Smith made some pretty strange decisions regarding selection; Dropping Smith, retaining Calderwood, Wellens, Gardner, playing two 6's and two 9's in the 17, Wellens rather than Hock, only picking 4 props, etc.

However saying all that the players on the pitch were only 6 points off and could easily have levelled the game until the last 2 mins despite making more mistakes than I have ever seen in a test match.

THe fundamental problem however is not the coach - before the comp started almost everyone was sure that the likes of Pryce, Roby, Morley, Peacock were very good players.

We have to look at why players who look like worldbeaters at club level look like amateurs at internatonal level.

The MAIN reason is that we play a COMPLETELY different game in ESL than they do in the NRL (and therefore at International level due to the pathetic obsession to pandering to the aussies).

ESL rules reward the style of players who are superstars in our game.

The NRL does not.

The outcome is obvious. When we play to NRL rules, our superstars are not given a platfrom to peform and are therefore made to look ordinary.

When we play to ESL standards (World Cup Challenge) our superstars have the platform to display their unique style of skills and we show we can compete.

So,

the real issue is how we want to police and enforce our game which ultimately dictates how we will develop our game - do we want to develop a quick, speedy, entertaining thrills/spills, game or do we want to develop a more controled, technical, skilful game?

can smith share the blame ??

And if he was aware of this you would have thought he would have blooded more players with an eye to 2013.
But what does he do he says 'you are playing Leeds and you have played for Great Britain and wont be available in 2013 and have got slugged by the Aussies in the past so you're in and you are playing for Saints and you have also played for great Britain and wont be available in 2013 and have got slugged by the Aussies so you're in' etc etc

read Ricky Stuart b.b.c.co.uk/rugby league,totally agree with every word he says.

The thing is that 24 players left our shores with reasonable form and ability and confidence. When you can say only 4 players performed to a reasonable standard and the remaining 20 players didn,t, the fault has got to belong to Tony Smith.

I don,t know what has gone on over there, time will tell......but when you see a team play without any skill, passion, pride, "british bulldog" mentality, you wonder if the coaching of the national side is good enough.

For my team players St Helens, I,ve seen more errors by them in the world cup than the whole of superleague last year. So who is responsible for that.

The coach should stay. It only masks the problem.

Maybe only a handful of players performed up to scratch because only a handful of players are able to?

I wouldn't fault the effort, just the execution of simple skills and decision making in attack and defence.

At the end of the day the coach can't stop players dropping balls that they wouldn't drop in SL. Maybe the step up in pressure was too much for some players to handle?

Smith is totally useless. People slagged off nobles selection policy's etc but Smith's was worse even his handling of the media out there smacked of a desperate man without any idea of what he was supposed to do. He and his employers should do the decent thing and walk as they have done nothing to improve the state of things since 8 years ago.

Without the players what can the coach do?

Noble or Smith - was the end outcome really any different?

Nobles column on the BBC says the same but then he is one of the worst for utilising poor quality imports instead of developing english players

First version please.

And there lies the problem.

Our game can't get much quicker and look at the end result in the last few weeks.

Yes!!! Smith out!!

For large parts of our games we didn't seem to have a clue, never mind a plan

I can see the reasons for Smith to go but who to replace him? Cullen?

Exactly we were clueless, on the other threads the saints players are taking a hammering, but these players play to game plans, use decoy runners, switch direction of play, use a second wave of attack, run complicated angles.

We didn,y see any of this from the england side, its as though the english side were playing "flat school boy rugby" so whose fault is that...Tony Smith

Indeed, what happened to all those years of success we had before Tony Smith was coach...

Exactly, the Leeds players didn,t show much intelligent play either, so as Tony Smith gone into a time warp or something. Smith is responsible for the teams method of play which was so predictable even PNG worked it out.

No offence to the guy but I just cannot see how he can stay on after such an abysmal performance.

Yes its true we don't have the quality players but we were expected to compete in the forwards of other teams and we simply haven't.

The biggest problems for me with Smith are three things.

1. In an interview on TV after the first NZ game he gave a politicians answer instead of coming clean and saying that we had played rubbish so far. His comments displayed a lack of blunt honesty about the performances.

2. Squad selection. We didn't take enough Prop Forwards and this was always going to bite us.

3. Team selections and substitutions. He has failed miserably by chopping and changing the team. His choice of players for certain matches was bizzarre. Why didn't he always play with two hookers with one coming off the bench. Why did he drop Lee Smith for the last game instead of putting him on the wing?

Try writing that again, are you the Judder man or the Jibberish man?

O the unintelligent one, you are not Tony Smith,s assistant are you.

So what was it exactly that you were trying to say?

You're his mum. No one else could possibly see merit in him.

Brian Smith's brother is nothing but a mumbling, whinging, loser clown.

What the hell he was doing in England winning a SL title is beyond me.

Daniel Anderson named new Parramatta Eels coach. that leaves smith where he is . Anderson was an assistant to coach Brian Smith at Parramatta in 2000 after leading the reserve grade team to the 1999 premiership. "I have a long history with the Parramatta club and I consider it a real privilege to be given the opportunity to coach the team over the next three years,'' Anderson said. "I started my coaching career here back in 1991 and it's long been a goal of mine to return. I'm a Parramatta boy, I grew up here and, apart from the last eight years, I've spent my life here. "Needless to day I'm incredibly enthusiastic about the opportunity that I have been given and I look forward to helping the team and the club rise up the ladder.'' www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/s ... 66,00.html

Daniel Anderson named new Parramatta Eels coach. that leaves smith where he is . Anderson was an assistant to coach Brian Smith at Parramatta in 2000 after leading the reserve grade team to the 1999 premiership. "I have a long history with the Parramatta club and I consider it a real privilege to be given the opportunity to coach the team over the next three years,'' Anderson said. "I started my coaching career here back in 1991 and it's long been a goal of mine to return. I'm a Parramatta boy, I grew up here and, apart from the last eight years, I've spent my life here. "Needless to day I'm incredibly enthusiastic about the opportunity that I have been given and I look forward to helping the team and the club rise up the ladder.'' www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/s ... 66,00.html

Not aggresive enough
no attacking game plan

defense patterns were schoolboy level

Not sure if it is Smith, the players or the dire coaching of juniors in England but somebody needs to shoulder some blame. By far and away the worse tournament display by any Eng/GB team in living memory.

That was the most depressing bit, for me.

Forget Australia, they're better than everyone by a mile for a number of reasons, but the NZ team that beat us was crap. When we lost, it just as much of case of how we were worse than them rather then them being better than us.

The majority of the NZ team would turn out to be the sort of very average SL signings they people decry for needlesly blocking young british talent.

Either Leeds or Saints would have trashed that Kiwi side. They're teams based around English players (who made up the majority of the Englnd team), so we've got some serious issues, especially when the line of defense is so woeful.

This is what we all are thinking, Leeds and Saints would have had in attack decoy runners, switch of play, 2nd attack phase, chip kicks over the defensive line. In defense Leeds and Saints would be more aggressive, quicker onto the offensive line, covering out wide.
We didn,t see any of this in the England side, in most instances the players didn,t know what to do next in both offence and defence. There was also no one in authority on the field to organise any plays thats if they had any.