Well they currently pick a converted full back there

Australia's game against PNG was, just like our game against NZ Maori, their first game in sometime...especially for some players who hadn't played for weeks (Slater and Smith for example). They still managed to score 42 points and not concede any against a team we struggled against in the last WC. I fear, although Australia aren't the same standard as normal, they will still have far too much for us to handle - and yes, could put a heavy score on us. I don't think it'll be 80 points, but it could be 50.

Don't get me wrong...I'm proud to be English and sincerely want England to win and make the final...how funny would it be if Australia failed to make it!?!

The problem is, and has been over the past 10 years or so, our coaching isn't at the same level as Australia. All these players that Eddie and Stevo claim are the next stars in SL just dwindle away or stay at a similar level their whole career. Look at Ellis and Burgess as examples, Ellis was a good player at Wakefield and Leeds...however his game has improved so much in 2 years at Wests. Look at Wigan...for 4/5 years they were average with top players coming in and youngsters (just like now) however they were no where near the top of the league....now in one season under Maguire (a good coach) they've won the league with ease.

So many of the coaches in England (not just SL) aren't developing players to their potential or improving little things that make the difference....one main thing being mental strength! It baffles me why not? For 10 years or more we've set about trying to catch these teams but just can't get near a trophy when it matters.

Realistically, England have 2 teams in the world to compete with for titles - NZ and Aus.....yet for 40 years we've failed. Thats 40 years where our coaching and playing skill set has constantly been behind our rivals. That in any sport is not good enough. Look at our RU (who won the RWC in 2003 and made the final in 2007) brothers...they have NZ, Australia, South Africa, Ireland, France just to name a few who could win trophies.....then look at football, England have atleast 8 teams who are ahead of them.

Why are the RFL so slow and insular in their approach to change things when we have barely any competition to compete with...yet still fail?

Anyway....come on England, lets try and end 40 years of hurt and get within 30 points of Australia on Sunday!

Really? I'm speaking with experience, two boys that went to a Primary School that banned sports day and had an 'inclusion day' instead. Maybe you have kids (god help them) and have had a different experience, or maybe you're at Primary School now, I'd be interested to know.

No, he just wasnt selected. Its not really a shock as Goulding played well last week and Hall was very poor against NZ Maori.

Brown has been awful the last 2 weeks and is a major weakness in defence. If whoever plays stand off can tackle for a start, and even if they do nothing else, then it is a big improvement on what Brown has provided in the last 2 weeks. O'Loughlin has played well when he has played at stand off for Wigan this year and offers a lot more than Brown at this level.

At least the Aussies have alot of injuries in the centres, Tate and Tonga are good but I'd rather play them than GI, Lyon, Jennings, Hodges etc

Ha ha.

Yes I do have kids (5 and 9), for the youngest sports & races are exactly what they should be at that age: fun games. The eldest does have competitive races at school, and he also plays football and basketball on a skills level, which I also think is preferable in developing sportsmen to what I remember at that age: which was running after a ball with no real instruction and the biggest/most confident kid getting hold of it and hammering it.

When they get to secondary school, they'll play more competitively and there are opportunities out-of-school if they show aptitude. (It's not a school's job, particularly a primary school's job, to develop sportsmen. It's their job to help develop decent people,and sport is an aid to doing that)

To get back on topic: England aren't lacking half-backs because they chained a potential international 6 to a fat kid to even up a three-legged race when he was seven years old.

That statement is clearly inaccurate – O’loughlin has thrown the final pass for many tries this season including some excellent cut out passes to send his wing men into the corner. He may not be England’s ideal stand off and certainly wouldn’t be playing there if McNamara had a full strength squad but to say all he can do is tackle and back up does both him and you a disservice

I do think England would have a chance with the best players available but like usual injuries have meant the team just isnt good enough.

Bridge has been great at centre this year,
Mcguire was at the top of his game and is huge loss.
Sinfiled and Eastmond are also big losses, not to mention JP and Morley but I think England still have the forwards to compete.

I think full back could be tomkins best position.
I dont think Lockers will let anyone down. Hes often one of the better players at international level.

I dont think England have a chance in hell, but I would love to be proven wrong.

come on England

Who also happens to be one of the finest RL players of the last 20 years , I'm sure the England team will be stood in a trance like state as he runs rings round us , as I said earlier in this thread , there are two ways of winning at sport

Being better at it than the opposition

Finding a way to win the game

There is a difference in those two scenario's

Tell ya what , why dont we get rid of these talented youngsters/in form players who are obviously not up to the job of competing with the Southern Hemisphere sides and bring back more experienced players like Wellens,Senior,Long,Gleeson,Wilkin,Deacon,Pryce,Gardner etc etc - surelly they could do a better job ???

FFS we complained for years about having the same old failures playing and demanded sweeping changes , well now we've got them and yet people are still moaning !!!!

But even though the faces have changed the end product is still the same , and in fact the face in charge seems even less confidence inspiring than before

I agree that McNamara and Lowes don't inspire confidence, given their "achievements" at club level. I think, sadly, that as long as we only employ full-time national coaches, then we'll only get those coaches who can't get a club job. This is the first wall between us and better international performance. The national side won't pay as well as a club job, it doesn't offer the same interest as a club job day-in-day-out, and at least with most club jobs you get chance to win a few games. Given that nearly all internationals are now played at the end of the club season, I see no reason why we can't have a part-time national coach. That way, you have a chance of attracting the best coaches to do the job - ie the ones who can hold down a good club job. If that means bunging their clubs a few quid to let them look after the mid-season game v France, then so be it.

Of course, then you hit the second wall - where are the decent British coaches. The Eddie and Stevo overhype machine works just as well for coaches as for players. They'e been saying for years that McDermott has been doing "a great job down in London" (tm). Yetactually, he's been pants, and has taken the first team backwards consistently, while the youth development is bugger all to do with him really. McNamara has used the excuse of player turnover at Bradford, but he's still had some players who he should have got more out of, and Nathan Brown has shown at Huddersfield what good coaching with limited resources can get you. Lowes was a disaster at Warrington, but is still described as a "great young coach" by Sky. Agar at Hull is laughable given the players he's had, and John Kear specialises in spectacular one-offs which culminate in bugger-all. In fact, by far the most successful British coach in terms of actually getting a performance out of a side is Noble. That's tragic.

And finally, the third wall : you could take a top coach who can really shake up a club side, like Tony Smith, Nathan Brown or Michael Maguire, and give them a well-paid part-time contract on top of their club role to take on the job. Yet they're still going to hit the lack of depth in the game which Saddened alluded to earlier. We've got a choice of props, second-rows, and halves who can mix it internationally, but not many of them. So when we lose Peacock and Morley, we're left with Griffin making up the numbers. We're unlucky that Maguire, Pryce and Eastmond aren't out there. We have one international quality fullback - Tomkins; and one hooker - Roby. If they got injured, we're screwed. But the real disaster is - literally - waiting in the wings. We don't have a single international quality threequarter in the UK. Not one. The best we have, on a good day when the pubs are shut, is Gleeson. After him, nothing. Look at the wings and threequarters we've used or are about to use. None of them would get a regular game for any NRL side (as Widdop shows). The best coach in the world can't do much with that.

I don't know what the answer is. If I'm optimistic, I'd say it's because when clubs spend their overseas quota, they tend to go for strike players in the centres, which is why so many of our centres are foreign. This limits places for British centres to get experience and develop. However, if I'm epssimistic, I'd say that clubs go overseas because there aren't any decent British centres. Why ? Because, as others have hinted at in this thread, a strong centre tends to be a very athletic individual. Fast, big, nimble and balanced. Those are the sort of guys who can succeed in any sport they try their hand at. And in the UK, unless they're herded into the private school system where they may find themselves heading into RU, they're going to go into soccer. We'll always get big lads like Graham and Joel Tomkins, and we'll probably carry on getting the speedy dwarves at half-back. Because a pro- soccer club wouldn't look at them. But the centres are all playing with a round ball somewhere. Now that is depressing.

While I agree with much of the sentiment expressed above, I do feel that you are being harsh on the wings in this England squad. Briscoe and Goulding are on the wings tomorrow while the last time we played in Melbourne (200icon_cool.gif we had Gardner and Calderwood... at 21 and 23 years of age respectively, Briscoe and Goulding are far better equipped for international Rugby League than Gardner and Calderwood who offer very little from dummy half and weak defence to boot

As for the centres.... agree 100% but I hope Cudjoe steps up and shows how talented he is (but it is a big ask in a must win international)

I'll reserve judgement on Goulding, but I haven't seen anything other than solid from him. I guess I view threequarters differently from forwards. I'm quite happy to accept that many forwards don't hit their straps until their mid-late twenties. But a top class centre will be a top-class centre from his very early twenties. Newlove, Connolly, Lyons, Folau - these were already stand-out class before they left their teens. Cudjoe I haven't seen enough of. He's clearly fast, but is he a centre ? Does he have the creativity to make the space for his winger, or the power and footwork to go himself ? I don't see that this is a huge improvement on Calderwood and Gardner, and I was always a major critic of both.

I'll be hoping they pull off a shock tomorrow, but I won't be holding my breath. The idea of the Aussie backline running at our guys is giving me nightmares.

Paul Newlove... what would I give to have him facing the Aussies tomorrow for England!

The English backline tomorrow has an average age of 22. There is some talent there; no doubt about that and one or two (certainly Briscoe and Tomkins at full back) can develop into quality international players

The Austrlian backline doesn’t scare me to death either – there is no stand out strike player like Inglis or Folau (as in 200icon_cool.gif... don’t get me wrong, very good players but not terrifying. In fact, I think the Kiwi’s have the strongest backline in the competition

I agree with a lot of that but you are putting the Aussie backs up on a huge pedestal. If you think Briscoe, Shenton or Tomkins (as a full back) wouldn't play regularly in the NRL you are talking rubbish. Australia have some absolutely outstanding players in that team but the myth about their never ending depth of talent is simply not true. In fact just a handful of injuries has left them with a pretty avarage back line in all honesty.

Him and Gary Connelly. BTW what is Gary doing these day's? He was one of the best defensive centre's I've seen play, he should be used in a coaching capacity to help young player's of when to come in and when to stay out.

I agree with a lot of what you have put here, but there are few things i would like to mention.



Correct, we seem to have tried to roll two jobs in to one Director of Rugby and Head Coach. I would like to see them split. To see someone like Ellery Hanley take up a Director of Rugby position, focussing on preparation, player pathways, coach training and the sport-science area of the role. And then a part-time head coach to take the tactic, selection, part of the role.

There arent enough of them. I disagree on McDermott, I think he had earned the opportunity of a shot at a big club, but who next? Very few british coaches get the shot at a top job, we are picking out of a miniscule pool. If we had 10 coaches at SL level, and 20 at semi-pro level then im sure someone would make a name for themselves, but sadly, we dont.

The problem here, is talent identification. RL has got itself into a rut whereby we arent picking the best RL players in the country, but simply the best players who were playing RL at 10-14 years of age and then got picked up by the various pathways to professionalism. We have become lazy.

We need to spread our net wider, we need to look at youngsters who may have slipped the net,players like Ryan Hall who was picked up very late by leeds, look at sprinters, wrestlers, weightlifters, basketball players RU players and bring them into the fold.

These players naturally fall into RL in Aus, we need to go out and get them.

again, i dont believe football gets them all, but we do need to look a little deeper for them, and while we can rely on overseas players, clubs arent doing it.

My biggest concern about the 17 is that we have a very inexperienced set of backs, in an untried formulation, with no backs on the bench. So if there are any injuries, or one of the youngsters has a bad game, or we just want to change things round a bit, we're stuffed. That's not smart IMO.
I watched my first test match 30 years ago, but this is the first time I have been absolutely certain that we will lose.

If this is the case then our game has taken one huge step backwards.

Quote ="Bigger Daddy"My biggest concern about the 17 is that we have a very inexperienced set of backs, in an untried formulation, with no backs on the bench. So if there are any injuries, or one of the youngsters has a bad game, or we just want to change things round a bit, we're stuffed. That's not smart IMO. I watched my first test match 30 years ago, but this is the first time I have been absolutely certain that we will lose.'" I take it you have blocked out this game then? news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 124598.stm And when you look at the balance of the back line and half backs Great Britain put out that day, England tomorrow don’t look too bad 1. Radlinski 2. Johnson 3. Wellens 4. Senior 5. Pratt 6. Sculthorpe 7. Sheridan Wellens in the centre, Pratt and Sheridan... I'll take 2010 please

Quote ="Bigger Daddy"My biggest concern about the 17 is that we have a very inexperienced set of backs, in an untried formulation, with no backs on the bench. So if there are any injuries, or one of the youngsters has a bad game, or we just want to change things round a bit, we're stuffed. That's not smart IMO. I watched my first test match 30 years ago, but this is the first time I have been absolutely certain that we will lose.'" I take it you have blocked out this game then? news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 124598.stm And when you look at the balance of the back line and half backs Great Britain put out that day, England tomorrow don’t look too bad 1. Radlinski 2. Johnson 3. Wellens 4. Senior 5. Pratt 6. Sculthorpe 7. Sheridan Wellens in the centre, Pratt and Sheridan... I'll take 2010 please

Quote ="Dunbar"I take it you have blocked out this game then? news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 124598.stm And when you look at the balance of the back line and half backs Great Britain put out that day, England tomorrow don’t look too bad 1. Radlinski 2. Johnson 3. Wellens 4. Senior 5. Pratt 6. Sculthorpe 7. Sheridan Wellens in the centre, Pratt and Sheridan... I'll take 2010 please'" I've tried to. But no, even then I had hope before the game - not this time though.

Quote ="Dunbar"I take it you have blocked out this game then? news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 124598.stm And when you look at the balance of the back line and half backs Great Britain put out that day, England tomorrow don’t look too bad 1. Radlinski 2. Johnson 3. Wellens 4. Senior 5. Pratt 6. Sculthorpe 7. Sheridan Wellens in the centre, Pratt and Sheridan... I'll take 2010 please'" I've tried to. But no, even then I had hope before the game - not this time though.

Like I keep saying, worse England/GB sides have beaten better NRL select Kangaroos sides.

Its a bold gamble to make so many changes for a must win game.

With Robinson in at scrum half i thought it would have been sensible to have played his half back partner as well as they are familiar with each others game.

It was tough on Widdop but we have to find a way of bringing the best out of Sam Tomkins as we haven't got lots of attacking options in the side.

Best we can hope for is if we can take an early lead and hope the Australians make some errors in attack and we defend like our lives depend on it,and kick on from there.



If the Aussies get their noses in front early i fear a loss by 26