Whilst I may be being overly harsh, two players produced by two clubs in what we're constantly told is RL country doesn't sound that impressive, but accept it's not the worst example.

I keep hearing on here that we should pack it in trying to grow the game away from the heartlands and focus on where we're strongest. If this is the best that the stronghold of the game can come up with, we may as well pack it in now.

It's a strange one really. As you know, I have my reservations about Wane, but I do wonder whether he would be better in terms of instilling the level of aggression and determination required, particularly as he is British and is therefore as frustrated as the rest of us with the aussies almost invariably beating us. The problem of course is that he is hardly a master tactician, and I do wonder whether the way he gets determination from players would be as effective when he isn't developing a relationship with them every day for years. Overall I think the appointment of Bennett made sense even though it was harsh on McNamara, and given his CV it makes sense to stick with him to see what he can do in the World Cup after another year with them.

As for the halfbacks, I agree but for different reasons. It was daft to pick Brown in the squad given that he is 32 and has not played a competitive international. The only way he should have been in was if he was good enough to be first choice. Otherwise it's really shortsighted, I'd have had Sneyd in the squad instead just for him to get the experience of being around the squad, and a game against Scotland. Gale I can understand more, he is four years younger than Brown and accustomed to being the main man who needs to make things happen against technically superior opposition. If it had worked, we could have been sorted for 4 years or so with him developing with the experience. However, it didn't, and realistically I'd say he needed to take that opportunity given his age. Next year we need to look to the future and pick Williams + 1 (needs to be an organiser with a good kicking game, likely still Widdop) to maximise his development. Hall and McGillvary (both 'middle 8s' this year) were two of our only players to come out with credit from the tournament so I definitely wouldn't agree about only picking from the top teams.

I don't think that tactics are that important in International rugby as Bennett's tactics are hardly complex - unless I'm missing something (which is highly likely!). I think Wane would have been able to motivate the team in a way that Bennett couldn't - he can't really lead a rallying call against the Aussie b'stards-being one himself!

That said I'm perfectly happy to be proved wrong about Bennett and I really don't want Wane to be introduced to the hate-a-thon that would inevitably ensue when we lose (I leave that to Wigan fans ).

I shelled out money to see all three of England's games and I feel that we didn't put our best foot forward at all. The atmosphere was like a snooker hall at both Coventry and London. Quite how stadiums that are half full can help the national team I'm not sure. I'd have played the three games at Wigan, Leeds and Hull and to hell with growing the game outside the heartlands until we have a winning team to be proud of, that people will be interested in coming to see play.

So he's just the man behind the curtain with the megaphone?


The Wizard of Oz, indeed.

Is the idea not that we are introducing new people to the sport who then watch RL regularly on TV, buy products from RL teams and those advertising at the games, and attend the big events (CC Final, internationals etc) thus making us more marketable so we can attract more money via sponsorship and TV deals? I'd imagine it's far easier to get broadcasters and sponsors interested if we have plenty fans from London watching on tv every week with all that disposable income burning a hole in their pockets as opposed to our traditional working class fan base from northern towns.

You might increase viewership a bit by playing a game down south, but in manchester and liverpool you could actually get some new FANS who regularly go to games and will watch sky games more often because they follow a team.
Also I don't know if you know this, but there are working class people in London and even some middle class people in the north

You what?

^^^

Erm how about - Inglis, Smith, Cronk, Thurston for starters

I've never understood the argument for reducing the amount of teams in Super League. All you do is reduce the chances of playing regularly for young English players. Would Luke Gale for example have still been in Super League if we only had ten teams? He only got a move to Bradford after leaving London. If there were only ten teams in the League would he have been picked up at all or would he have to go to a Championship club and gone part time?

All you do by cutting down the teams is deny 40+ players a living and thousands of fans the opportunity to watch Super League.We are nearing saturation point as it is with watching Wigan play Leeds or Saints up to five times a season. Cutting the teams means 'same old, same old' and Sky would pretty soon tire of that.

The argument that it would improve standards is a fallacy.Take a look at the Scottish Premier if you don't believe me. Celtic and Rangers both won European honours in the days when the Scottish League had 22 teams. It now has 10 and the standard is about English League 1 or 2 level (3rd or 4th division in old money)

The Aussies did the basics, built pressure, ran hard especially their 2nd rows along the centre channels and waited for their chances to come.

Sure GI made some great runs and was hard to put down, but then some of our players were too. The spine of 9, 7 and 6 were consistently very good not exceptionally outstanding.

We also made breaks, put players through gaps and broke the line, but we made mistakes - we could easily have been 3 scores better through simply catching the ball.

The Aussies didn't make any mistakes.

Imagine if we'd played error free rugby, the score one would be far closer.

That's why I said there was no one head and shoulders above us in the Aussie team.

I agree with putting a game in Liverpool, but why not one in Manchester? That has to be the biggest oversight currently in our game. I know Salford fans won't like it, but I think they should have merged with some other clubs in greater manchester to form a team called 'Manchester X's'.

GF doesn't count because 99% of the people there will be fans of the clubs and it doesn't have the same appeal as internationals. I can tell you when the 6 nations will be this year but I don't even know what month the RU playoffs are.