The management of the RU has had loads of problems over the years. In fact it has been shambolic at times. You cannot just blame RL management. Watching the National Anthems last night (Scot v Aus) and comparing what would happen at Murrayfield would tell you something. We just have not got the fan base apart from a very small area. It is much to simple/easy to blame those at the top.

RL is a passionately supported regional sport, that's it.

Lomax my scapegoat.

It's will soon be Watkins when you realise you're not singing him. But bless you for believing!

I thought England looked stronger in both attack & defence when Hill & Graham were on the field together. There seemed to be less organisation when they were off.

I thought Lomax played well & very pleased for McGillivray.

Watching the NZ game it's hard to get round how our crowd just doesn't seem to get whipped up with supporting our England Team. It's as if we are watching and exhibition match. But if England were playing NZ at Rugby Union they'd lap up scrum after line out after ruck etc. in a frenzy and they'd seem to enjoy every minute.

I don't know the answer by the way.

I think what is noticeable in RL games is the lack of crowd close ups. Compare that to international RU games where almost as many shots are shown of the fans as of the game ,probably to deflect from the lack of activity on the pitch.

Yes crowd shots at common following kicks for position.

Same old story I'm afraid. So close yet so far.

Lomax had a good game apart from the one on one tackle that cost us a try.

I thought Sarginson was poor tbh. Got pulled in for the first try and bombed a try of his own.
Watkins didn't seem to do a lot either to be honest.

The Burgess twins made a few mistakes when they came on, and the Kiwis seemed to handle them reasonably well.

Magillvray had a good match and Hall did a fair amount.
I was impressed by Elliot.

Gale seemed to drift in and out a bit, and Widdop did a little too. Neither anywhere near the Johnson, but then very few are.

Hill and Graham were great as was Hodgeson. His kicking was very very good and he ran to the line well. I can see why he's a hit in Oz. Never thought too much of him when here to be honest, but he's improved vastly.
I'd have used Clark differently. I'd have brought him on in the 1st half for the last 10 or so minutes. Don't think we saw the best of him, but he did nothing wrong in particular.
Cooper had a solid game, and it looks good for us next year on that front.

Their number 13 was immense and their bench (Tapau ?) was really good too.

I'm sure lots will have different views and I've only seen it the once, so may have a different view if I watch it again.

Well we know for sure now, England will not beat Australia with the same team.
Our only chance of a complete change in attack is to utilise Ratchford. Even then it'll be slim, but as it is now, it's impossible.

Lots of huffing and puffing but the final killer move was missing. We should have been way ahead by half time if possession, position and pressure had counted!

I agree with most of this - Lomax didn't impress me against France but apart from that one tackle he did well this game. His effort to ground that ball first was heroic! Sarginson kept trying to dummy and go himself (and getting nowhere) when Hall had space outside him, it was so frustrating...

The atmosphere was absolutely dead yesterday .. And I can't see it being much better at Coventry or Olympic park.. If we want intense atmospheres we should be kicking off around 6 pm on a Saturday and playing at the likes of Wigan,Hull or perhaps Bolton.

It's possibly the brand of rugby that's served up these days. It's too structured. Ok that's the way you win games but it's not entertaining especially when you're losing.

You can pick problems with individual players e.g. I thought Gale's kicks on the last were hopeless. Big high balls much too far downfield and easily taken. Sarginson produced nothing. But overall we looked like amateurs playing professionals tbh. The best part of our game was the enthusiasm and work rate that we produced, but it was insufficient to bridge the gap in quality.