It has been the case for as long as I remember that Australia will beat us 8/9 times out of every 10 games. On paper they are much stronger but England have to give it to them and test their resolve. There is little point trying to arm wrestle a low scoring victory. To win it Burgess, Chase, Tomkins, Watkins have to trouble them in defence and we have to score points. Apart from Wembley 1994 we have had to score over 20 to beat them on every occasion in the last 25 years.

Any sort of strong performance at Cardiff will be okay with me (win or lose). For those who were at Elland Road in 2004 or Melbourne 2008 the depressing thing is watching a team get mullered and not competing at all.

Same here.I dont want to see us going down without a fight.Ive said it too many times in recent years we tend to just stand back and watch them for the first quarter and before we know it we are down by a few scores.We need to get into their faces and hammer them in the tackles,the crowd will get behind the team and it may make the Aussies think about what they are doing which could force mistakes.Standing off them will lead to them ripping us apart as per usual.

Like you and many more i dont expect a win but a real close battle would please me no end.

An individual non team player and a one trick pony versus 2 of the most talented half ever to play rugby (of either code).
Just based on that it is probable that the outcome can be foreseen.
When Gallen has softened the English half backs, then the rest will be history.
Sad but true.

People who are talking about the 'spine' should have a look at their current form - Melbourne have always been successful by having just a decent workman like team built around the superstar 'spine'... The reason Melbourne didn't win it this year is because the 'spine' haven't been at their best. Yes Cronk won the Dally M, but he was poor for large parts of the year, but as he's Melbourne's main playmaker, and they scored lots of tries from kicks, he scored well in the Dally M points system.

Looking at the 'spine';

Slater has had a very quiet season, even in Origin, and has struggled with niggling injuries.
Thurston was gash for 3/4's of the year, but had a good end to season
Cronk was poor both pre and post origin, but went ok
Smith quietly went about his business in his usual consistent approach

No doubt they will turn it up a few levels for the RLWC, but I think the Aussies real danger comes from elsewhere... Lewis and Fifita off the bench will be something the UK based players have no answer for, as there are no 2 players like this in the super league. Fifita will be a real handful who will eat up the meters and give some good offloads, and Lewis will run the great lines at the back of the ruck - If the Aussies get any roll on (which they should with Scott, Fifita, Myles, Gallen) England will struggle to contain someone with the speed and power of Lewis... If the defence can cope with the forwards around the ruck, that will just leave space to ping the ball out to Inglis out wide - then we are in trouble...

The key for me is dominating the ruck... Numbers in the tackle, wrap up the ball, and slow them down... If we do this well, we can prevent Smith from dictating the pace of the game and are in with a shout - if they get a good roll on, it could be a cricket score.

I'm just glad they've chosen Farah instead of Cherry-Evans. Although I really rate Farah, they don't need a 9 on the bench. And I think DCE is one of the 2 best halves in the game at the moment, alongside his Manly teammate Foran. On form DCE should be ahead of both Thurston and Cronk, but you can't blame Sheens for sticking with the tired and tested 'spine'.

There is no denying the Australian half backs are better than England and, with Tate over Jennings in the centre, it is the area where the Kangaroos have the clear advantage

But to call them to be two of the most talented halves ever to play the game is just going way too far. Thurston is good but I would rather see his name on the team sheet than Lockyer every day of the week and Cronk is good but remember Andrew Johns was lining up against us in the number 7 jersey only a few years ago

Lewis, Kenny, Lockyer, Daley & Fittler are just a few of the stand off’s I would rate higher than Thurston. As for Cronk, I wouldn’t rate him higher than Sterling, Langer or Stuart and a mile behind Johns

Serious question, as an English player today which of the following would you rather see on the team sheet

6. Lockyer
7 Johns

or

6. Thurston
7. Cronk

I know which I would prefer