Yeah it's not like Sinfield put up the kick for Cudjoe's try or he and Chase linked for Hall's try.
Whilst Widdop did nothing when he came on.
Plus if people think Chase being given the freedom to express himself is the key to beating Australia then they're kidding themselves and just too focused on x-factor players. Did Thurston and Cronk do anything wow or x-factor like? They played good no doubt, but as team players not in free reign roles.

What REALLY cost England today coughing up possession and a few daft penalties, mostly from the forwards. Westwood for all the tackles he made undid that hard work on several occasions.

George, Roby and Hill were outstanding, Westwood worked his nuts off but he's a bungalow at times. Tom Burgess and Mossop killed our momentum when they came on and Graham coming back for one of these two will definitely boost England.
The centres were generally very good especially in defence despite being billed as defensive nightmares by certain posters.

England's main problem though was their discipline and completion rate. if they improve in those areas they have a chance.

Thought it was encouraging in parts, we werent battered as usual against the Aussies.

What is clear is we are seriously lacking in the half-back area...Chase, for me, offers absolutely nothing in the International set up, certainly nothing that any of the other half backs in the game could, Sinfield tried but again, isn't a creative player in my opinion. Widdop would probably be a better option than Chase .

Thought Hill and G.Burgess started well and laid a great platform for us, Mossop also offered nothing ...thought Watkins, Cudjoe, Ferres, S.Burgess were good today and i see no reason why they shouldn't keep their places.

Hall and Charnley didnt have enough ball but both did what they needed to.

i agree. westwood was a liability and i saw nothing from tom burgess to justify being in the team let alone the squad

For me I think that we should have widdop starting partnered by Chase to add a bit of speed and and creativity. I know Leeds fans will have a go at me but I cant remember sinfield having a great game against the ozzies or kiwis. I know he set up Cudjoe's try up with a great kick but really what else did he do . Also Westwood puts in a load of tackles but he is a penalty machine, thought S.Burgess and G.Burgess had a good games, shame Sam will get a game bans.

Still think if we'd played Tomkins in the middle and Hardaker at FB we'd have done alotibetter. Tomkins playing an old-fashioned supporting stand-off role feeding off HIll and G Burgess in that first 20 and we may have got clear before Australia warmed up.

Sinfield basically contributed a kick for a try. Any half-back could have been a link for a planned move. You could also say that any decent kicker could have provided the kick.

We'll never know if Chase can make an impact because he's never given free reign to have a go. He plays how he's told, which is basically a pivot. He could fail miserably, but what's the point in picking a player who plays off-the-cuff only to have them do what any HB in SL could do for the International side?

Same with Widdop. Expecting him to come on for 20 minutes with a game-plan devised by the Coach does not mean he is not worth his place. It means the way he's told to play by the coach is at fault. You want exciting off-the-cuff RL? You need to let the HB's dictate some of the play. Not play to a plan that doesn't change throughout the game.

Hill was superb two years put of ptrl

Westwood is a bungalow gets quote of the thread so far. I'm still giggling about that one.

I'm 50/50 on Sinfield. I thought he did ok, you can't really call him on the Aussie try. He was marking 2 players, the team did not slide across enough.

I'm not a fan of Sinfield as a half, but as for giving Chase a free role, to me that's similar to the arguement that some use on our home forum that Lance will play better with a good number 7.

If you can't inject yourself into the game then you can't. It's not about if only he had some mystery role it would make him better.

Maybe risk Tomkins in the halves and Hardacker at full back

To me it's pointless debating the halves as mcnamara has decided on his structure and he's sticking to it. He had this in 2011, and since then everything has been on building for the world cup so he won't change it now, injury permitting.

Starting front row was outstanding and they gave us the edge through the middle. George's footwork is nothing short of amazing for a man of his size, I get more impressed every time I see him, he could be anything in this game.

Thought Briscoe would have been a better option for us than Charnley today, bit more direct and threatening in the contact and gets a quick play more often. Bit disappointed in some individual performances but nothing that can't be fixed. O'Loughlin was a big miss for us today and if we are going to spell Roby then get McIlorum in there, he would have thrived in that physical environment.

Expect Burgess to get a game, maybe two so for me SOL, Graham and McIlorum in for Burgess, Widdop and either Tom or Mossop

We weren't too far away today I thought. What worries me for the rest of the tournament my belief that the Aussies have far more potential to improve throughout the tournament than we do. If we get to play them again that is.

The major difference today was the half backs.... Comparing Chase/Sinfield to Cronk/Thurston is classic chalk and cheese.

Chase is out of his depth at this level, Sinfield has never been upto this level..... Without wanting to hark back to the good old days, a Andy Gregory/Shaun Edwards quality half back pairing would have torn that Aussie side to pieces.

Its ironic that back when we had some decent backs, then our forwards would inevitably get blown away... Now when we have some forwards that match the Aussies, it seems obvious our backs are a mile behind theirs.

If Sinfield and chase are the best we can offer, then our game is truly in a sorry state.

When did Edwards tear 'em apart?

Not necessarily individually, but as a partnership they offered miles more.... Let's just say that I bet Edwards/Gregory worried the Aussies coaching side more than Sinfield/Chase does.

Has an opposing coach, do Sinfield or Chase offer anything that would give you any significant worries in the run up to a game?