I don't think McNamara can take any credit for picking Tomkins, if ever a selection was a completer no brainer that was it.

I agree that he couldn't forsee losing 3 forwards to injury but he could have lessened the effect if he'd had two props on the bench. Plenty said as much beforehand but he chose to let Bailey and Carvell sit in the stand while playing lightweights like JJB and Wilkin.

Aside from that the side looked well prepared. However one creditable loss does not make him a good coach.

I don't know about that, it is a huge game against the best team in the world, and we looked well coached. Had we been abject and got humiliated, I'm sure plenty would say it made him a bad coach.

Also don't forget we ought to have had Sam Burgess in that pack as an added option too, if we didn't have such cruel luck.

You're right FA, Inglis didn't do much apart from catch the ball and stroll to the tryline unopposed with our right centre nowhere to be seen. Where have we seen that before?

A centre scoring a try? I don't think it's ever happened before.

I think perhaps the reference was more to the terribly weak soft c0ck defence of the McNamara-coached England team allowing Inglis to stroll through unopposed...

that Inglis try was a combination of a cracking run and an amazing pass from Thurston. Reed had a man to mark and he would have been ok if Hall had come inside to take Inglis. That said, it would have been 2 on 1 and I would put my house on Australia scoring from that, especially with Inglis providing.

Probably poor communication between and winger at worst but I don't think anything should be taken away from how easy Australia make plays like that look. A top try scored in a pressure situation.

Chase had a good game?

Must have been watching a different game to me. He hasn't done a great deal in either game for me, let's hope he finds his SL form soon.

Whether it was a planned move or off-the-cuff it was a quality sequence of play, and the previous pass from Cronk started it off, a player ran a good decoy and Thurston passed from right behind him (that was what the "obstruction" inquiry was about), the result was that the Aussies had a man over. The centre saw the danger and took the option of coming out of the line to try to intercept Thurston's pass, presumably on the basis that if the pass wasn't intercepted then a try was certain anyway, Thurston was good enough to see him move out and threw the ball over and behind him, where Inglis, making the extra man, caught it and ran in unopposed.

If Hall had come inside to take Inglis, that would have left the winger unopposed, so I can't blame Hall at all.

It was a top class move by the Aussies and credit where it is due.

To me, instead of giving credit for top class rugby league, to say that was nothing more than a case of McNamara's soft-c0ck defence just makes the poster look pretty stupid.

I'm more with FA on this - you can't underestimate how well Australia execute close to the line. They have two great halfbacks and a team full of quality attacking players. It should surprise nobody that every now and then they score a try that looks easy but is in reality almost impossible to defend against (see also Origin over the last few years).

The key for England is to get experience from facing this kind of attack, and NOT to stand back and watch. I'm not suggesting everybody charge out at full speed, but you cannot allow Australia the space they have been getting. Moving up purposefully in a line and making Lockyer/Thurston make quick decisions is the only hope (along with preventing them get the field position in the first place).

I'm used to seeing McNamara coached defensive lines with players all moving up at different speeds in SL so it's good to see it's the same at test level.

You know, it's strange. Last season over 7,500 points were scored in the NRL. So, for the sake of argument, there were probably somewhere in the order of a thousand tries.

Given how stoically and impeccably NRL-drilled players defend, repelling all-comers, how can this be? I think we should be told.

They were all conceded due to Michael Worrincy & Sam Burgess' poor positional play. And look who used to coach them.

Lets not forget the positioning of sheriffe for the last try.....

Theres a pattern to all the causes!

In McNamara's defence, he simply has nowhere near enough quality at his disposal in order to realistically threaten Australia in a game of RL. England were miles behind the Aussies and it is hard to see what McNamara could have done to improve on this.

That said, Briscoe and Yeaman on the left hand side? Dear me. Nowhere near good enough internationally.