Why would anyone want to put Eastmond in front of Greg Inglis. Hell, Inglis was throwing players around for fun last night!


As for playing loose.....what? Really?




And to suggest Brian Noble had it right...please. You lot got destroyed when he was coaching too!

Rogues Gallery wrote: The only chance we have next week is if we play a "loose game".

We haven't got a hope if we play it tight and get into "an arm wrestle"

That means we have to rely on players with individual flair (Tomkins, Eastmond and Myler) and just hope it comes off.

We may get beat by a bucketload , but we mustn't come away from the game wondering what would have happened if the kids had played.

We got battered in Melbourne last year with an experienced side, so give the kids go.


Rogue's Gallery is undoubtedly correct. Whilst we need our forwards to step up, playing EXTRA forwards in the backs will never work. An 'arm-wrestle' will result in a traditional close 60 minutes followed byt the Aussies running in 30 points at the back-end of the game. Our backs are clearly not as good as the Aus or Kiwi line-ups, but the only way to beat the Aussies is to spend at least 60% of the game in attack, depriving them of time in possession. Tough, it's true, but if you set out just to defend for 80 minutes you might as well not even turn up.

Oh my aching sides.

We'll be lucky to get 5%!!!

on 2nd thoughts your observation is correct regarding 60%

other way round for me. we have to try smother it and play to our strengths which is in the pack. try rattle em early, start like the kiwi's did and get in their faces. if we try out pass em on the fringes we'll get clobbered

seems a strange kind of logic, why not play 12 wingers and a hooker? or 13 props, or the under 11s maybe that will work?

why dont they all cover themselves in ice-cream, we musnt come away from this game wondering what would have happened if the ice-cream covered team had played

we got battered with in melbourne with a team not covered in ice-cream, so lets give Ice cream a go.

i agree with not just trying to defend and playing players out of position is NOT the way to go. but, playing to our strength in the forwards does not necessarily mean playing defensively, quite the opposite, its using them to get us on the front foot which is the only way our back line is gonna have any kind of chance to play. basically our halves are not gonna be creating loads of gaps and chances. we need to try summon from somewhere a high energy defence with quick line speed and in attack play the ball as fast as possible and make yardage from the ruck.

You know what....if england spend 100% of the time attacking, imagine how much they would win by!

1 point!!!

A fluke drop goal

No doubt kicked in the 19th minute....you know....as you do!

1. S Briscoe
2. T Briscoe
3. Ellis
4. Smith
5. Hall
6. Mcquire
7. Tompkins
8. Graham
9. Roby
10. Morley
11. Peacock
12. Wilkin
13. Sinfield

14. Eastmond
15. Carvell
16. Crabtree
17. Burgess

Briscoe
Hall
Briscoe. T (needs more ball and will get it in the centre)
Eastmond
Smith

Sinfield
Tomkins

Morley
Roby
Peacock

Ellis
Burgess
Wilkin

Crabtree
Carvell
Graham
McQuire