Thoughts on game please

Quote: Roy Haggerty "Thoughts on the game Players

Tomkins - excellent
Hall - best winger England have had since the days of Robinson, on this form
Reed - what a pleasure it was to see proper centre play when he set up Hall's second try. Good try of his own. I don't agree with the criticism of his defence in some quarters. Mostly, the Aussies worked their overlap so well as to give him no choice.
Yeaman - sorry, but this guy's just a second row playing in the centre. Offers almost nothing in attack. Terrible defensive decisions in the second half backing off from attacking players near the line.
Briscoe - Good footwork on ball returns often beat the first man, but error prone too. Combined with Yeaman, we were basically one-sided in attack, only offering threat down the right.
Sinfield - Kicking was mixed, but crucially, too slow to take on the line like the Aussie halves. He was a postbox in attack.
Chase - I wonder whether those who have criticised Chase's performance are the same people who didn't think he should be selected in the first place. He was the best attacking weapon we had after Tomkins throughout the game, and while there were some brainfarts (the kick from the restart was the worst), what he lacked was runners when he created uncertainty in the defensive line.
Graham - immense, and it was noticable that England made less progress when he was off.
Roby - would like to see a few more runs from dummy half, and someone should tell him not to kick, as his boot isn't good enough. But a few good darts and excellent defence.
Peacock - Good in defence, but clearly his buggered knee prevented his normal contribution in go-forward.
Westwood - please, please drop this guy. He reminds me of Scott Moore - all aggression and bugger all brain. A penalty machine, who was also at fault for one try through lazy defence.
Ellis - looked great while he was on, and his absence was a key reason for the decline of the English 2nd half performance
Heighington - just a cultural cringe to the NRL. There are better back-rowers playing in SL, and two better ones on the bench. Absolutely no point. The Williams try was embarrassing at international level.

Widdop - didn't do much when he got on, but that's because presumably he hasn't been training as the stand-off pivot.
Morley - good solid lad, but his internatonal days are well behind him, and didn't make enough metres with the ball
Wilkin - didn't find enough gaps to run at, although a nice pass to Set Tomkins off for the second try. Needs to be either a playmaker or a hard-runner. At present not making enough plays or running hard enough.
JJB - Ran really well when he came on. A proper battering ram and a handful. Good impact.

Issues

The game was lost in the forwards. England does have a mostly international-standard pack. But the key international players are Graham, Roby, Peacock and Ellis. When they were all firing in the first half, we were dominant, making space for the backs, and creating a bit of a roll which greater composure or creativity would have turned into points. When Graham, Ellis and Peacock were effectively either removed from the pitch, or playing with injuries, then our go-forward stopped, and the backs had no space. Chase and Tomkins look very dangerous when given space, but we didn't do that in the second half, and that, effectively, is the story of the game with ball in hand. The story of the game defensively is that the Aussies were very likely to score whenever they had 3 or more tackles in our 20m. Our defence was poor at dealing with the Aussie dummy runners, and too often that allowed Thurston, Lockyer and Cronk to give a simple pass putting a man in a one-on-one situation close to the line, which is always going to be difficult to stop.

Biggest weakness

Coaching. This game was lost before the kick-off because of the coaching. The selection at international level remains bizarre. The best stand-off for England this year is either Widdop (played for the Aussie minor premiers in that position) or Chase (won man of steel in that position). Macnamara chooses Sinfield, who isn't even the best stand-off at Leeds. The best loose-forward this year was Sinfield, but Macnamara chooses Heighington, a journeyman pro utility forward. Decisions like that hurt us badly, because to we've clearly trained to have Sinfield as pivot, and he is simply not an international half-back. He is, arguably, an international loose-forward, and should be played there.

The difference between the Aussie coaching and the English coaching was apparent. Look at Inglis's try - it was the best of the match. Not because it was a length of the field thing, but because of the amazing team skill which went into it. Every Aussie player was running at the line, all in a position to take a pass. Each one committed a defender, allowing the pass out the back to hit Inglis. It was a wonderfully worked bit of skill which came from long hours on the training field. England, on the other hand, when they passed the ball, offered no uncertainty about who would get it. The only question was when the ball would be passed to the obvious receiver. Occasionally, there was a single, obvious, dummy runner going through and the ball was passed behind him. The Aussies never bought it. As a result, our tries came from either acts of individual brilliance, usually from Tomkins, or the old hoof it up and compete for the catch option. That's coaching. I have to say that the most depressing reading on the England teamsheet is the coaching staff. Macnamara - failed at Bradford; Lowes - failed at Warrington; Powell - failed at Leeds, none of whom are head coach at a SL outfit, so don't even have up-to-date coaching experience. Sheens - a very successful coach still up to date because of his involvement at a top club.

We might still beat NZ, because they don't look that impressive, but only if Graham, Peacock and Ellis can be patched up. But until we get some decent coaching, it won't be enough to beat the Aussies.'"