I thought aside from those three major mistakes, Chase had a good game. However, it's those significant moments that attract the attention (it's what everyone is talking about for Hall for example, rather than his genaral play work) and had a signifcant impact.

I'd stick with Chase, but make an earlier change to Widdop working with Sinfield, then Chase into hooker later in the 2nd half.

I just think Chase is no World Beater and shouldn't be replacing British Talent that could do the same if not a better job.

Couldnt say it better, think if lomax hadn't got injured. The very average chase would be the one taking his spot

Is the Australian resident and NRL player Widdop more Britush and more of a world beater than SL MOS and Castleford resident Chase?

In a Word.......Yes

Yes he is more British - neither are world beaters though.

Personally i have not been that impressed with Heighington. Seems to get dominated too often. No better than others in the squad.

I thought Chase had a decent first half apart from the "kick". He made good yards and exposed holes in the Aussie marker defence well. I think if we hadn't lost Ellis and Graham (something that seems to have been overlooked as a contributing factor to the loss) then he might have come off second half.
If he's smart enough he will have learned a lot from the big game experience, which in all fairness he doesn't have. I would personaly start with him on the bench and see how Widdop and Sinfield combine from the off. Then bring him on to add some spark from dummy half as you suggest.
Heighington I would drop for Ablett (unless Ellis is out next week and then he has to stay unfortunately). Not impressed at all with him.

Until I heard Widdop interviewed I would have said no. But having heard his voice he is without doubt a lad from Halifax living in Australia, not an Australian claiming Halifax roots.

As for world beating, I think getting the jersey in his day job is harder than getting it for his country. He's got better players around him at work so is used differently.

Chase should be dropped (he should have been before this game) as he has not regained his early season form. He looks to be trying too hard and was too often playing for himself and not the team. He continued to make mistakes which yesterday were crucial and did not form a link with anyone.

As previously stated I would play McGuire at 7 to restore the proven and successful link with Sinfield at 6 where he should stay for the whole game, and Widdop should replace the pedestrian Yeaman at centre

People sometimes overlook the need for established patnerships, and just look at the quality of the individual, even though Chase is no better than McGuire IMO.

This Familiarity is especially important in the halves where they need to know what each other is going to do. It is apparent Kev and chase do not have this.

I think it is also a reason Hall is on the right, to keep the Hull Yeaman Briscoe partnership together

Nice attempt, but not quite good enough to distract us from the obvious - by far the most ineffective back for England was your own (Hull FC's) Yeaman.
Sinfield created Hall's first spectacular try with a brilliant pass and could have had two further assists very early on had the finishing been more clinical.

I didn't think Chase was 'terrible', but he was certainly not good.

I thought Tomkins, Hall and to a lesser extent Reed were outstanding. The rest (including the forwards) had decent but not extraordinary games.

Hall and Tomkins were the only two who excelled for me, everyone else was average or worse our pack is poor their flat footedness will be exposed next week by a very fast NZ team.

What break up the magic, fruit bearing, duo?

Regarding the briscoe try, wasn't a double movement but was a forward pass from yeaman for me