Pack was ok, needed a Morley or Peacock but not both, and beat the cons imho.

The organisation skills and confidence that subsequently pours through the Cons backline via Lockyer exposes our inferior backline, he must retire soon!!

Though Goulding and Briscoe looked ok for the future, but we need a couple of 6'2'' 15.5 stone centres, with great ball handling skills and 9.8 sec for the 100m to come through soon. Will that be Watkins?

Eastmond/Robinson/Tomkins/Myler/Widdop give us some hope in the halves.

Westwood - while not the best player in the world, nor most talented, nor because of his hair - stood out because you can see he's giving 100% effort all the time. Does he give away pens? Yes. Was that why we lost? No.

There was a noticeable drop off in the forward momentum from England when Burgess and Graham left the field... Crabtree is a good option off the bench as he can produce an off load etc but him and Fielden didn’t have the same go forward as Burgess and Graham

What I would love to have seen was the likes of Peacock and Morley in the mix to maintain that momentum – ah well, not to be

Specifically on Burgess, as above, his forward momentum was great but simply too many errors to have been described as having a good game

Welcome to the wonderful world of why we keep losing. Because we big up players who have limited talent, poor decision-making, yet who give "100%" effort. I used to give 100% effort when I played amateur RL. Does that mean I should get praise in an England shirt ?

I'm happy with amateurs who give 100% effort. But for a professional, that's not enough. For an international, I expect not just effort, but some success, and - crucially - mental effort as well, to make the right decisions in attack and defence.

Westwood is a bruiser, and for that reason, I quite like him, because I think raw aggression is a requirement of a top-class pack. But until he learns to temper that aggression by cutting out the silliness, he'll be a net liability to club and country.

how many of those have any experience of international success?

BUt i didn't just pick out 2 saints players. And i can't see how you can have a love in with any player when we've been outplayed on all accounts in 2 games. Noone erally shone in either game but the ones who were to supposed to be our game breakers i.e. Roby, Graham, Burgess, Ellis, Tomkins didn't stand out at all. Westwood and Robinson weren't expected to do much and have somewhat earned a chance to prove their worth again. Others have proven their worth adn with such should be cast aside from international rugby. Atkins, Brown, Harrison, Cudjoe and probably Fielden aswell now. Goulding, Briscoe and obviosuly Hall haven't really had chance to shine and i'd happily see them continue their international development. BUT the big one for me has to be that Macca goes and goes very quickly....

Actually, if anyone stood out over the three matches so far it is Graham. The guy was head and shoulders above any other British forward. Roby played well yesterday but was anonymous in the first two games. Tomkins was good in the first game but anonymous in the las two. After that I'm really struggling for positives.

Atkins has been found out as someone overhyped way beyond their ability, and his club success is testament not to his ability but to the absolute dearth of top class threequarters in the British game (see the other thread on 2013). Cudjoe looked as if he was bricking himself every time the ball came near him. Briscoe and Goulding looked average throughout. No speed, no evasion, weak defence, no real contribution.

Robinson played about as well as he's capable, which is ok, but nothing which is going to get us any wins at international level. Brown was pretty dire in both matches he played. Joel Tomkins has been a big disappointment, because I think he's a very good player and was looking forward to seeing him mix it up on an international level - but he just didn't show. Westwood, see above. Lunt and Harrison didn't have time to show much. Widdop showed why he can't break into a regular first team spot at his club. Hall was defensively at sea. Shenton showed glimpses but got injured too soon. Fielden managed to forget his good club form this season and go back to the international failure he's been since Mason chinned him. Burgess needs to hold on to the bloody ball. Ellis looked like he wasn't playing in the same team as every else, and was waiting for his Aussie mates to come pass to him.

That's pretty scathing, I know, but it was a poor show, and I don't think whitewashing this with "well, it was a good effort" "young team" "building for the future" etc, will help us. We need to actually address the problems rather than simply acknowledging them and hoping something turns up.

Roy, normally I am 100% behind your posts. But today, I find myself wanting to shake you. Sorry, but you I picture you frothing at the mouth in indignation at the moment.

We were outplayed, whats new. It was a young team, that did ok given teh lack of preparation and inept coaching.

The backline didnt gel, because it hadnt played together before and was up against the best in the world first game out.

I can't agree. Their backline plays together no more often than ours does. Yet their threequarters ran on to the ball, whereas ours took it standing still more often than not. When we went wide, we were hammered back or into touch. When they went wide, our defence backpedalled and often let them through. When they kicked, it nearly always found the ground or stopped dead in goal. We don't seem to have had a decent field-kicker since Andy Gregory.

I'm not frothing at the mouth at all. I'm a bit depressed. But mostly I'm concerned that we're using these excuses to brush it under the carpet. The whole attitude of British RL is to make excuses and hope something changes before the next disappointment. We should be actively tryign to actually do something about our weaknesses. Instead we celebrate them because they're weaknesses in young players, not old ones !

So that I don't get confused can you confirm that "straight from the resulting tap" equates to "at the end of the next set of six following an England drop out needlessly conceded when the ball was running dead for a 20m re-start".

Thanks

Actually Roy, their backline plays together at least twice as often as ours does, in much more high octane games with the SOO and ANZAC games.

We play France once and stuff them.

I think considering we had a weakened squad, a young squad being built for the WC, a coach who hasn't proved himself and a dodgy refereeing team the lads did really well. Its clear not all the players are up to scratch, but they put their all into it.

Ellis and Burgess weren't very impressive they've been quiet.

I think the only players I would criticise on this tour are Widdop and Atkins. Widdop clearly has the natural ability, but hasn't got the experience or knowledge to be blooded yet. Atkins has proved to be utterly useless on this stage! He has no conception of what his positioning should be in th defensive line and all too often was found really far out of position or standing too far back from the line which cost us tries. In attack he was inffectual. The one decent run he had was when England were on the attack after scoring a try. He made a good few yards at the end of an attack, two defenders were bearing down on him, nothing was on, our attack was steaming a head oin formation, their defensive line was broken and scattered. Did he take the ttackle for a quick ptb in a commanding position to potentially score? No! He decided to try run round Billy Slater, five metres away from the touch line.

To be fair, their backline usually involves players from both QLD and NSW, and not all of them even play in the SoO due to intervening injuries and so on.

As I've said on another thread, I think playing together in a mini-series like SoO is a red herring. The skills they devleop come not from playing together for 3 matches, but from playing against each other for twenty matches. In the NRL, threequarters have to be on form in every game because the opposing team will punish them if they're not, and there's another kid waiting to take their place if they mess up. In SL, St Helens can finish second in the league playing one semi-retired centre and one second-row or stand-off on the other side, pretty much all season. They can do this because there are very few teams who challenge them on the outside. Any team playing the 2010 version of Gidley and Flannery as their centres in the NRL would be spanked each week.

Cudjoe has looked good because the other centres in SL are so mediocre. But he got found out yesterday. Maybe he'll improve in time, but he certainly isn't good enough yet. And before we hit the club bias button, I'd point to Jamie Foster. Eddie and Stevo were starting to do the same to him last year as they did to, say, Atkins. He was a wonderful winger, class act, young flyer, etc etc etc. Basically, he's solid and can kick goals. Other than that, he's completely unremarkable.



Yes. But I don't see the difference. The result of that penalty - as with all penalties - was to give them possession near our line for a full set. The resulting pressure gave them the try. I think we don't take penalties seriously enough - they're game changers. Fans can expend huge amount of fury over single perceived dodgy refereeing decisions which may or may not have affected the outcome of the game, but almost never get worked up at all when a single player can repeatedly cost them yardage and points by lack of concentration or just plain stupidity.

I think you need a lie down Roy, sorry.

I might get slated for this, but to defend Cudjoe, his only mistake is not knowing if he could rely on his inside defender to move up, after that inside defender showed he couldnt be relied on. Other than that I dont think you can blame him, or suggest he wasnt up to it. (unless you like the commentary team couldnt tell the difference between him and Atkins) then again, he got his chance, probably ahead of when he should have and it will have done him good.

I don't have a problem differentiating between Cudjoe and Atkins ! Atkins was 100% pants, in defence and attack. Cudjoe was 90% pants in defence and attack - although I thought he was harshly pulled back for the pass which sent him into the open. Also, Cudjoe is taller. Loads of difference.

Roby
Westwood
Graham
Ellis
Fielden

Which is what they have had since they started playing the game in this country.

Why can't people see that?

I have to add I really do appreciate all the time effort and sacrifice all the volunteers and amateur set ups put in considering the lack of support and facilities they have to deal with.

I agree with most posts on here. Roby, Graham, Westwood was our best players and robinson was ok.

Roby has been the best player on the tour IMO.

There would only be Roby and Graham who would be of interest to a NRL club, Ellis, Burgess and Westwood really didn,t do enough.

We looked like a team mentally ill prepared, instead of being in the faces of the opposition the first 20 mins we let the other teams dominate against an England team with not one player with any organising skills.

Can i just say that James Graham has been outstanding as el capitano.

I really think he has learned to wind his neck in and let his actions do the talking.

Never had much time for the bloke at a personal level before and his petulance in previous games has bugged me no end, but i think he has really handled it well, exceptionaly well in fact.

I will sling all sorts at thim next year when he is back in a Saints top, but he has really done England proud this year.

I feel like the criticism of the two lads from the NRL is pretty harsh.

Ellis played a completely different role to the one that he has played all season, taking the ball up the middle rather than cutting angles out wide off a player like Marshall. I was pretty impressed with his workrate and effort. He hit hard, never took a backward step and almost always landed on his front.

Burgess was a tad more disappointing with far too many errors, but again he was played out of position and an awful lot of responsibility was put upon his shoulders. He consistently won the collision and people have to remember the lad is 21! He's played one season in the NRL and he's supposed to be the world's best forward. It's completely ludicrous.

The clear positives from the tour so far:

Westwood has been very impressive and won alot of supporters down under. Okay his discipline lets him down but he has really taken it to both packs.

Graham has been outstanding as captain and played well in a beaten pack twice.

Robinson has showed himself to be more than capable, and now has put himself in a position where he should be in possession of his shirt (form dependent obviously).

Finally, Roby has been brilliant and I can't actually believe people are detracting from his performance at the weekend. He punched so far above his weight in the tackle it was like Floyd Mayweather fighting David Haye and winning. An uncharacteristic error behind a pressurised pack. WOW.

Those players deserve praise and with half decent three-quarters, and fit halves we would have provided the Aussies a much sterner test (I wouldn't go as far to say we would have won or got close to their full strength)

Cumon fellas, what were we expecting? Honestly.

Chris Bridge at centre?

Well said Roy H. We keep hearing about the 'odd mistake' and penalty but if you give a penalty away or drop the ball to a side as good in attack as Australia, and they start a set of 6 within 30-40m of your line, you're in trouble. Patently SL players are not used to being as severely punished for basic errors.

We also keep hearing about players improving but they don't fix the basics. Is Atkins 17? If not why has he still got dreadful basic play? If his game is so flawed, how come he's one of the best English players in his position?

Tomkins is exactly in the position McGuire was when he first got a game for GB. A few glimpses of something, and yet its clear to all and sundry that he needs to improve a lot in almost all aspects of his game to be close to a Lockyer. I really hope Tomkins uses this as a learning experience and tries to do something about his game, otherwise he's going to end up exactly as McGuire, just younger.

But Atkins isn't one of the best english centres at all. Senior, Shenton & Gleeson are all better than him for starters. And will someone please tell me how Roby is the best player in the series so far?

My main feeling with the performances is one of disapointment. But the more you look at the players who "disapointed" the more i go back to looking at Macca being the culprit. He destroyed good players and players with potential at bradford and looks like he'll do the same to anyone who comes into the england squad with poor tactics and positional play and downright stupid squad selections. As I mentioned elsewhere coaches do have a massive impact and do change players. Look at Maguire at Wigan. Macca needs to go asap. Witht he right coach, the Grahams, Ellis' Burgess and Tomklins of the game will have the opportunity to improve.

It doesn't matter who your international coach is, they won't stop Sam Burgess being careless with the ball in regaining his feet, or James Roby concentrating on where he's going to run before he's even picked the ball up, or Ryan Atkins thinking the best way to defend is to shove your man across til he becomes your winger's problem.

These are all issues that should have been addressed before these players ever got to first grade at their respective clubs, but there's no pressure on them or their club coaches to do so such is the ordinary standards expected of your average SL player week in, week out.