You're right FA, Inglis didn't do much apart from catch the ball and stroll to the tryline unopposed with our right centre nowhere to be seen. Where have we seen that before?

A centre scoring a try? I don't think it's ever happened before.

I think perhaps the reference was more to the terribly weak soft c0ck defence of the McNamara-coached England team allowing Inglis to stroll through unopposed...

that Inglis try was a combination of a cracking run and an amazing pass from Thurston. Reed had a man to mark and he would have been ok if Hall had come inside to take Inglis. That said, it would have been 2 on 1 and I would put my house on Australia scoring from that, especially with Inglis providing.

Probably poor communication between and winger at worst but I don't think anything should be taken away from how easy Australia make plays like that look. A top try scored in a pressure situation.

Chase had a good game?

Must have been watching a different game to me. He hasn't done a great deal in either game for me, let's hope he finds his SL form soon.

Whether it was a planned move or off-the-cuff it was a quality sequence of play, and the previous pass from Cronk started it off, a player ran a good decoy and Thurston passed from right behind him (that was what the "obstruction" inquiry was about), the result was that the Aussies had a man over. The centre saw the danger and took the option of coming out of the line to try to intercept Thurston's pass, presumably on the basis that if the pass wasn't intercepted then a try was certain anyway, Thurston was good enough to see him move out and threw the ball over and behind him, where Inglis, making the extra man, caught it and ran in unopposed.

If Hall had come inside to take Inglis, that would have left the winger unopposed, so I can't blame Hall at all.

It was a top class move by the Aussies and credit where it is due.

To me, instead of giving credit for top class rugby league, to say that was nothing more than a case of McNamara's soft-c0ck defence just makes the poster look pretty stupid.

Mav should have pointed out that Sheens was merely trying to put pressure on a young ref but that he had the utmost faith that the ref wouldn't cave in to the Aussies bully boy approach. Then invented some technical offence the Aussies always commit for equilibrium.

I'm more with FA on this - you can't underestimate how well Australia execute close to the line. They have two great halfbacks and a team full of quality attacking players. It should surprise nobody that every now and then they score a try that looks easy but is in reality almost impossible to defend against (see also Origin over the last few years).

The key for England is to get experience from facing this kind of attack, and NOT to stand back and watch. I'm not suggesting everybody charge out at full speed, but you cannot allow Australia the space they have been getting. Moving up purposefully in a line and making Lockyer/Thurston make quick decisions is the only hope (along with preventing them get the field position in the first place).

I'm used to seeing McNamara coached defensive lines with players all moving up at different speeds in SL so it's good to see it's the same at test level.

You know, it's strange. Last season over 7,500 points were scored in the NRL. So, for the sake of argument, there were probably somewhere in the order of a thousand tries.

Given how stoically and impeccably NRL-drilled players defend, repelling all-comers, how can this be? I think we should be told.

They were all conceded due to Michael Worrincy & Sam Burgess' poor positional play. And look who used to coach them.

Lets not forget the positioning of sheriffe for the last try.....

Theres a pattern to all the causes!

In McNamara's defence, he simply has nowhere near enough quality at his disposal in order to realistically threaten Australia in a game of RL. England were miles behind the Aussies and it is hard to see what McNamara could have done to improve on this.

That said, Briscoe and Yeaman on the left hand side? Dear me. Nowhere near good enough internationally.

A tad unfair. Not sure who would be a guaranteed improvement on Briscoe, and Yeaman has run back into some very good form last season so not a controversial selection. But who would you have played there?

I agree with the above - Before the tournament kicked off, I had Yeaman and Briscoe in my team as they have demonstrated this year that they work really well together.

Taking into account the last 3 games, I think they have played really well. The defence on their side has been pretty solid, the other wing is where we seem to have problems defending.

At no point did I make ANY suggestion about who would be a “guaranteed improvement” and with a crystal ball none of us can. I am simply saying that if those two are the best that England have then no wonder they are so far behind Australia.

Whether they have done well in a vastly inferior competition counts for little. They are well below the standards required to compete against Australia on a regular basis and I doubt even Superman could coach the side to a win.

Ah, so you agree Mac picked the best selections available. Fair enough.

Hmmm. Quite why you feel the need to put words into peoples' mouths is a curious practice on here FA. I never said that whatsoever.

FWIW, I would have young Foster in my side before Briscoe, Sinfield would never be in the halves, Wilkin would be nowhere near a game, Westwood is an absolute liability and Chase is completely the wrong nationality.

So, no, I don't believe he did pick the best selection available, but, even if he had done so, the quality as I said before is sadly lacking.

WTF?

What's your problem now?? Fookin'ell, I try to have a normal conversation with you yet ... ???? I won't bother, it really, really ain't worth it -ENDS-

Good idea. I ain't biting as you can see, despite your best attempts to get me to do so.

So, Mac coaches a comprehensive defeat of Australia's frequent nemesis, New Zealand, keeping them well in check for most of the game and comfortably qualifying for the Final. Briscoe and Yeaman in particular played well.

Imagine what could happen if he could only coach . . .

Well he's got the best English players from around the world into a tournament final.

That's an achievement.

However, his club coaching record is still poor

I still don't understand what Widdop has to do to get a game?

Or Wilkin not to get a game.

i wouldnt want steve mac anywhere near my team and been an international coach is easy really you expect to beat france expect to get beat by the aussies and you take in turn with new zealand to beat each other