FFS, it's the forwards. It nearly always has been. They can't build a good enough platform for the full 80. They drop off.

Common problems for england which 99% occur in the pack:

Stupid penalties
Sloppy kick chase
unforced errors
a lack of domination in the collision both in defence and attack
failure to control the speed of the ruck, due to above.
Consistently losing the territorial battle, due to a combination of all of the above.

You can't have 20 minutes of good everything in the pack, then have all of the above creep in and claim the pack dominated. England have some good individuals in the pack, but not enough depth. The bench is never strong enough. Bringing the likes of farrell off the bench, they don't add any go forward, they are dominated by their opposite and that's when england really start to fall off the pace because they are unable to spell the better forwards.

Let me tell you what is going to happen against NZ. England will not be able to control the speed of the ruck. The collisions will be 50/50 at best and otherwise 70/30 in nz's favour. The forwards will struggle to lay any real platform, which means the NZ defence will be able to aim up and shut everything down with ease, field position will be scarce and they'll be some penalties and knock on's from the forwards thrown in.

...........And then people will come on here and say it was all the fault of Chase and sinfield.

I logged on tonight expecting people to realise that with Fiji dominating Samoa the New Zealand performances in a poor quality group have been put into context. Ah well, never underestimate the negativity of the rugby league fans

To the OP. I didn't even read the content of this thread because of the title.

How about you start a thread entitled.

[sizeFive reasons why England will beat NZ.[/size


Apologies but this is the typical English/British downtrodden attitude that permeates through our DNA. Get rid of it. I don't care how good the opposition are. Means nothing.

I believe England can win.

So to sum the thread up if you dont think Engaland can win you are neagtive.

Oh well maybe that just makes the rest of you sheep.

I want England to win i just cannot see it but dont let that get in the way of petty insults.

If England win regardless of the manner in which they do it i will be pleased and happy to admit mea culpa,

Still all the sheep can enjoy another glorious English failure and the continued damage it does to British RL domestically and internationally.

Just interesting to note that despite you wanting England to win, you think it more important to show why we can't. I suppose you have an expectation for defeat therefore you will avoid disappointment.

As for calling people sheep. I haven't read the thread, but if people have insulted you, have you not tried generalise and put everyone into a same group. Labelling all those people puts you so, so much above them doesn't it.

Not disappointed just very frustrated that a great opportunity for RL to really get into the national consciousness has been wasted.
Despite all the positives to come from this WC the most important one would be England getting to the final and either winning it or being part of a great game and i think they have not given themselves the best chance of doing it unfortunately.

I agree.

I just always pop on here and get a massive blast of "why not" before "why we will or can".

I always believe England have a chance of winning at anything. And that's not based on national pride, but if I didn't have a belief system like that, there'd be no point turning up. Maybe I've learned that from the aussies. But even now over here over the past 4-5 years there's a very British misery and whingingness (if there is such a word) as they are not performing in sport.

Rugby League Internet coaches could've given way more reasons why Sheffield Eagles wouldn't win the 1998 Challenge Cup.........how did that turn out again?

And sorry I'm not buying this "oh we're only concerned for the good of the game and McNamara has comprised it" b#ll#cks.

If 17 men lose next week to New Zealand it'll be down to what happens during the 80 minutes......not because Poster X and Poster Z on here "told us so" weeks in advance.

Yet the most tragic laughable pathetic thing is that they'll be on here next Saturday almost bragging as if they were the ones scoring the tries or making the tackles for the Kiwis, when in reality they didn't even move their ar$e off the sofa but will somehow have the cheek to question and criticise the efforts of others who did actually compete.

Id suggest that picking Chase at 6 and Sinfield at 7 in every game shows that he knows exactly who to play at half back and in what combination. Just because the majority of England 'fans' dont agree doesnt make your point correct, and as he is the Head Coach id value his opinion more than the hundreds of people who have never coached who slate him for his selection.

Bring back Great Britain

TBH what have our current halfbacks done. Chase has got a temper and will be found out against NZ next week.

There's a difference between can(not) & don't think they will. NZ have got to be favourites, but it wouldn't be a massive surprise if England did. The bookies onviously think that too. I am not entirely happy with the half back set up, but I am not as critical as some. Few know the real situation with Brough, but him apart there is no-one else with any more right than the present incumbent. My biggest criticism of his selection is the apparent need to pick a number of average Wigan players - Mossop, Farrell & McIlorum - because they won the GF. There are obvious far better players in all those positions in SL. I'll be going into the game thinking we are slight underdogs but believing we definitely have a team who can win.

Ferres played if i remember correctly

So it begins....the great battle of our time!