The current coach education programmes put our lack of decision makers (in all sports) down to the drill based nature that our coaching (again, in all sports) has had for decades - run in and out of cones, queue for your turn, run here and run there. There is a big move nowadays to using games to help kids learn, forcing more decision making onto them. It's harder to coach that way - as soon as you open up from a drill to a game you have so many more different things to look at along with the skill you want to work on. Some kids seem to really benefit from it, some don't, and it's not just down to positions - one half back we had made great progress and another didn't. It's a real culture shock to the players too, them being used to strict drill instructions. Again, so benefit from it and some feel they need strict instructions. I suppose it'll be few years until we really find out how well the change in approach works.

McNamara was hampered from the start in who he could select for this competition and from what was left he made his choice, which obviously doesn't suit everyone. From that original selection his team choice has been reduced by injuries and players not performing as they have done in SL. So, I am quite happy with the team that he is putting out on Sunday given those circumstances.

In fact I think some of the young players may even make one or two of you "experts" eat your words later on Sunday morning. This Aussie team is nothing like the team that beat us 52 - 4 in Melbourne in the 2008 World Cup but hey, we always have to try and give the opposition a hand in running down our own players. I believe that if our lads go out with belief and cionfidence and play to their natural ability then we are quite capable of turning over these Aussies.

This is a very young England team and it can and will get better as the players gel. Lads like Tompkins S and J, Cudjoe, Briscoe, Lunt, Harrison, etc, will be around the international scene for many years to come so stop knocking them and get behind them. I just hope they have more spherical objects than some of you posting on here!!!!

Perhaps I misunderstood you, i dont like seeing stand offs making too many tackles, yes they will be targeted, but to put a player like sam or roby on with the single purpose of tackling lockyer seems to be a waste.

Im not saying lockers at 6 is ideal, but he can play a ball playing loose roll well, and its not much different is it?

Austrailia have done it for years and had basicly an extra prop in the back row.

Provide an example of when the Aussies have played anyone other than an accomplished 6 at 6-Props second rowers etc is fine decision making link men is different

I meant style player not an actuall loose forward as they can produce players.

Id say a "typical" 6 was more like a dailey than a lewis, wouldnt you?

Well they currently pick a converted full back there

Australia's game against PNG was, just like our game against NZ Maori, their first game in sometime...especially for some players who hadn't played for weeks (Slater and Smith for example). They still managed to score 42 points and not concede any against a team we struggled against in the last WC. I fear, although Australia aren't the same standard as normal, they will still have far too much for us to handle - and yes, could put a heavy score on us. I don't think it'll be 80 points, but it could be 50.

Don't get me wrong...I'm proud to be English and sincerely want England to win and make the final...how funny would it be if Australia failed to make it!?!

The problem is, and has been over the past 10 years or so, our coaching isn't at the same level as Australia. All these players that Eddie and Stevo claim are the next stars in SL just dwindle away or stay at a similar level their whole career. Look at Ellis and Burgess as examples, Ellis was a good player at Wakefield and Leeds...however his game has improved so much in 2 years at Wests. Look at Wigan...for 4/5 years they were average with top players coming in and youngsters (just like now) however they were no where near the top of the league....now in one season under Maguire (a good coach) they've won the league with ease.

So many of the coaches in England (not just SL) aren't developing players to their potential or improving little things that make the difference....one main thing being mental strength! It baffles me why not? For 10 years or more we've set about trying to catch these teams but just can't get near a trophy when it matters.

Realistically, England have 2 teams in the world to compete with for titles - NZ and Aus.....yet for 40 years we've failed. Thats 40 years where our coaching and playing skill set has constantly been behind our rivals. That in any sport is not good enough. Look at our RU (who won the RWC in 2003 and made the final in 2007) brothers...they have NZ, Australia, South Africa, Ireland, France just to name a few who could win trophies.....then look at football, England have atleast 8 teams who are ahead of them.

Why are the RFL so slow and insular in their approach to change things when we have barely any competition to compete with...yet still fail?

Anyway....come on England, lets try and end 40 years of hurt and get within 30 points of Australia on Sunday!

Really? I'm speaking with experience, two boys that went to a Primary School that banned sports day and had an 'inclusion day' instead. Maybe you have kids (god help them) and have had a different experience, or maybe you're at Primary School now, I'd be interested to know.

No, he just wasnt selected. Its not really a shock as Goulding played well last week and Hall was very poor against NZ Maori.

At least the Aussies have alot of injuries in the centres, Tate and Tonga are good but I'd rather play them than GI, Lyon, Jennings, Hodges etc

Ha ha.

Yes I do have kids (5 and 9), for the youngest sports & races are exactly what they should be at that age: fun games. The eldest does have competitive races at school, and he also plays football and basketball on a skills level, which I also think is preferable in developing sportsmen to what I remember at that age: which was running after a ball with no real instruction and the biggest/most confident kid getting hold of it and hammering it.

When they get to secondary school, they'll play more competitively and there are opportunities out-of-school if they show aptitude. (It's not a school's job, particularly a primary school's job, to develop sportsmen. It's their job to help develop decent people,and sport is an aid to doing that)

To get back on topic: England aren't lacking half-backs because they chained a potential international 6 to a fat kid to even up a three-legged race when he was seven years old.

That statement is clearly inaccurate – O’loughlin has thrown the final pass for many tries this season including some excellent cut out passes to send his wing men into the corner. He may not be England’s ideal stand off and certainly wouldn’t be playing there if McNamara had a full strength squad but to say all he can do is tackle and back up does both him and you a disservice

I do think England would have a chance with the best players available but like usual injuries have meant the team just isnt good enough.

Bridge has been great at centre this year,
Mcguire was at the top of his game and is huge loss.
Sinfiled and Eastmond are also big losses, not to mention JP and Morley but I think England still have the forwards to compete.

I think full back could be tomkins best position.
I dont think Lockers will let anyone down. Hes often one of the better players at international level.

I dont think England have a chance in hell, but I would love to be proven wrong.

come on England