Had a belting girlfriend.



Seriously though, Nigel should be down in the annals as the last great GB half-back, he was unplayable at his best.

Ive never been a Smith fan

However he did a good job - Undoubtedly Widdop is our best half

I think it was the best half back performance for some time for England - Yes not perfect but a vast improvement, Not having to rely on a LF playing at 6 anymore is certainly a great starter

I thought both performances were good (Not sure about the Samoa game, either we were under par or they were better than expected).

Against Oz', we had two crucial chances to win the game, with breaks of 3 against 2, sadly on both occasions the ball carrier held on for too long. If just once the ball had been passed wide the game would've been won and thats without any "fingertip-gate" discussion.

Against the Kiwis, if Ryan Hall doesn't lose his grip, we win, sadly he did, so we lose.

It's been ages since I last felt we were about to win, well ages against Oz', only last year against the Kiwis to be fair, but I'm sure you all know what I mean.

Developing halfbacks has clearly been a problem for decades. Goulding and Sean Long were the last class halfbacks to come out of england, and in Long's case he was far too variable to trouble the opposition regularly.

We seem to either develop running halfbacks who can't pass or, more rarely Deaccon/Smith types who pass and kick but can't run. I'd say with Smith at least could get better - he needs to run the ball far more, its that simple. He doesn't need to be lightning quick - too many people are obsessed with half backs having pace at the expense of skill (Johns wasn't quick, Lewis wasn't, latter-year Lockyer wasn't, Cronk never was).

Its about is making the defence unsure as to what you're going to do whilst having control yourself - Thurston makes even the best defence stand on their heels because he can run, kick or pass long or short near to the line, and they know it. If you know the halfback will pass its a hell of a lot easier to defend against.

Brown kicks just as much as Smith. Douglas Bader would have been as much use as Smith as a kicker (or runner) for 2.5 games. At least Brown gives you creativity, support, a try threat & unpredictability.

Douglas Bader retired from international RL in September.

Fair point.

As a youngster playing RL I was lucky enough to have plenty of outstanding players as inspiration in the likes of Gregory, Edwards, Hanley etc.

All we can do is hope the kids these days have access to Premier sports and see the likes of Thurston as something to aspire to, the same way that big lads look at the likes of Graham and Burgess as the type of forward they want to be like. As a kid my fave players that I wanted to play like were Nikau and Gavin Miller, so you have a point in regards to how young kids form their ideals in regards to playing.

Easy

Look down under and sign any past it, pension seeking, holidaying oceanic with a British "qualified passport" on a ridiculous contract and the problem is solved.

Ask the SL clubs they know it's the way forward, have been doing it in the past and will continue to do so.

Development?

That's the other teams problem!!

Smiths kicking game was hardly brilliant was it.

Englands problems stem from a lack clinical finishing to breaks made in the middle of the park, a lack of a ability to force repeat sets, and a lack of really threatening last tackle options.

These problems stem from not having two classically good half backs. We dont even have 1.

That really is the difference, we dont have even 1 difference maker in the halves. Our pack can compete, for the first time in a long time our backs can compete AND we have a fair bit of depth there, we have two hookers who have proven they can compete. Our halves just can't.

Widdop is a good NRL level half. He probably isnt an NRL or international level half. We could probably get away with it if we were playing Thurston next to him

Smith isnt close. We dont really have anyone else who is close at home. Perhaps Brown or Burrow or anyone else you want to argue should have been there instead, would have won the game, but thats only because the games were so tight and yeah maybe they would make a break, maybe they would have got on the end of something but that is only because they are different, not better. They arent the answer for us either.

Eastmond is a heartbreaker, he really could have been 'the one' He and Tomkins should have been grabbed at a very young age and moulded in to half-backs. Tomkins has some stuff missing from his game at Half but its nothing that shouldnt have been both apparent and fixable at a young age. Eastmonds problems were always 'growing pains'

Whether its the style of play in SL or it is something more endemic at youth level, we really arent producing half backs for international RL in either style or sufficient quality.

Agree with this. At junior level (in general) basic half back skills like decision making, basic kicking, accurate passing etc simply aren't taught.

Then another major problem is the jump from u21's/u19's to SL. The Aussie halves (and most other players) spend at least a year, often more, playing for their parent club's feeder club in the Queensland or NSW Cup. Our promising youngsters generally don't get that opportunity to play and learn the game against men. I think it's a massive, probably the biggest, advantage the Aussies have over us. I'd agree that u19's is too low an age range but even if it were u21's or u23's it really wouldnt make that much difference. We need our promising youngsters to play RL versus men at a decent standard but not with the pressure of the very top level.

Another issue is our impatience/lack of stability at international level. Over the last 10 years (50 games) England/GB have had 21 different half back combinations. Only 9 of which played more than 1 game together. Our longest halfback combination in the last 10 years has been Sinfield & Chase. But even then that was only 11 games. I think most people would be suprised if their club bought 2 new halfbacks and they were working perfectly together after only 11 games. And that's with all the time & training & pre-season etc that you get at a club.
By comparison the Aussies had Lockyer & Thurston who played together a total of 36 times. And that's from a competition where clubs and halves generally play a more similar game to each other than in SL.

We have problems at every level of the game. We need monumentally better junior coaching, a far, far better relationship between SL & the Championship and much, much more patience at international level & preferably some kind of domestic representative series where players can learn representative rugby without the pressure of facing Australia & NZ.

The dual reg system wont help with HB development because generally Championship Club coaches dont want the disruption of their pivot players being taken off them at short notice

Half backs should be on season long loans, and if SL clubs did that then more would get the experience they need, Jamie Ellis and Ryan Brierly are 2 cases in point

They arent going to learn doing a lot of those things by playing against others who arent near their level.

The best need to be playing against the best.

The problem isnt that the best youngsters are being funnelled to certain clubs, its that those certain clubs arent being funnelled towards each other.

Its only in fire that something can be forged, and a half back needs to practise these skills against the best opposition

That can only be sorted by the clubs, but then youd end up with a junior SL of maybe 8 clubs at u 12 s / 14 s, and the St Pats and Blackbrooks of this world are happy just winning their local comps

Whilst the move to FB for Tomkins helped him tear up SL, it wasn't the best move for his own development and for England.

He should be our 6 right now.

I'd argue that we lost this game around the ruck as Clark isn't a good defender and Ferres isn't a Hooker!

At junior level it makes little difference who they're playing against. It doesn't need to be the best vs the best there just needs to be an environment where kids are performing those basic skills both in training and on game day. That is down to the coaches who choose not to practice decision making, kicking, passing etc.

Encourage those skills to be taught in training and to be used on game day and you'll see youngsters getting into academies & scholarship teams with better half back skills than currently.

But then there are equally big problems beyond junior level.

Widdop just a good 6 in the NRL.......!!!

He was the 2nd highest ranked half back for the 2014 season in the NRL behind Thurston and came 4th overall in the Dally M standings. Its no coincidence that Storm struggled in 2014 without him failing no less than 4 times to find a quality replacment!
What we need is a quality dominent 7 with a good kicking game and the indroduction of two quality back rowers and we win more than we lose. Over all I think this has been a great 4 Nations comp that could of gone either way.

I can't agree, i think that at junior level one of the things that work is simply 'give it to the big lad' which is why we struggle to produce as many skilful players. I dont think that changes by not funnelling the talent.

Players will do what works. If thats just give it to the big lad thats what they will do, if its give it to the fast lad with the step, that is what they will do.

One of the problems we face in bringing through our best players is that often they find it too easy. Even at academy level some players absolutely rip it up.

Tomkins is probably the best example of that, Tomkins tore up academy RL but Noble was reluctant to give him a shot because there was still deficiencies in his game, largely it wasnt a problem because he was such a good runner of the ball that what he did 'worked' eventually when he made the step up those deficiencies became apparent and he moved to FB.

Kids arent going to be throwing in a few runaround or dummy plays when they can just run through a gap and no-one can catch them.

The short version: when kids are too good for those they are playing against and with they dont need to learn to go around them because they can just go through them.

Widdop is a good player, dont get me wrong.

But he isnt, in my opinion, on the level of Thurston, Cronk or Johnson. He isnt a difference maker like they are.

One of the strengths of the England team in this 4N was the speed and range of Clark-Smith who, between them, can move the ball 30 yards in two passes.

Neither Widdop nor Tomkins have that range. If someone else does, let's here about them taking Smith's slot.

It would be great if professional clubs could get together and form a proper national league, with teams at under 12's and up.

Even if they just played 10 games a season with a few training camps and played for their local teams the rest of the time, it would really benefit them to be playing against good opposition and receiving some proper coaching.

It needs the clubs to make a commitment and spend some money though.

The give it to the big lad happens because that's what coaches encourage both in training and on game day. At junior level the big lad will prosper regardless of who he faces.

Players will do what the coaches tell them and encourage them to do. If at every training session players practice the skills and are encouraged to use them on game day they'll use them. Its that attitude in coaches we have to change, not picking and choosing who are the best 10 year olds and funnelling them into some sort of performance based system at such a young age.


That will happen at every level. Some just find that environment fits them. The big problem is the step between academy and SL. The step between amateur and SL is only a problem because the right skills aren't taught at junior level.


Yeah but that's nothing to do with him not playing with or against good enough players when he was 10 years old. It's to do with the fact he went from playing against 17/18 year olds to playing against men at the elite level with no step in between. The lack of a 2nd team or feeder league like in Australia.


Yes they will. If you coach them properly they will. They're young kids, they do what they're told and encouraged to do.


Not if you tell them that to do something different. That's a coaches job. Otherwise no kid would EVER pass the ball if they didn't listen to their coaches. Because every kid wants to score.
So teach them the basic skills. Practice, practice and practice them. Have a plan for game day to use them. Simples. I can remember my primary school team doing runarounds, drop offs & tactical kicking despite having a powerful runner in the team. Why? Because the coach told us to.
The coach is the one in control of his team. If he can't control a bunch of 10/11 year olds he shouldn't be coaching.

Thurston and Cronk are in a class of their own.

Johnson is good but can disappear. See many games he's had for the Warriors and NZ versus Samoa.

When you consider the number of halfbacks playing the game in Australia it shows the problem of how many you have to develop before you get the real world class ones. They have lots of decent enough ones but apart from Cronk and Thurston none are much different to Widdop and Smith in ability.

At 12 to 13 the size gap widens if anything, your looking around 15 when the gap is drawn back in.

I believe they use or used the same size system in Oz, the drawback to it is if you have a big 11/12 year old playing against a kid 2/3 years older (not sure what limits they put on it) of the same height and weight but not maturity or muscular development.

Core skils ,movement skills and mental skills for all players are a must.

I currently coach at age U13 and am have taken part in the RFLs Embed The Pathway program, one of the aims of which is allowing all players to develop to their potential and not to rule out certain players at an early age. The relative age effect has a massive part on our game as the early developers dominate in our age bracket, yet theres kids with all the right attributes who do get overlooked.

I find the program and its content very helpful and its helped me develop as a coach and re-think certain aspects, im always open to learn but for everyone of me there's 2/3 old school who go down the win at all costs routes, were flat tracking teams is seen as a major achievement.

Spot on.