairly obvious that we have probably the softest under belly of any team in the 14. Get in amongst us and we don't have anyone to take responsibility and instil the mental toughness required during the game itself. Couple that with too many individuals right across the park who seem unable to take responsibility for the quality of their own work and you get multiple defeats to teams who are no more talented but much tougher mentally. When we play the big boys - Wigan/leeds/Wire - we have a bit of a siege mentality ourselves and have done OK in these games but it's a "one-off" scenario instead of the norm.

The coach has a lot to answer for in terms of our structures and support play failings and when that's magnified by a shortage of 'brains' leaders (halves who dictate play) it's not a good mix. Miller could well make it but it's too big an ask for him to be leading the team around this year based on his age and late arrival into the club. We have a chance against Wire as already proven this season but it relies on a siege mentality and a top kicking game backed by our best defence. If we kick well and tackle hard we can nullify Wire's threat (in other words influence their level of play) but to do this we need Holdsworth to play. I hope Gentle simplifies it right down to that - based on what's gone before I can't see any other options available.

Never seen so much drivel as what's going round this board in a long time.

We're doing exactly what Warrington did in 2009.

Yeah I get were your coming from and that sums it up pretty well. To me there are two types of teams who do well, there are the Wigans who rely on structure and well drilled moves, this allows them to field a side that on paper seems pretty average but can still turn out results. Everyone knows their job and stick to it rigidly, they supplement that with a big dose of quality and flair in Tomkins that once the hard work is done they then tear it up. The other side of that is the teams like Wire and Hudds who rely on off loads, pace and unpredictability, when it comes off it looks and is fantastic, when its off a bit then it looks pretty awful. Wire get away with it due to experience and some clever heads, hudds generally don’t and get a hammering when off the boil.
FC for me look to be trying to emulate the former of the 2 methods but without the flair element, which result in close games but ultimately coming up short. To be honest I thought you look best when you were offloading with abandon and really testing other teams resolve. That side of your game seems to have been lost, (until games are nearly lost) whether this is to do with Manu moving on, who I thought was the best utiliser of this you had or if it’s just a confidence thing then that’s up for debate.

How nice to read some reasoned debate from our neighbours, rather than the usual garbage we have to put up with. Barham Red and Mild Rover are two great examples of rivals who actually see the bigger picture.

I may be mistaken, but the post you quoted refered to games, and not points,

So, 9 points off the top 8, rather than 5, which puts us joint top with Cas from the teams you quoted. I'd guess the chips weren't peed on afterall.

Thought it sounded low, maybe not a full torrent of pee but the point still stands that most of the bottom teams have taken points off the top teams, a lot have ran the top 4 close, on the any given weekly round day anyone can beat anyone. The telling point is in games that matter, this is when the top teams seem to up a gear and win the games. Thats the reason we have so few different winners of competitions over the years in RL.

Yeah, its still not great is it. Coupled with the regular, ongoing ability to away points at the likes of London & Salford. Ho Hum.