I can't believe the people on here saying Westwood was a top player today. Is it because he's got shaggy hair so he looks vigorous when he runs ? Is it because he charges into tackles so you can go "oooh" before he gives away the inevitable penalty?

You could make a good case that Westwood lost us the game today. He is a penalty machine, both for Wire and for England. The one thing we needed was a good start, and we have the Aussies on their first set trying to come out of their own half. So what does Westwood do ? He wraps his legs around the tackled player's leg and gives away the stupidest penalty in international RL this year. The Aussies score straight from the resulting tap, and from then on we're on the back foot. It's not good enough to look as if you're running hard into the collision. In RL test matches between the big 3, penalties decide games. Westwood had no excuse for that - he wasn't tired, the defence wasn't scrambling after a break. He just lost the plot. You'll also find that he missed a fair few tackles too, which is inexcusable for a second-row.

I'm not saying he was the worst player out there. You'd have to say that numbers 1-6 were predictably woeful, and Burgess probably pipped him for the Shot-In-The-Foot medal in the forwards. But to say he was worthy of significant praise is rhubarb.

What a crock of shizer, you have completely contradicted your own previous post. You bleat about people having a go just because they play for saints....then have a go at Westwood!! If westwood played for saints he'd be amazing just like Graham.

I think some of you were just waiting to slate Burgess. He was the only one to run over 100m and was second in your tackle count. Not forgetting your opening try. He knocked-on twice, which is no doubt incredibly frustrating, but he was still one of your best.

I thought Graham was outstanding.

Great effort.

You're a mentalist. There's a different between tongue in cheek poke at a pie fan who decides to single out the only two Saints players in the team for some against-the-grain criticism, and someone who questions just one player's performance. By your account, nobody is allowed to criticise any player unless he's from their own supported club. Get a grip.

Pack was ok, needed a Morley or Peacock but not both, and beat the cons imho.

The organisation skills and confidence that subsequently pours through the Cons backline via Lockyer exposes our inferior backline, he must retire soon!!

Though Goulding and Briscoe looked ok for the future, but we need a couple of 6'2'' 15.5 stone centres, with great ball handling skills and 9.8 sec for the 100m to come through soon. Will that be Watkins?

Eastmond/Robinson/Tomkins/Myler/Widdop give us some hope in the halves.

Westwood - while not the best player in the world, nor most talented, nor because of his hair - stood out because you can see he's giving 100% effort all the time. Does he give away pens? Yes. Was that why we lost? No.

There was a noticeable drop off in the forward momentum from England when Burgess and Graham left the field... Crabtree is a good option off the bench as he can produce an off load etc but him and Fielden didn’t have the same go forward as Burgess and Graham

What I would love to have seen was the likes of Peacock and Morley in the mix to maintain that momentum – ah well, not to be

Specifically on Burgess, as above, his forward momentum was great but simply too many errors to have been described as having a good game

Welcome to the wonderful world of why we keep losing. Because we big up players who have limited talent, poor decision-making, yet who give "100%" effort. I used to give 100% effort when I played amateur RL. Does that mean I should get praise in an England shirt ?

I'm happy with amateurs who give 100% effort. But for a professional, that's not enough. For an international, I expect not just effort, but some success, and - crucially - mental effort as well, to make the right decisions in attack and defence.

Westwood is a bruiser, and for that reason, I quite like him, because I think raw aggression is a requirement of a top-class pack. But until he learns to temper that aggression by cutting out the silliness, he'll be a net liability to club and country.

how many of those have any experience of international success?

BUt i didn't just pick out 2 saints players. And i can't see how you can have a love in with any player when we've been outplayed on all accounts in 2 games. Noone erally shone in either game but the ones who were to supposed to be our game breakers i.e. Roby, Graham, Burgess, Ellis, Tomkins didn't stand out at all. Westwood and Robinson weren't expected to do much and have somewhat earned a chance to prove their worth again. Others have proven their worth adn with such should be cast aside from international rugby. Atkins, Brown, Harrison, Cudjoe and probably Fielden aswell now. Goulding, Briscoe and obviosuly Hall haven't really had chance to shine and i'd happily see them continue their international development. BUT the big one for me has to be that Macca goes and goes very quickly....

Actually, if anyone stood out over the three matches so far it is Graham. The guy was head and shoulders above any other British forward. Roby played well yesterday but was anonymous in the first two games. Tomkins was good in the first game but anonymous in the las two. After that I'm really struggling for positives.

Atkins has been found out as someone overhyped way beyond their ability, and his club success is testament not to his ability but to the absolute dearth of top class threequarters in the British game (see the other thread on 2013). Cudjoe looked as if he was bricking himself every time the ball came near him. Briscoe and Goulding looked average throughout. No speed, no evasion, weak defence, no real contribution.

Robinson played about as well as he's capable, which is ok, but nothing which is going to get us any wins at international level. Brown was pretty dire in both matches he played. Joel Tomkins has been a big disappointment, because I think he's a very good player and was looking forward to seeing him mix it up on an international level - but he just didn't show. Westwood, see above. Lunt and Harrison didn't have time to show much. Widdop showed why he can't break into a regular first team spot at his club. Hall was defensively at sea. Shenton showed glimpses but got injured too soon. Fielden managed to forget his good club form this season and go back to the international failure he's been since Mason chinned him. Burgess needs to hold on to the bloody ball. Ellis looked like he wasn't playing in the same team as every else, and was waiting for his Aussie mates to come pass to him.

That's pretty scathing, I know, but it was a poor show, and I don't think whitewashing this with "well, it was a good effort" "young team" "building for the future" etc, will help us. We need to actually address the problems rather than simply acknowledging them and hoping something turns up.

Roy, normally I am 100% behind your posts. But today, I find myself wanting to shake you. Sorry, but you I picture you frothing at the mouth in indignation at the moment.

We were outplayed, whats new. It was a young team, that did ok given teh lack of preparation and inept coaching.

The backline didnt gel, because it hadnt played together before and was up against the best in the world first game out.

I can't agree. Their backline plays together no more often than ours does. Yet their threequarters ran on to the ball, whereas ours took it standing still more often than not. When we went wide, we were hammered back or into touch. When they went wide, our defence backpedalled and often let them through. When they kicked, it nearly always found the ground or stopped dead in goal. We don't seem to have had a decent field-kicker since Andy Gregory.

I'm not frothing at the mouth at all. I'm a bit depressed. But mostly I'm concerned that we're using these excuses to brush it under the carpet. The whole attitude of British RL is to make excuses and hope something changes before the next disappointment. We should be actively tryign to actually do something about our weaknesses. Instead we celebrate them because they're weaknesses in young players, not old ones !

So that I don't get confused can you confirm that "straight from the resulting tap" equates to "at the end of the next set of six following an England drop out needlessly conceded when the ball was running dead for a 20m re-start".

Thanks