Looking forward it is 9 that worries me. I think we are in good shape in other positions but I just see at the moment a lack of quality at 9.

Lots of expectation around Bailey Hodgson and hopefully he can break through in the next 2 years at Newcastle.

We have no depth and much less quality than the Australians.

From the outset Waney selected Watkins at right centre. Rowley knows he's can't hack it there so plays him second row where he's had a very good season. Trouble for Shaun was that there wasn't an Intl English right centre either in the NRL or SL so he played Watkins there. Didn't take long for him to get found out in the semi.

As for the future it isn't that bad. Welsby can play full back. Young and Makinson will be available. At centre there's Newman, Wardle, King and Percival. Williams will be available as will Dodds and Smith. That's of course if they are all fit!

As for forwards, there do seem to be plenty young big forwards around but we will;l need two ball players probably at 9 and 13.

That backline will not worry the Aussies. Makinson will be 34 and I am not sure that his body can take what he puts it through for another three years.

This is the most articulate and mature summary I've read. Its easy to let club loyalities influence comments and start bagging other players. Indeed Welsby has had a lot of stick on social media. I do get it, he is a big talent, much was expected of him and he didn't perform. I'm big enough to say that he had a poor game and hopefully he will learn from that, lick his wounds and come back well. With a Saints hat on I'm hoping he goes back to FB and has a great season.

Too many players underperformed but it was the right edge for me that cost us. Young looked young (pardon the pun) and looked a bit lost at times. The communication between him, Watkins and Welsby was poor and defensively we struggled. Tomkins looked his age, however I thought Williams played well in patches.

As for the future, a lot of those who played on Saturday won't be in the next WC. Makinson, Burgess, Hill, Cooper, Tomkins, Whitehead etc and then even the likes of Walmsley, Lomax and Farrell will be too old. Hopefully there is some talent coming through. The problem is that the game is too reliant on the likes of Saints/Wigan/Leeds bringing through all the talent. They can't keep doing that in silo and need other clubs to step up. To be fair to Warrington, they do now seem to have got their academy sorted and are producing some excellent players. However when you look at the size of Hull as a city and the catchment area of it, its a disgrace that they aren't producing international class players.

Agree that no point in blaming any players because they dont play for your team,on Saturday I was a England fan not a Wigan fan as I have stated on many occasions.
We need other teams to step up and supply more international players.
Keep Wane as head coach,get some more internationals played each year,get rid of the salary Cap or raise it enough so we can improve the product.

We need to fundamentally change the organisation of the sport over here, something that we have, allegedly, been doing for over four decades. Tinkering at the edges will not make us competitive with the Aussies. We are a second rate sport compared with the NRL and we need somebody with vision to take the game by the scruff of the neck, unfortunately Chairman Mo is no longer with us. Sadly we have gone backwards since the days of Hanley and co.

People have put the likes of Welsby on a pedestal but, although I think the lad is a very good player, he would not get a gig in the NRL. Hopefully, as Stu says, he gets a run at fullback and then we can seriously assess his qualities. We are woefully short of real talent, a fact supported by average antipodeans playing in SL, and that needs to change if people born after 1972 are to witness another successful England side.

Not much has been mentioned about quota spots.

I remember when you had 3 and a bit of a loophole meant you could scam 5. Now we have 7 with loopholes meaning we can go up to 8.

This is a huge fundamental issue with the game.

In many cases clubs can field a match day 13 with over half the players not qualifying to play for England or the other home nations.

We need to reduce this as a matter of priority initially to 5, then ultimately to 3.

I think that is a sensible suggestion.

I agree in principal, but you also have to look to maintain the club level game and make it attractive to spectators, unfortunately imports do that for clubs, reducing the quota too low may mean a lack of interest at club level and a drop off in spectators.

I would like to see more of an emphasis on bringing players into the international set up with a chance for them to play more international games, hopefully this will raise the standards of players coming through and we can try and identify the younger talent coming through

I agree in principal, but you also have to look to maintain the club level game and make it attractive to spectators, unfortunately imports do that for clubs, reducing the quota too low may mean a lack of interest at club level and a drop off in spectators.

I would like to see more of an emphasis on bringing players into the international set up with a chance for them to play more international games, hopefully this will raise the standards of players coming through and we can try and identify the younger talent coming through

Still gutted

The club level game is already low. I have no problem with clubs bringing in quality imports but the majority are average players. The only way we can raise the standards of players coming through the system is to send them to the NRL.

Every time that happens we get complaints about watering down the level of SL. We can't have it both ways.

We either send the best players to the NRL to try and improve the national side, or we keep them all in SL to improve the level of SL but it may not improve the national side.