Even when he’s trying to be funny he makes a fool of himself - classic!

Do you think that Myler would have been better than Tomkins and if not, who would you play instead of him.
Regarding Bateman, I thought he had an excellent game and despite the attention of 3 defenders, he put Gildart away to win the game for England.
Although Tomkins struggled to create too much, he's still the only England player with the "x" factor and for me, he should keep the shirt.

TM did ok tbf and I don’t think TJ would have done any better. However ‘outstanding’ no not even close mate.

I'd like to see ST take the line on. Agree he should keep the shirt as we totally lack any international class half backs, and our game is a dull shadow of itself as a consequence.
All we get is a forward battle, which England just about shaded. The excitement is now only due to just the closeness of the scoreline rather than any skill factor on show. Great persistence from Gildart for his try, but awful defence on NZ's part - same for England allowing the try from the scrum.

I don't think Big Sam would agree with this comment.

If he's to stay in the starting 13, then it needs to be at 1. He doesn't offer enough as a middle pivot.

It was Bennett who said Makinson was outstanding, for a bloke (Bennett) who doesn't give much praise its outstanding in its self for him to say that, maybe some fans don't like to agree or accept his efforts in the game.
The others that came close were Whitehead, Thompson and Connor.

If he wanted to stop the attacker he needed to use his hands/arms/shoulders/upper body, not his knees.

If he didn’t want to use his knees nobody forced him to slide in on his knees.

Oh so now Bennetts word is beyond reproach, funny hasn’t been in the past. Bennett decision to pick Tm over TJ raised a few eyebrows, very typical of Bennett to support those signings and rightly so.

However you don’t need to be Wayne Bennett to know he wasn’t sensational.

That said he did well and despite me believing TJ is the better player I certainly wouldn’t drop Makinson who imo did well.

Which is exactly what I said in the first place.

Why didn't they select an Aussie ref, why Hicks?? His man management and communication is shocking, I would be furious with his referring if i was the NZ coach. He missed so much.

Why was Thaler getting over excited when making decisions.

What a shambles Ganson has made of our officials.

Seriously Wren, maybe five years ago but now he offers very little imo - he’s lost it.

Wasn't a bad game , good try from Gildart to win it, but an international class fullback and team captain should be making those sort of tackles.
Lomax is a waste of space others nothing, halfs did very little, rather have myler in at 7 and move Tomkins back to fullback. Connor and Gildart both did well enough. Makinson shaky good and bad defo give Johnson a game, (neither a tthreat to a fit Hall)
Thompson made an impact in pack. Still think Tom burgess only gets in on his surname.
Expect tougher next week. Think it will be a 3rd test decider.

Lomax was invisible in attack, but I thought he had a good game defencively.
It'll be interesting to see who replaces Todd Flanders.

AS I saked of the previous poster, who would YOU put in the halves instead of Tomkins and Williams.
I still believe that Tomkins offers far more then Myler, Myler doesnt offer much of a running threat, whereas Tomkins has a great step, decent hands and excellent vision, no to mention a bit of arrogance (which is a decent attribute in the halves).

Few things from the game:
1.Lomax would not have been sent for a head assessment if he hadn't pretended to be unconscious when he hit the deck. The incident was a lazy flap but he couldn't resist milking it. That cost him the rest of the first half.

2. The attendance was poor. Personally, England doesn't excite me like GB did. I just don't buy into it in the same way. It doesn't have the same heritage. As others have said, buy through the clubs. If my club, Wakey, could have got a fiver's commission, selling a thousand tickets is the same as selling 200 hundred home full price tickets.

3. Hicks. Likes the game at a snail's pace. Very poor ref.

4. The RL product overall. Partly number 3. The game gets stopped too often. Every scrum becomes an opportunity to refuel. Every injury is a stoppage. Every minor incident becomes a lecture. The game needs to speed up. Water carriers on only after a try. Injury stoppages only if in the way. The game needs to go back to being relentless. Now, too much play-acting and stoppages. Not the spectacle it used to be.

5. Makinson-v-Johnstone? Makinson on form. I think he offers more threat in general play and perhaps a better defensive game. Johnstone more threat in open space.

Tomkins and Lomax offer a bit more creativity, can operate at both full back and half back positions and perhaps have a better vision than what Myler can offer. That is one of the reasons the Tomkins and Lomax teams have done pretty well for the majority of the 2018 season I reckon we won't see any change in the backs for the next game, the newcomers Makinson and Connor to keep there shirts.

So if ticket prices were the same, same level of marketing, same players (yeah it would be the exact same) but instead it was GB vs NZ rather than England. Some people think there would have been a bigger crowd. Sorry but I am not buying that.

Unless bigger crowd is an extra few people as that is all it would be.

Agreed

The answer is that we'll never know, in reality. But if I think of a GB test series, I think of something more special somehow. England? Not as much. Maybe it's because there was a time when England was the second-string internationals. I was fairly ambivalent about yesterday. Wanted to watch it, but that's about it. It wasn't a must-see event.

The blame for that has little to do with England/GB and more to do with:
A/ Your perception of what constitutes top class sport.
B/ The RFL's utter inability to market the game at a national level.

The first issue is nothing more than a thin smokescreen, as regardless of if they were called GB, England or the British Isles XIII, the same 17 players would have pulled on shirts. Laziness and apathy towards attending matches is in-bedded in the psyche of RL fans across the board and it's hard to find a logical reason for it, given the rabid fervour on here when describing it as TGG. Without naming names of clubs, it is illogical that some owners can't see the benefit of fans and attracting more......the 2018 SL champions attracted on average 2,000 fewer fans to games than the previous year....15% drop. "FANS" need to stop whining and get back to attending games and owners need to make attracting fans their #1 priority.

The second issue is harder to fix, because self preservation rules the corridors of Red Hall. 25,400 tickets were available for Saturday's game......51,408 was the average weekend attendance in SL........how flippin' hard is it to get half your weekly fan-base to an afternoon game? Pound shop pricing at the end only devalues the event....the minute the series was announced the aim should have been to sell out all three games and Hull was the perfect choice for game 1 as they usually turn up......12 SL clubs, each getting 2k tickets to sell, or 10 clubs less London and Catalan getting 2,500 each......it really in't rocket surgery

So let's gets this straight. The answer to creating big crowds and interest for rugby league internationals in this country is simple as replacing England with GB.

Come on dude. You can't seriously believe that

Are you really saying that if England was replaced by GB it would have became a must see event for you?

It would have been much more so than it was. It's perhaps a personal thing, but when I think of GB and all the Test series of yore, it makes my blood stir. England just never has in the same way. It may well have been the same players, but the occasion would have had more history behind it.

And I'm not the only who thinks that. That's why the RFL is doing a GB tour of Australia, not England, even if it would be the same players. It has the heritage Down Under.

I don't understand the obsession with GB. I used to prefer it but I've got used to England. The fact is as someone else said, a GB team would be identical to England in terms of players - we'll never see a lot of Welsh again, and never had that many Scots.

As for the game, I'm not sure how England playing dourly is Bennett's fault. On paper that backline is dire, and our halfbacks are dire on the pitch as well as on paper. Being honest any result against that Kiwi team should be worth a lot of praise. Oh, hang on, this is RL, where we damn GB/England for beating a 'weak' NZ and damn them if they beat a strong team.

I think Bennett has had a bigger effect on confidence than a lot of people expect, and he has at least got SL players putting in pretty solid defensive efforts against some class players. If he could just get them to show that confidence vs Aus.....

...yeah, heritage


This time next year the team will already be down there.....any chance of a schedule, or are the Aussies still deciding if they'd rather play Samoa?
[urlhttps://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/rugby-league-news/wayne-bennett-england-hull-fc-2115655[/url

How much in love with yourself are you in percentage terms?

I did not see the game but reading this thread it seems to start of with predictions of defeat for England, go through negativity with regard to marketing, the crowd (despite those moaning seemingly not going themselves), the atmosphere, the play and end up with criticising team selection notwithstanding we are coached by one of the most successful coaches in the game's history, who coached a winning side on the day. All the thread shows is what's really wrong with the British game - the total lack of insight / stupidity of the 'fans'. That of course assumes those on here are representative of supporters in general (which i very much doubt is the case).