They dragged us about after that. They knew we had the better of them in the middle. When they had us dragged out of position it gave GI the space he needed.

Realistically we are always going to have a two or three injuries in any given tournament, Australia have more than that and I think I'm right in saying New Zealand do as well.

I'm not sure Waite or Noble ever got as good an opportunity as this and yet they both managed to beat Australia at least once and have fairly good records against the kiwis. Smith had a poor side to choose from with the old guard of Radlinski, Long, Fielden, Cunningham, Farrell and Sculthorpe all gone and Roby, Graham, Burgess and Lockers not really ready to take over at that level so it's more understandable him not getting a win against the aussies, though he did whitewash New Zealand in a three match series with a mediocre squad.

If we get beat by the kiwis this time that will make it 1 win from 9 attempts against Aus/NZ for McNamara. The last two have been agonisingly close but even so I can't help but feel that another coach would have produced a better return than that all with this set of players at his disposal.

Yes I agree with that. And maybe someone else deserves a crack at the national coaching job (though I hope it isn't Shaun Wane to be honest).

My point about feeling sorry for the coach was that he was one poor decision from getting into the final and beating Aussie for the first time in 8 years. Sometimes coaches are lucky and sometimes they aren't. I think we underestimate the role that luck plays in top class sport, sometimes the difference between winning and losing between two well matched sides is down to luck.

I don't believe that you can make your own luck either. By its' very nature luck is random and can't be 'made'.

Yes exactly. The Aussies were losing so they changed their tactics. Did our coach respond? No.

It wasn't different tactics that cost us but a failure to implement the game plan properly in the second half. The Aussie came out and played better, you'd expect that of the home team. But having weathered the early storm and forced a scrum, it wasn't the coaches fault we dropped the ball on their 20, on the second tackle, was it?

Still if the video ref had done his job properly we would have won. That's not the coaches fault either.

I've been a massive critic of McNamara in the past, but this time it just isn't warranted. He picked the best team available. They played well. They deserved to win.

As St Pete posted "I think sheens made a big call bringing hunt on and playing with 3 halves. They moved us around then which give GI the space he needed.

Also the Aussies speeded up the play the ball which killed us."

You did not notice that? Are they not different tactics? It was not down just to our individual errors. McNamara did not respond to the Aussie change in tactics.

Sorry but how is 'speeding up the play the ball' different tactics? It's what every team tries to do unless you are shutting a game down in the last 5.

They moved us around because Cronk is a great kicker - it's what he always does.

Getting Greg Inglis into space isn't a tactical change. It's what they always try to do.

You are over analysing this. The Aussies played better in the second half and got lucky with the officials. Nothing to do with the coach (on this occasion).

Playing three halves not a different tactic?

No. They had Cronk, Cherry Evans and Hunt. England had Smith, Widdop and O'Loughlin. A ball playing 13 is as old as Rugby League mate.

i was talking to Dean Bell a few years ago before he moved back to NZ. He said if the game is decided by one refs decision then you haven't done enough to win. If the team doesn't let Australia back into it in the second half with penalties and overly conservative play, or if we have made all that first half dominance count for more than 12 points, then it really wouldn't have mattered whether the Hall try was given or not, the game would have already been settled.

I don't think McNamara will have told the lads to play conservatively or give away penalties but at the end of the day they did, and it's his job to decide what the plan is and make sure they execute it. The players not following his plan is as much a bad indictment of his coaching skills as him coming up with a bad plan in the first place, because it shows he is ineffective

I agree with you regarding Joel Tomkins.

I disagree with you about Westerman, I though he was poor against Samoa and would have dropped him even if O'loughlin hadn't played.

With regards to O'loughlin you're talking absolute nonsense, first half O'loughlin was very good, both in defence and attack, he helps the attack so much as he takes the ball right to the line. Yes he wasn't 100% but at 70% he easily better than westerman.

Also he's not arguably the best 13 we have when fit, he's easily the best 13 we have when fit.

When fit he's arguably the best 13 in the world. (Ask Ryan Hoffman)

Name dropper!!!

Yes but one team has to win. Maybe we didn't do enough, but by the same token neither did Aussie.

You can't deny that the decision over Hall's try is wrong. Widdop gets to kick for the match. Because the decision was so late in the game it WAS the deciding factor.

If England win - no-one is debating McNamara's tactics. And all of a sudden Tim Sheens is under the spotlight. We get to pull his game plan apart (as I said to Andy Gregory!).

The difference was that the Aussies did not start with that set up. They adopted it when they were losing, a change of tactic that worked. The other difference was that O'Loughlin sole contribution was to give penalties away. If you cannot see the difference there is no point in continuing the discussion.

If you think that SOL's sole contribution was to give away penalties then I'm with you. No point in continuing.

But the overall trend is he falls short more or less every time. Why is it that at our very best under McNamara with a weakened Australia team we can only be about level with them?

Even with a couple of injuries under Waite and Noble we still managed to beat good Australia teams, the margins were 8, 12 and 11 points. In all three games we started the game well and kept it going in the second half. We didn't have to come back from behind or score a late winner and we had it sealed late on. Coaching at international level is a very hard job but the harsh reality is that he is failing to live up to the standards of his predecessors, never mind improving on their efforts

Yes you are right, and I'm no fan of McNamara. His decisions last year cost us a place in the World Cup final IMO - leaving out James Graham and Gaz Hock for the Aussie group game and sticking blindly with Sinfield and Chase.

However with the correct video ref decision we win and get to the final with a chance of winning the tournament. My main point was that luck plays a part in sport and he got none on Sunday. It could end up costing him his job (or one of them!!!).

Aww come on, I've still not ingested my requisite amount of anti Wigan bile yet! Please ask him to come back!

Lol....

Not anti Wigan bile at all. Just don't rate O'Loughlin at the present time. I am not denying his class I just don't think that after his injuries he is performing at his best. In the Aussie match he IMO did not perform well and gave away too many penalties. May be this was due to his own frustration at his below standard performance I don't know.
May be you should ask yourself why my criticism of a Wigan player should be transcribed by you into anti Wigan bile.

He is not the only Wigan player you have had a pop at. Previously you had a pop at Joel Tomkins as well.

Reason England lost the match was more down to defensive errors in certain moments and Wigan players were involved but so were others which oyu really have not mentioned so therefore you come over as Anti Wigan. If you were balanced or fair you would point out more than just errors from 1 team.

If you read the response to my comment about Joel Tomkins you will see Wigan supporter agreed with me. Can you honestly say that Joel deserves to be included before Elliott Whitehead? He was responsible for the Aussies first try. I thought Tomkins and O'Loughlin were two weak links. That is my opinion your opinion may be different. These are the only two Wigan players I have commented on even though others were playing. I do not feel the defeat was due to Wigan players, the coach picked the players and set the team tactics and that has been the basis of my argument all along. I used the examples of the Wigan players to show IMO how McNamara continues poor selection even after the Chase/Sinfield debacle. That incidentally is not getting at the Cas/Rhino clubs. Some of you on here seem to be a little sensitive.

Josh Hodgson was partly at fault for two of the tries on Sunday, but it's hardly been mentioned

if he played for us i bet Keiththered would have reminded us.

So your not Anti Wigan but again you just have a pop at Wigan players and justify it by saying others were playing as well.

Be honest you are Anti Wigan yet again you only name Wigan players in that game. Thats the point that makes you Anti Wigan.

Would you play Watkins next week. He was the worst defender on Sunday yet you neglect that and the fact Hodgson defense also let him down. Again a point you do not make.

You say your not Anti Wigan but the facts show you are.

I was not again having a pop at Wigan players I was merely repeating what I had already said in previous posts.

You do not actually comment on the original point of the discussion. Should Joel Tomkin, who was nothing more than ordinary since his return from Union have been selected in preference to Elliott Whitehead, who was fantastic all season? Sean O'Loughlin did not appear to be fit after his injury problems and playing at his normal standard. He also gave away too many penalties. If O'Loughlin was on top of his game no one would doubt he should be in the team but he isn't.

If you feel that is anti Wigan because I did not go through the whole team then so be it. It was their selection I was querying. I do not think they should have been selected and their performances proved my point. I did not question McNamara's other selections hence I did not comment on their performances. It is easy to see players faults after the match as in Watkins and Hodgson. The situation with Tomkin and O'Loughlin should have been clear to the coach before the match.