How anyone could watch that game and blame any if the back line is beyond me. Whatever club, whatever their form, they went OK.
The halves were ok, but you can't miss a touch line from a penalty, nevermind 2! But how do end up with another combination in the biggest game? We should set our stall out and stick to it, to give them chance to blend together and as a team!
But the biggest downer today was the pack. The crucial score after half time came from a 100m set by Aus where they just rolled us. We had just had a really good defensive set, then went back to hanging back and letting them run at us. Shocking stuff, regardless of the opposition.
Poor team selection. Poor team motivation. Poor game. Poor attendance. Poor RL. Poor me! Very disappointed. Get shut of Bennet now!

Percival and Watkins should be in the side as they are the two best English centres. The trouble is that it says more about how dreadful a pool of players we have to pick from in that position than it does about how good they are. People do scapegoat Watkins as well, considering he's probably the most discussed player whenever England lose despite the fact that he plays in one of the least important positions on the pitch.

"should be in the side as they are the two best English centres " That's up for debate. No one should really have a God given right to have a place in the starting 17. I have yet to see people hold Watkins solely responsible for the defeats or poor performances - that's what scapegoating is, not how many times he's been mentioned.

But as you say it's not just the centres. Williams really should've started today, and why Pinhead was picked in the squad at all is mind boggling. The halfbacks are a real concern, despite one poster always mentioning the assist count, not a single one has shown they are capable of taking control of the game.

The forwards look like they should do better than they have done - it doesn't help with the Burgess twins coming on at the same time.

Are you related to Watkins? Seriously do you trawl through these forums looking for any post that says anything bad
about him? Jeez man, let it go - people have opinions, you don't have to defend him against every one!

Can't argue with any of that, especially the two missed touch kicks !!!!

I would also add this six drives then a kick from one end to other by both teams seems what the modern game has become in order to win. It may be effective but its terrible to watch and will not win over the unconverted public.

Watkins doesn't take any more responsibility for that dross than any other player - I think he gets more attention though, because commentators and pundits insist on talking him up to a ridiculous level; build expectations, then people will inevitably comment based on his failure to deliver.

Overall, we were just poor; after a blistering opening surge, the pack rolled over and was bullied - and the Burgii in particular were poor and full of errors, with the sainted Sam a useless captain; he is a big daft lad who will run it in hard all day long, but shouldn't be anywhere near the captaincy. Our halves were terrible, which is a perennial problem, and if Matty Smith is the answer to that particular quandary, god help us. Our execution is just miles off the Aussies - they win by grinding out chances and executing them clinically when they come up - conversely, we scratch out a faint opening, then panic and bomb it.

Hall looked good - but he's getting old, and as usual, McGilvary worked his socks off and was a handful; other than that, not much positive to say - we're as far off the Aussies as we've ever been, and I don't see Bennett being able to fix that between now and the WC.

I think the next step will be Bennett goes away and says 'your halves and centres aren't up to scratch but these Aussies have an English granny' and we'll get them for the world cup. Not really what I want to see if I'm honest.

I wouldn't pick on Watkins for yesterday but I'd like to see this 'world class' twaddle be stopped now, you'd have have to be an absolute cretin to be wheeling that observation out after this tournament.

I agree with all you say but I might also point out that our game remains utterly flawed and has been since Wally Lewis turned up at BV.

There are very few teams in SL who are not partly if wholly reliant on Aussies/Kiwis as play makers, match winners and game breakers. Nearly all the on field leadership in SL comes from oversees players and we are about to be just as guilty - again.

We are all to blame, even I find myself entranced by the arrival of Sam Williams - why? He's not world class and other than a bit more pace is no better than Finn who in turn is much smarter than Miller. Now Finns to old, slow and past it now to build a team around but are Miller and Williams really the answer - short term at best.

We now have had generation of British players who simply take orders from Australians and are terrified to stray from the norm - and you simply can't do that. Does anyone think Thurston plays to Meningas game plan, no he plays to his own and so he should he's a test half back.

Added to this we no longer promote on natural ability, we simply take players who are big, fast and can be drilled to do only as they are told, with that talent pool Thurston and co must be laughing.

A CONFESSION -

I love Strictly come dancing, I'm not sure why exactly but one reason is because it has similarities to RL - trust me it does.

Some of the dancers are rubbish and are quickly found out, that should be the case in SL but not always.

Most can be trained to a reasonable level and do a passable dance in most disciplines - this is your SL players.

One or two though are gifted and in certain dances they simply have a natural ability and it's those who make it worth watching, that and the comedy value of the duffers in the early rounds - at the moment England has none of those players in pivotal positions, none whatsoever - we have no players who make you go ooooh that was special. The few in SL that can occasionally be bothered are Aussies on a holiday, getting a pension or not NRL standard but able to fake it at SL level.

Only Wane who I detest seems willing to go with his own though his predecessor ruined Sam Tomkins. However it's nowhere near enough - there was a point in the sixties where Cas had three H/B's who were competing for the Lions place whilst most other teams had at least one. When you have that talent base even Bennett could pick three in form players (pivots/spine of the team).

At the moment there is not a single English playmaker who is remotely world class other than a couple of wingers and a couple of forwards at best, whilst the one NRL hope for H/B is now fading fast.

If we made a rule tomorrow that only one Aussie/Kiwi playmaker per team was allowed it would IMHO take three generations of players (20 years approx) before we were in with a chance and that's ignoring the other frailties and flaws that riddle SL. That's how far behind we are and will remain, it's just the players it's a total lack of leadership.

You could argue that the form of Watkins and Hall going into the series wasn't good enough for them to be selected - clearly they were below par. I thought Watkins copt for some unfair criticism after the NZ game, he defended really well and got limited oppertunities with ball in hand. I actually thought Watkins had a dig yesterday and actually looked like he was trying - so doesn't deserve any flack, neither does Hall or any of the outside backs really. I think the coach is getting away with things here, several baffling decisions such as:

Picking Daz Clarke and using him at completely the wrong times in the NZ game.
Having 3 different half back combinations in 3 games.
Picking Williams on the bench yesterday - WTF?
Having our 2 best forwards off the field at the same time and having both twins on, why not split Hill and Graham up?

I also think that all 3 of the Burgess boys need looking at, Sam for trying too hard and the other 2 for being error prone show ponies.

Don't get me started on the nauseating footage from after the game of the players swapping shirts and licking having pictures taken with the Aussies. I want players to be as browned off as I am when we lose to them and while ever we are in awe of them our already slim hope of a win goes even further down the pan.

You'll need better bait than that.

It's not bait it's fact - I've watched Williams over and over and he's a good honest pro but not much more as far as I can tell. He's got pace compared to Finn which allows him to do more but he's no more special than that.

In your answers you express the disease ruining our game better than I ever could - you just assume Williams is better full stop and he isn't, he has the edge because he's younger and quicker but worth bringing him hallway around the world for a year - really - is that how we improve our game. It's not even about whether he's better than Finn (he is a bit) it's that he isn't English and that's what this thread is about. I don't blame Carter or CC for signing Williams what else could they really do and neither have been around long enough to be blamed for the current situation but other including Kear do have some guilt.

We give the Aussies so much respect, if Miller were from Eastmoor he'd be at Hunslet by now - no way would he have been given the time and chances he has if he weren't an Aussie. I'm happy he's had those chances I'd just like to see the courtesy extended a little.

That said because of P&R we have little choice as short terms comes even more of a must.

Have to apologise here, I got the wrong guy! I sped read and assumed, given the topic of the thread read 'George Williams' in my head. I have no idea on Sam but my posting history shows I am no fan of bringing people half way round the world so agree that home grown talents ans potential tallents should be afforded the same courtesy as imports.

As you where.

Adding to the playmaker / halfback debate there are, perhaps surprisingly 19 British halfbacks who will be play regularly in Superleague next season.I wonder if you can all name them ? Could even be more if the likes of Sam Tomkins was played stand off.

I can't name one that's anywhere near as good as the top 10 Aussies that's for sure

Maybe so Vastman, but people use the arguement that over seas players stop the development of ours. Yet as I indicated there are plenty around.Why they are not good enough is obviously another issue.

For me the problem is that as much as sky might like to claim that superleague is as great as it's ever been, it's actually in decline. The quality of rugby as a whole is getting worse. Even in the top sides, saints, Wigan and Leeds were all a far better rugby side 5/6 years ago than they are now.

Also I think Bennett made some serious selection errors. For me I'd have had Houghton in ahead of Hodgson. Atkins would have started ahead of Percival for the Australia match to add some physicality. And maybe slightly biased but I'd have given Johnstone a go, I think his pace would have given them a bit more to think about. Hall is solid enough but he was never going to score from any distance against them.

While ever we have junior rugby played with a win at all cost attitude by coaches and parents then we havent a prayer of getting anywhere near. Mooch down to almost any junior rugby match and you will be amazed at the attitude of The majority of coaches and parents who are desperate to win and will do anything they can (cheating, putting pressure on referees often only a couple of years older than the kids, interpreting the rules to suit, refusing to maximise participation numbers to try gain and advantage, Tayloring pitch size to accommodate the fast kid etc) and much more. The good work done by a few is being outdone by the majority of who are living vicariously through their kids and hopin they prove how tough they are. The environment is shocking many times so it's no wonder that players generally seem to be from rugby families and newcomers are put off by the hostility they encounter.

We need to go to touch rugby up to probably the age of 10 maybe more to develop skills and craft but that won't happen as we've got to prove how tough we and at touch coaches can't give it to the big lad 3 times a set in the last 5 minutes to try and get the final score to win the game that makes everything ok.

Couldn't agree more.

Spot on.

It's not a lot better in Union if my experience of Sandal is anything to go by, but it is better.

Its is certainly the case that the depth of talent is no longer there, but yet we scrap the reserve grade. Go figure! The fact that we are discussing which generally mediocre player should be in instead of the selected mediocre player speaks volumes. There have been a few absentees who might have caused some difficulties, like Hardcore and Ben Currie, but this is the weakest national team I've seen for years. There isn't a single three-quarter who would trouble them. Johnstone wouldn't have troubled them either, because we never made a space.

The backs can only work something if the half-backs generate something, and with three partnerships in three games it was never going to happen. The only one who showed anything, and was man of the match, was benched for the crucial game.

For all Bennett's superstar status, he is the only national coach who has left a series with a feeling of being completely inept. The previous ones have just left us feeling with that we are just a bit behind them, and possibly catching up. I've never felt further behind and that the selection decisions over a three-game series were just bizarre. In the same series, he states that the England players don't believe in themselves, and in the same breath says they are not good enough.

For me, get rid and get someone who will at least instil some fire. Sometimes, that can be the difference.

Ask SL Chairmen about that one - in a collective act of shocking short-termism, they voted for it.

For me, a club that can't run a reserve grade team shouldn't be in SL - and if that means cuts to the 1st team playing budget, so be it.