And 8 points is even a bit much. If Sinfield converted one more kick we're looking at a game with 1 try in it.

Hohaia above Slater and Sinfield above Thurston, that's hilarious.

That score line doesn't lie you're right, it says that we were the closest we've been to beating the Aussies since 2006 yet you choose the score line to bash Sinfield.

Too many errors too many mistakes. Sinfield played well 2nd only to Thurston in halfbacks on the field yesterday IMO. George burgess was an absolute monster, Sam burgess was great but tried to do too much

Roby played well aswell. We lost far too much when he went off for Widdop, we lost our best half back and got an inferior hooker out of that change. Widdop either starts for chase or doesn't play IMO. I think that game was tailor made for Burrow to come on at hooker for those last 20mins.

Watkins stood up well against Inglis, some defensive work to do on the other side though.

Westwood tries so hard and does such good work it's incredibly frustrating he makes so many mistakes, he is a momentum killer at times. Tom Burgess was not quite ready yet,

We add graham and o'loughlin in to that forward rotation and we step up a level. That boost in the pack could be the difference.

I saw nothing in the Australia performance that shouted unbeatable, and I saw nothing in the English performance that said we couldn't beat NZ

Quote: Leaguefan "The score line does not lie. We showed we had a system to beat the Aussies We went away from it. Sinfield is the leader and it is HIS responsibility to ensure that the team play to the plan, they stopped, and therefore he failed. I agree with statement that perhaps others were not up to Sinfield standards but then I have never rated him than being a slighter better than average club player, not international standard. The evidence is in the score line.'" Give it a rest, you and so many others on here are just embarrassing yourselves with your Sinfield and/or Rhinos hatred. The "system" worked for 20 minutes because Aus were obviously very rusty and played like donkeys for 20 minutes. Once they found their feet there was only going to be one winner, unfortunately. I do think we've got it in us to reach the final though and anything could happen there. By your logic the only reason England/GB haven't won a series for 40 years then is due to us having crap captains. The evidence is in the scorelines afterall. Stats from yesterday: live.nrlstats.com/matches/nrl/match25396.html Unbiased, agenda free NRL player ratings: www.nrl.com/player-ratings-austr ... e_featured International player ratings since 2008: www.news.com.au/sport/nrl/austra ... 6494737540

Quote: Leaguefan "The score line does not lie. We showed we had a system to beat the Aussies We went away from it. Sinfield is the leader and it is HIS responsibility to ensure that the team play to the plan, they stopped, and therefore he failed. I agree with statement that perhaps others were not up to Sinfield standards but then I have never rated him than being a slighter better than average club player, not international standard. The evidence is in the score line.'" Give it a rest, you and so many others on here are just embarrassing yourselves with your Sinfield and/or Rhinos hatred. The "system" worked for 20 minutes because Aus were obviously very rusty and played like donkeys for 20 minutes. Once they found their feet there was only going to be one winner, unfortunately. I do think we've got it in us to reach the final though and anything could happen there. By your logic the only reason England/GB haven't won a series for 40 years then is due to us having crap captains. The evidence is in the scorelines afterall. Stats from yesterday: live.nrlstats.com/matches/nrl/match25396.html Unbiased, agenda free NRL player ratings: www.nrl.com/player-ratings-austr ... e_featured International player ratings since 2008: www.news.com.au/sport/nrl/austra ... 6494737540

What we're all forgetting in all this Hill - George Burgess praise is that if Graham hadn't been (apparently) dropped one of them probably wouldn't have started. So, perhaps should start on the bench next week?

^ Absolutely. Graham plays a lot off the bench for Bulldogs anyway, will be good to have him involved again but there's no way he should be starting.

Also to think of it in terms of prop partnerships. Think out of the two of Mossop and Tom Burgess we should let the latter get another shot and I think coming on around the same time as our most experienced prop could be good for him.

I was quietly impressed with that performance, If we didnt drop conentration for the Dlater try just befre h/t and cut out a few silly drop balls and penalties we could have won that game. I thought the halfbacks worked reasonably well with Tomkins and when we had field position we looked dangerous. I'll be honest I was concerned about Watkins and Cudjoe defensive but thy was spot on yesterday. Tom Burgess and Mossop were below par, Westwood needs to be a little bit cleverer when he's houseing ala Greg Bird, although I like that side of his game. I was disappointed with Hall he seemed sheepish and not upto his usually Leeds standards and Josh could have done better with the in touch incident. I don't think Ablett offers anything of the bench although I rate him, and even though Farrell is a 80 min workhorse he has neat feet and speed for a forward and can make breaks. Bearing that in mind when we are full strength I would go as follows...

Tomkins
Charnley
Watkins
Cudjoe
Hall
Chase
Sinfield
Hill
McLlorum
G Burgess
Ferres
Burgess
O'Loughlin

Roby (On after 20 for the remainder)
Graham (Used like at the Bulldogs on after 20 for remainder)
Westwood (Brought on for a prop and S Burgess pushed to front row)
Farrell

So we can all agree the strongest setup would be
Drop mossop
Tom burgess 1 more chance or drop

Props
Graham, hill, g and s burgess

Ferres, Westwood, SOL

Centres are nailed on.
Wingers are the best we have but have to play to their best ability

The rest is debatable

As I said before its not about Sinfield its about the whole squad.

To suggest your views are valid because we haven't beat the Aussies in a while is bizarre. Take Sinfield out and replace him with any of our other world class half backs and you think we'd beat 'em regularly? Replace him with Thurston and you think we'd beat them regularly? Your view is wholly invalid and frankly ridiculous.

its not that your views are against the grain, it's that they are demonstrably nonsense. Sinfield is an international standard half back. You know how I know that as a fact? Because he is playing international football, at the highest level for a major nation. He is doing it regularly and with some success.

The fact you have decided on some quite nonsensical criteria to define 'international standard' is neither here nor there because by your criteria no English players are 'international standard' SBW isn't an international standard 2nd Rower and there has been less than 30 'international standard' players in the game who weren't wearing green and gold since 1972

I'm just not a fan of Westwood at all.

He reminds me a bit of Kirk Yeaman who was made to look good by Paul Cooke and then when he left Hull Yeamans career never really sore to the heights it once promised. For me Westwood needs Briers and looks lost without him. If he didn't give away so many penalties his work rate could be enough to see him in the England side but for me its not enough.

The current fixation with Australia is irrational. NZ have a better team - it's theirs to lose.