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

Actually Roy, their backline plays together at least twice as often as ours does, in much more high octane games with the SOO and ANZAC games.

We play France once and stuff them.

I think considering we had a weakened squad, a young squad being built for the WC, a coach who hasn't proved himself and a dodgy refereeing team the lads did really well. Its clear not all the players are up to scratch, but they put their all into it.

Ellis and Burgess weren't very impressive they've been quiet.

I think the only players I would criticise on this tour are Widdop and Atkins. Widdop clearly has the natural ability, but hasn't got the experience or knowledge to be blooded yet. Atkins has proved to be utterly useless on this stage! He has no conception of what his positioning should be in th defensive line and all too often was found really far out of position or standing too far back from the line which cost us tries. In attack he was inffectual. The one decent run he had was when England were on the attack after scoring a try. He made a good few yards at the end of an attack, two defenders were bearing down on him, nothing was on, our attack was steaming a head oin formation, their defensive line was broken and scattered. Did he take the ttackle for a quick ptb in a commanding position to potentially score? No! He decided to try run round Billy Slater, five metres away from the touch line.

To be fair, their backline usually involves players from both QLD and NSW, and not all of them even play in the SoO due to intervening injuries and so on.

As I've said on another thread, I think playing together in a mini-series like SoO is a red herring. The skills they devleop come not from playing together for 3 matches, but from playing against each other for twenty matches. In the NRL, threequarters have to be on form in every game because the opposing team will punish them if they're not, and there's another kid waiting to take their place if they mess up. In SL, St Helens can finish second in the league playing one semi-retired centre and one second-row or stand-off on the other side, pretty much all season. They can do this because there are very few teams who challenge them on the outside. Any team playing the 2010 version of Gidley and Flannery as their centres in the NRL would be spanked each week.

Cudjoe has looked good because the other centres in SL are so mediocre. But he got found out yesterday. Maybe he'll improve in time, but he certainly isn't good enough yet. And before we hit the club bias button, I'd point to Jamie Foster. Eddie and Stevo were starting to do the same to him last year as they did to, say, Atkins. He was a wonderful winger, class act, young flyer, etc etc etc. Basically, he's solid and can kick goals. Other than that, he's completely unremarkable.



Yes. But I don't see the difference. The result of that penalty - as with all penalties - was to give them possession near our line for a full set. The resulting pressure gave them the try. I think we don't take penalties seriously enough - they're game changers. Fans can expend huge amount of fury over single perceived dodgy refereeing decisions which may or may not have affected the outcome of the game, but almost never get worked up at all when a single player can repeatedly cost them yardage and points by lack of concentration or just plain stupidity.

I think you need a lie down Roy, sorry.

I might get slated for this, but to defend Cudjoe, his only mistake is not knowing if he could rely on his inside defender to move up, after that inside defender showed he couldnt be relied on. Other than that I dont think you can blame him, or suggest he wasnt up to it. (unless you like the commentary team couldnt tell the difference between him and Atkins) then again, he got his chance, probably ahead of when he should have and it will have done him good.

I don't have a problem differentiating between Cudjoe and Atkins ! Atkins was 100% pants, in defence and attack. Cudjoe was 90% pants in defence and attack - although I thought he was harshly pulled back for the pass which sent him into the open. Also, Cudjoe is taller. Loads of difference.

Roby
Westwood
Graham
Ellis
Fielden

Which is what they have had since they started playing the game in this country.

Why can't people see that?

I have to add I really do appreciate all the time effort and sacrifice all the volunteers and amateur set ups put in considering the lack of support and facilities they have to deal with.

I agree with most posts on here. Roby, Graham, Westwood was our best players and robinson was ok.

Roby has been the best player on the tour IMO.

There would only be Roby and Graham who would be of interest to a NRL club, Ellis, Burgess and Westwood really didn,t do enough.

We looked like a team mentally ill prepared, instead of being in the faces of the opposition the first 20 mins we let the other teams dominate against an England team with not one player with any organising skills.

Can i just say that James Graham has been outstanding as el capitano.

I really think he has learned to wind his neck in and let his actions do the talking.

Never had much time for the bloke at a personal level before and his petulance in previous games has bugged me no end, but i think he has really handled it well, exceptionaly well in fact.

I will sling all sorts at thim next year when he is back in a Saints top, but he has really done England proud this year.