To me this only makes sense if you are pairing Leroy with Jerry on the right...

Just feel Watkins would pose more of a threat on the left and see more ball. I'd play the usual flat line in attack out left but with a steeper attack line out right. Gale could hang back on the left and then come on fast switch play to link up with steep attacking line on the right OR Widdop has the option to hit runners on his left. We need same effort in defence in test three but with more inventiveness on attack as above (& Gale's varietous kicking game) and a bit more bite up front (Westwood). Roby to start, Hodgson on interchange.

There were that many below par performances on Saturday that you struggle to make a case for who should and who shouldn't keep a place. I don't think a single player could really take too much credit from the game.

I've heard calls for the heads of Burgess, Bateman, Williams, Whitehead etc but as a team unit it was poor across the board. I'd be tempted to go with the same side but I'd probably move a more orthodox centre in to Batemans place in Cudjoe and then decide which player from Bateman or Whitehead moves out of the 17.

To make wholesale changes would single out players when really you could make a case for dropping the vast majority.

Id take Williams out of the firing line, it isnt fair to leave him in at this stage to execute a game plan that just isnt functining. The wide range of skills a top quality half needs are so underutilised that we arent going to see much of a drop off whoever we bring in to replace him.

Bateman isnt a centre and again, he needs taking out of the firing line. Too much on the line to be fitting a square peg in a round hole just to get him some experience.

Farrell has struggled too much going forward, he has been dominated nearly every hit up, he is 25 years old now and just hasnt performed in attack. His defence has been pretty good, but his attacking performance isnt good enough to justify his shirt.

i dont agree that we have been bad across the board, i think we have been bad in places, good in some others and and average mostly. I think Widdop is in a position where he needs to show something to keep his shirt, i think Whitehead has been ok but not what was necessary, and wouldnt argue if either were to be dropped (i would only rest Williams rather than drop Widdop simply because its an awful lot of pressure to put on Williams at this stage and at the end of a tough season that ended in disappointment for him)

But i think our front row has been pretty good, our hookers are pretty good, and with the little ball they have actually had, i think Watkins and Burgess have done pretty well actually and look a good partnership. Hardaker has been solid if unspectacular, Hall has worked hard, O'loughlin had a bad first half of the first game but has been decent since, Ferres has done well.

A proper centre, a bit more dynamism and if we are dreaming perhaps even and offload or two from the 2nd row and the most important a more expansive game plan and the game is ours for the taking.

What really brings home where he have gone wrong is the lack any dynamic players in that squad as a whole. There isnt an attacking 2nd row, McGuire has been the best half in biggest games of the year and doesnt get a look in, Shenton and Percival could at least have gotten the ball to hall in a bit of space, Cuthbertson and Walmsley can break a line and get the ball away,

There are cases for dropping 95% of them after Saturday though. The one thing id say about Williams is that he's bounced back very well at Wigan when he's had some poor games and I think we'll see him do that again.

Hardaker has been very quiet but then so has the full back line and that's because they're hardly seeing any qualify ball. I've not seen one ounce of space created for Watkins/Bateman and then in turn the wingers. I don't think changing personnel will create any more space. That will be done by changing our game plan and playing with some width.

People might not like this but I think we've missed Sam Tomkins massively. As that link man from fullback he ensured the centres/wingers got quality ball and took the pressure off the halves.

We have. And we (Wigan) are going to be missing him for quite a bit longer too.

thing is Tomkins wouldnt matter, attacking wise i could play full back for us on the last two games. You could have both Billy Slater and Greg Inglis playing at full back and they are going to look pedestrian when our most adventurous play is a drop off from first receiver.

Id be fine with leaving Williams in, but there is now pressure, not only on result but performance. Our halves havent even scaled the heights of average yet this series. We have got to the stage where in his third game in a row, a decider 'good for a young half finding his feet' isnt good enough. He needs to be good without qualification or its a disappointing series at the end of a disappointing year.

The issue with Bateman is a little different, what are we getting out of shoving him in there? He isnt going to be an international centre, he isnt an international standard centre, where is the upside here? I actually wouldnt have a problem with having him as an interchange forward and sending him out there for 10 or 15 minutes and telling him to be a mongrel, get under the kiwis skin, but i dont get why we are persevering with him at centre when in the next couple of years he isnt going to be there. Lets put an actual centre there.

I think it is unlikely anyone not in the 17 for the last 3 weeks would make a difference - they must be rusty not having played since September. Furthermore, Gale, Cudjoe or McGillvary would not make a difference behind a beaten pack. It was in the forwards that England lost, yet both Whitehead and Cooper got limited game time.

As for the halves, difficult to do much given the frequency that James Graham takes the ball to the line and then passes. If Williams was allowed to do that England get several breaks, Ferres, Farrell and Whitehead would all thrive off that. The coaches need to set the tactics rather than indulge favourite players.

Here's a change for the final test, some aggression! Totally absent from the series so far, say for the exception of SOL's hit on Blair and a couple of big hits from Whare. Seriously needs some biff to kickstart the game on Saturday.

Can I suggest England 'walk up' to the Haka, would at least generate some atmosphere

Agree. After some initial success, other NRL sides wised up to Canterbury's now rather tired tactic of using Graham as a pivot. Cooper looked to do pretty well to me in his limited time, he should get more game time at the DW.

Graham's passing became a problem at Canterbury when it went from being used sparingly to effectively using him as a halfback on every play. It became increasingly easy to read and in fact slowed down the play considerably as by the time he has passed the defence is set and its very hard to get the ball further wide.

McNamara needs to focus on backs scoring points, not forwards. Having rewatched the tries from the first test, it was a mistake to think that was likely to be repeated. Hardaker's knee aside, every other try NZ would have been really disappointed to let in.

McNamara needs to get the forwards to do their job - make yards and quick PTB. A pass or offload every now and then. But not dominating the play.

I disagree - the Dogs are at their best when he is at first receiver. He made the duds that are Hodkinson and Reynolds look good enough to play State of Origin. Only when Graham was missing in the early part of 2015 were they found out for the mugs they truly are when at first and second receiver rather than second and third. No coincidence that when Graham came back into the side and fit again the Dogs looked threatening all the way up to the referee effectively ending their semi-final with a dodgy call vs Roosters.

I do agree however that overkill is bad. Same for any play though. England are not good enough to utilise Graham's strengths to put it bluntly and thus, his touches are often wasted and reflect poorly on him.

That's the point - the Dogs went into overkill on the forwards as halfback thing. They were and are at their best when they mixed it up. When Graham first started passing it set up tries as other front rows weren't used to defending against it. The problem was when they started using it at the expense of their halfbacks. Hodkinson and Reynolds are pretty limited, but it got to the point where they were being cut out of the play by their forwards with Graham at times only playing as a halfback. Its all about balance.

He's in the squad and probably won't be ever again. If there's one man who would spark this series into life it is Benny! A final hurrah in an England shirt, he'd add that aggression so missing from this series.

I would start with him and Ferres.Get into their faces for minute one, the start to both tests so far has been laclustre to say the least.

I watched Saturday's game again and have changed my mind on what I'd change.

Bateman was nowhere near as bad as has been made out. His three drops were due to a slip, a high tackle (not penalised) and a ball strip (penalised). I'd still look to move him out of centre but would play him from the bench in the back row.

On the flip side George Williams struggled far more then I noticed on the day. He looked nervous and tired after a long season. It may be better for him to take him out of the firing line. As a Wigan fan I can't say put Matty Smith in because his forms not warrented it this year so Gale should get a shot.

I would also look to replace Whitehead who's been poor over the two games. I agree that Westwood would be a good, aggressive fit and it could possibly be his final appearance in an England shirt so he'll be fired up.

I'd go-

Hardaker
Burgess Watkins Cudjoe Hall
Widdop Gale
Graham Roby Hill
Westwood Farrell O'Loughlin

Subs
Burgess Cooper Ferres Bateman

We'll have a good shot with that team IMO. I'd be looking to ask Roby to do the 80 mins. I think he can cope with that and still make a big impact.

I worry that the coach won't make any changes, the problems that most people seem to be able to see in his tactics were apparent after the first test, yet he carried on in the second test with the same squad and tactics.

The players he picked did not fit the tactics he chose, so I have little confidence that even if he does see the light, that he will pick the right players and the right gameplan(s) for this upcoming test. The time has come for a fresh start for England, and hopefully a new coach is appointed over the winter.

Saturday is make or break for McNamara. A 20 point win (however it's done) and he keeps the job for at least 12 months. A repeat of the last test and surely he's a gonner. Then what? Push the boat out to bring Sean Edwards back to what "his heart is in"?

The dire attacking performance of England requires whole changes in key positions. Steven McNamara must make important changes to the team, and turn to Leeds and a dash of Castleford to turn the tide away from an otherwise inevitable Kiwi win.

[iZachary Hardaker

Joseph Burgess, Kallum Watkins, Michael Shenton, Ryan Hall,

Daniel McGuire
Robert Burrow

Sean O'Loughlin,
Liam Farrell, Elliot Whitehead
James Graham, Joshua Hodgson, Christopher Hill[/i

Interchange: [iThomas Burgess, Michael Cooper, Carlos Ablett, James Roby[/i

McGuire,Ablett and Burrow are not even in the squad and likely on a beach somewhere. And even if Burrow was selected, he has very rarely played in the halves for the past 3/4 years.

Can't really believe i'm saying this but i think Shaun Wane would make a terrific England coach.

Edwards and Wane, that would be a great combo imo.

An England win & McNamara keeps his job. Unless the RFL have the balls & resources to bring in someone like Edwards. I wouldn't necessarily mind Wane being given a go. At least you might see some attacking structure & aggression in defence. At international level I'm not sure how much is game tactics & how much is getting the team mentally ready for the match. I can't imagine Aussie coaches spend too much time on the former, they generally have enough talent & big match experience in the squad to do the basics right.

Those players whom you think are on a beach somewhere -- be it Blackpool or Bondi -- should be called home and called up immediately. This is a crisis for England and its long term morale, because New Zealand are playing for the first time without both their star halves and play makers, Shaun Johnson and Kieran Foran, and also without their second choice replacement Thomas Leuluai.

The Leeds players I have identified are unlikely to have lost all their fitness already. I was thinking of Ablett as a bench replacement anyway, so he would only need to play 15-20 minute spells.

As for Robert Burrow, his playing style makes little difference whether he is hooker or scrum half. He is a live wire, and he could ignite the English attack in a way not seen in years.

Who is Carlos Ablett?!!!!Didn't realise we were searching Mexico for our English. Also I'm pretty certain it's Juan Carlos anyway!!!

Wane would be ideal for the way our game is right now. He would them up and probably get the best out of limited players we have.

Which is why he would be entirely the wrong appointment. There should be one person with a responsibility for the pathway taking players from 5 to England, someone to put in place the necessary structures and systems from top to bottom and get rid of the nonsense patchwork we currently of massively different levels of investment, some clubs having academies, some not, some having U23's some not, some with dual reg, some not. Thats where we need to be, with elite development and international achievement as a priority not an afterthought with a part-time coach trying to fire up our limited player pool for the occasional underdog victory.