Did you not watch the game today? Plenty of good things, including a massive try saving tackle.
Who could've done better?

Yes I watched the game and credit where it's due for that tackle on Vatuvai but it doesn't mask his poor performances during this competition, he's got to be better than that.

disappointed again with losing but we arent far off now, think we need to stick with the squad and mcnamara for the NZ tour next year, got to win that on home soil!

never seen ferres play hooker before



G burgess is a beast!

clarke was good too

quite a few didnt impress though, j tomkins, ferres, j hodgson, charnley, t burgess...

Talking out of your arris on both counts.....

Clarke excellent again, Sarginson looked great in attack, forwards made good yards, all round they played very well.

Tomkins didn't shine but he can't shine always, didn't really see anyone not giving their best. Pretty close to them now.

I don't understand the comments about Widdop. He was superb in the defence, particularly with mopping up and being in the right place at the right time. The reason why we didn't win was because the Kiwis raised their game and we couldn't slow them down. Certainly our attacking structure was the equal, if not better, than their's.

Watkins has got to be better not just for England but Leeds too.he has been out of sorts for a while and even a few leeds fans quetioned his selection on current form.

I don't get your ridiculous comment about him spending 4 years in the international wilderness though.He is 24 and still hasn't reached his full potential imo.He needs to pick up his form but if he can do that he can still go on to be a great centre for England for many years.

I think we were five percent off a win today.

We created more than New Zealand.

The Kiwi's just scrambled that little bit better in defence than us, particularly from minutes four to about twenty six and were clinical in taking their chances.

Despite losing the last two games I can't remember us (including Henderson and his boogie!) playing better in the Southern Hemisphere.

I'm not a McNamara fan but I think he's done enough to retain his job, he's got us close. We were miles away four or five years ago. Continuity is necessary.

As an inverse to people picking out individuals for criticism, I'd like to give plaudits to a few players. I thought Farrell really ran some good lines, Sarginson looks great for a twenty one year old, Clark, once he grows into his position will be World class and if S. Tomkins can rediscover his best illusive running game we can do more than just threaten.

I thought he was excellent, without having the class of Johnson. I lost count of the times he took on the defence, committed a defender & took the hit before the pass, was there for the second phase or supported a break. In the 3 games I could count the number of times his HB partner did any of those things on one hand.

It's what's happened to Ryan Atkins after 1 poor performance under McNamara, it was a tongue in cheek comparison given Watkins poor showing.

I'm not really suggesting that we stop picking Watkins after being poor in this series that would be as ridiculous as not picking Atkins after being poor in one Test , OH hang on . .

England were crying out for a 2 nd rower to take on the line and offload out wide rather than the ball being moved fast through hands, the Kiwis were cutting us off by pushing out the centres, a dummy, step back inside was needed

But we just didnt seem to have any ideas

We're Sam Burgess away from beating the pair of them imo. Our weakest area is in that second row where Burgess would have been and he's the best forward in the world and one of the top 3 players (long with Inglis and Thurston). Had we been able to call on him these past two weeks we'd have won both games and been sitting on the verge of making history.

It's not only his ability we lost but his leadership and his aura. He looks like he doesn't just believe he's the equal of these Aussies and Kiwi's anymore but that he is better then them and it's because he is. He would have dragged the lads along with him and got us over the line.

As it is we'll have to do it without him. We're getting pretty close but now we need to kick the door down and win a series or tournament.

Agree on the second row comments. Farrell is a cert but we did miss some punch, which perhaps Tomkins would have given us if he'd had a full season behind in. Ferres is solid enough but I think that Ablett might given us a bit more out wide. Once the Kiwis sussed out our attack we struggled and had to gamble a bit. As others have said, a big unit running short onto those balls would have been great.

As for somebody knocking Tom Burgess, I thought he was fantastic today. He never loses yards, pretty much winning every collision he's involved in.

How can we be "not be close to them yet" when the difference was the ball twice hitting an upright not once, but twice.

Agreed. We'd already be in the final now anyway were it not for the referee last week deliberately ruling against England because of the situation he found himself in. You have to feel that if this tournament was in England, we'd at least have reached the final.

If england continue the development they have shown under Mcnamara since 2010, I think they'll win the world cup in 2017.

Steven McNamara is probably the best coach England has had since Anthony Smith.

I thought Ferres had an excellent WC, but seemed to have a constant sulk on in this tournament, either because he wasn't picked outright or had to play on the wrong side.

Think we should have taken two points with the last minute penalty.

At least we'd be coming home with a draw against one of the big two. And a moral victory against the Aussies.

Just needed a bit more composure and more variety / creativity in attack. Thought both Tomkins' played well.

Nah we did the right thing. Just went the wrong way about it. They should have given it to Widdop. Stood everyone on the left touch line, and made it a lottery. A draw wouldn't have seen us progress (as it happens a win wouldn't have either but hey ho), so you've got to go for it. We will never make progress if we are content with moral victories.

J Tomkins was much improved in the NZ game tbf. But was anonymous in the other two.

Even before his move to union I wasn't convinced he was international standard, so he's got work to do to prove he deserves to be there imo.

Cannot really fault Ferres in this game. Started on the bench then played out of position but still managed 42 tackles which is some effort in defence.

Unfortunately Whitehead didn't get enough game time. Would have liked to see what he could do at this level but the limited time he got, when McNamara clearly favoured Tomkins, didn't allow him to show anything. Disappointing that you can just waltz back into the international side after just 4 months back in the game and he didn't show enough in game 1, for me, to be a pick for 2 and 3.

I like Whitehead and had looked forward to seeing him play, but it was clear within a few minutes he was out of his depth. He was totally dominated at every turn and didn't look confident at all - and as we should all know, RL is a confidence game. It was the correct decision to take him off.

I don't blame him for that, he's not played for a long time and this was his debut. Chuck him on at full match fitness and when he knows he's as good as, if not better than, the opposition and I think he'll go well. I just hope he learns from the experience and comes back stronger, he's a belting player.

That said, I also questioned the inclusion of Joel when there are a few good back rowers to choose from. I suspect it came down to experience of the big games and against Antipodean opposition. Joel did well enough but didn't really show a great deal going forward but then would any of the others against those defences?