Jump to content


Rugby League World - Grand Finals Issue

RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD - THE GRAND FINALS ISSUE - OUT 17 OCT OR DOWNLOAD IT NOW!
Try our Fantastic 4-Issue Bundle Offer:
For just £14, a saving of 10% on the regular cover price, you’ll get:

The Grand Finals Issue (out 17 Oct) – Grand Final drama from both hemispheres plus Four Nations preview
The Four Nations Issue (out 21 Nov) – Fantastic coverage of the Four Nations tournament down under
The Golden Boot Issue (out 19 Dec) – A look back at the 2014 season plus the big reveal of the winner of the Golden Boot
The 2015 Season Preview Issue (out 23 Jan) – How will your team perform in 2015? We preview every club.


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

What we learnt about England in the Autumn internationals.


  • Please log in to reply
24 replies to this topic

#1 RSN

RSN
  • Coach
  • 4,200 posts

Posted 11 November 2012 - 07:11 PM

This is personally what I learnt about England in this series:

Hock needs to mature to even be considered against Aus and the Kiwis although he is probably the biggest strike threat we have in the forwards.

Watkins for the right centre spot, he seemed a class act every time he got the ball and seemed a class above cudjoe. Its out for Reed/Atkins/Cudjoe for the other spot.

Briscoe impressed me more than Charnley and he is in the front seat for the wing spot next year with Ryan Hall undoubtly taking the other.

JJB and Ablett should be no where near selection next year.

Its going to be a tough decision in the props with Burgess x 2/Crabtree/Carvell/Hill/Mossop/Morley/Graham all warranting selection

We need to up the intensity.

Our problem in the halves still hasn't been resolved.

Anything else people would like to add.

#2 PLD

PLD
  • Coach
  • 516 posts

Posted 11 November 2012 - 07:39 PM

Haven't really learnt much about England in this series that I already think I know.

They are light years behind AUS and NZ and they will be putting those kind of score-lines up against England next year.

Rugby League must be a great game to survive the fools at the RFL who run it.

 


#3 markleeds

markleeds
  • Coach
  • 1,672 posts

Posted 11 November 2012 - 07:56 PM

The spirit in the England camp looks brilliant, if we get neutral refs and the Aussies don't going crying the the Sydney media about getting a friendly ref then England can win it.

#4 guess who

guess who
  • Coach
  • 4,020 posts

Posted 11 November 2012 - 08:04 PM

The spirit in the England camp looks brilliant, if we get neutral refs and the Aussies don't going crying the the Sydney media about getting a friendly ref then England can win it.


Have you had a bang on the head?

#5 1976PMJwires

1976PMJwires
  • Coach
  • 9,621 posts

Posted 11 November 2012 - 08:14 PM

England need to play teams who have 80mins game time in them. Not five mins here and there!!


12 months ago we competed for an hour, this year we only needed to compete for 15/20 mins

Team spirit looks good.


We'll beat the kiwis but not a chance against Australia , not a chance in hell.

#6 terrywebbisgod

terrywebbisgod
  • Coach
  • 8,428 posts

Posted 11 November 2012 - 08:24 PM

Watkins has matured as a centre,good footwork,good hands.
Myler and Sinfield are a good halfback partnership
Mossop and Hill make a very good pair of props to support Graham and Burgess.
Cannibal chiefs chew Camembert cheese,cos chewing keeps them cheeky.

#7 1976PMJwires

1976PMJwires
  • Coach
  • 9,621 posts

Posted 11 November 2012 - 08:30 PM

Watkins has matured as a centre,good footwork,good hands.
Myler and Sinfield are a good halfback partnership *
Mossop and Hill make a very good pair of props to support Graham and Burgess.


* have you been drinking?? This is the worst half back pair ever to play rugby league
Funny that, they've won all medals possible between them this season :P

Edited by 1976PMJwires, 11 November 2012 - 08:30 PM.


#8 steef

steef
  • Coach
  • 1,467 posts

Posted 11 November 2012 - 08:32 PM

My findings, with the world cup in mind...

Hardaker is going to be a very capable back up for Tomkins especially if he improves as you'd expect him to given his age and relative inexperience of the position.
Wingers are fine, Hall is a shoe in, toss of a coin between Briscoe/josh.
Watkins looks the real deal. Not convinced by Cudjoe, Reed would get my vote.
Halves did ok, think Widdop has to be involved. I'd have him at 6 and Sinny at 7 with Myler and Chase in the mix as back up.
Props look good, Mossop and Hill both played well and should both get better, added to Graham/Burgess and many others we're looking good here.
Hock really needs to cut the errors out or else he'd be a liability against the best. Hope he can do it as on his day he can be unplayable, didn't see anything from Ablett or JJB that thinks they should be above Westwood or Ellis.
O'loughlin was impressive and should be 13.
I'd have Burrow in the squad, always a threat and I think he's a better option(just) than MM to support Roby at hooker.
I'd have liked to see Luke Burgess and Ratchford play
"surely they've got to try somthing different now, maybe the little chip over the top?2


http://www.flickr.com/photos/stufod/

http://www.facebook....156268557729980

#9 terrywebbisgod

terrywebbisgod
  • Coach
  • 8,428 posts

Posted 11 November 2012 - 08:41 PM

* have you been drinking?? This is the worst half back pair ever to play rugby league
Funny that, they've won all medals possible between them this season :P

it has been a rather long afternoon ;)
Cannibal chiefs chew Camembert cheese,cos chewing keeps them cheeky.

#10 1976PMJwires

1976PMJwires
  • Coach
  • 9,621 posts

Posted 11 November 2012 - 08:42 PM

it has been a rather long afternoon ;)

it has been a rather long afternoon ;)


:)

#11 Scubby

Scubby
  • Coach
  • 3,912 posts

Posted 11 November 2012 - 08:44 PM

Haven't really learnt much about England in this series that I already think I know.

They are light years behind AUS and NZ and they will be putting those kind of score-lines up against England next year.

They whooped NZ 28-6 last time they met. HTH.

#12 RSN

RSN
  • Coach
  • 4,200 posts

Posted 11 November 2012 - 09:18 PM

They whooped NZ 28-6 last time they met. HTH.


We beat Wales by 68 points didn't we? So wonder what would warrant a 90 point turn around in 2 years which PDL is stating. Fair enough that the kiwis had a half a dozen of quality players missing but since 2011 from my point of view:

Tomkins is a better player than 2011. Briscoe and Charnley have both improved the right wing spot. We potentially have a quality centre combination in Watkins and Reed who arn't half as bad of who we have had in the past. We had Chase playing when we played them, Widdop is twice the player of Chase and is holding down his position in the best club side in the world. Graham has improved and is now considered in the top 3 props in the world without a doubt and arguably the best. Sam Burgess wasn't playing in that series and we also have Hock now who on his day is world class. Luke Burgess has also improved massively. We had two players in the RLIF team of the year, which is two more than the Kiwis I believe. So how are we light years behind them I don't exactly know, someone tell me and I'll be happy to debate the points you make

In reality we are short of Aus but have the ability to beat them in a one off game. Player by player I think we match the Kiwis, and even if we are short than Australia we can definitely beat them in a off game. I wish people would explain to me in detail that we are 'light years behind Aus and NZ' because in reality, we arn't as far as we think.

Edited by barrowraiderskid, 11 November 2012 - 09:19 PM.


#13 HappyDave

HappyDave
  • Coach
  • 3,236 posts

Posted 11 November 2012 - 09:34 PM

I don't think Hock, Chase, McIllorum or Mossop should be anywhere near an England shirt as the first 3 are hot-heads/thugs [Hock and Chase definitely are thugs] and Mossop never impresses me, plus at times he looks like he's possibly looking for trouble.

I thought JJB was really good today.

I'm still of the opinion Morley will be too old in 2013 to be of any real use to England. I'm much rather Larne Patrick or Eorl Crabtree took his place.

Plus I'm still a little unsure about Grahams' dirty side too. Could he a liability too? As he was dirty in the Grand Final in 2010 so I'm unsure whether he's becoming dirtier with age?

In reality we are short of Aus but have the ability to beat them in a one off game. Player by player I think we match the Kiwis, and even if we are short than Australia we can definitely beat them in a off game. I wish people would explain to me in detail that we are 'light years behind Aus and NZ' because in reality, we arn't as far as we think.


Exactly!

Edited by HappyDave, 11 November 2012 - 09:37 PM.

"I've never seen a woman with hairy ears... And I've been to St Helens" - John Bishop

#14 Viking Warrior

Viking Warrior
  • Coach
  • 5,184 posts

Posted 11 November 2012 - 11:05 PM

i think the biggest thing we have learned is the confirmation that ryan hall is the best winger in world rugby of either code!
"Why is Napoleon crying ?" said one sailor to the other, "poor ###### thinks he's being exiled to st helens" came the reply.



https://scontent-a-l...276002364_n.jpg

#15 ShotgunGold

ShotgunGold
  • Coach
  • 858 posts

Posted 12 November 2012 - 02:59 AM

The only thing we need to do against Australia is to play for 80 minutes. We are usually fine in the first 40, in fact we're sometimes fine in the first 60, but then as we slowly approach the 80 minute mark they go on to thrash us.

Do that and we'll either win, or only lose by max 8 points.

#16 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 5,613 posts

Posted 12 November 2012 - 03:32 AM

I think Danny Maguire should be in the squad. You cannot leave out a player with his scoring abilities.

#17 RSN

RSN
  • Coach
  • 4,200 posts

Posted 12 November 2012 - 03:14 PM

I think Danny Maguire should be in the squad. You cannot leave out a player with his scoring abilities.


Widdop is a better all round player than Mcguire in my opinion.

#18 RSN

RSN
  • Coach
  • 4,200 posts

Posted 12 November 2012 - 03:24 PM

The only thing we need to do against Australia is to play for 80 minutes. We are usually fine in the first 40, in fact we're sometimes fine in the first 60, but then as we slowly approach the 80 minute mark they go on to thrash us.

Do that and we'll either win, or only lose by max 8 points.


Reason is because our halves just get simply outclassed. They get the Aussie forwards on the front foot until our forwards collapse and they go on to win the game. The only real big difference between Aus and England is 6 7 and 9. Even in the backs we arnt anywhere near as far behind as we used to be.

Tomkins is slightly worse than Slater, but he's just as good in attack.

Uate and Boyd who played in 2011 arnt clearly better than Briscoe and Hall, infact I question wether they're better at all. Fair enough they're better in the centres but Inglis has so many bad games in him, Lyon and Morris are class though but Reed doesn't seem to struggle against playing against this level of opposition every week and Watkins looks better than him.

Its only Smith Thurston and Cronk who just make the difference, but people still insist we are miles behind them but will never explain how. If we swapped our 6 7 and 9 with there's we'd win.

#19 Wiltshire Rhino

Wiltshire Rhino
  • Coach
  • 2,329 posts

Posted 12 November 2012 - 03:26 PM

Reason is because our halves just get simply outclassed. They get the Aussie forwards on the front foot until our forwards collapse and they go on to win the game. The only real big difference between Aus and England is 6 7 and 9. Even in the backs we arnt anywhere near as far behind as we used to be.

Tomkins is slightly worse than Slater, but he's just as good in attack.

Uate and Boyd who played in 2011 arnt clearly better than Briscoe and Hall, infact I question wether they're better at all. Fair enough they're better in the centres but Inglis has so many bad games in him, Lyon and Morris are class though but Reed doesn't seem to struggle against playing against this level of opposition every week and Watkins looks better than him.

Its only Smith Thurston and Cronk who just make the difference, but people still insist we are miles behind them but will never explain how. If we swapped our 6 7 and 9 with there's we'd win.


Nail on the head!
2014 Challenged Cup Winner

#20 petero

petero
  • Coach
  • 2,833 posts

Posted 13 November 2012 - 08:26 PM

Reason is because our halves just get simply outclassed. They get the Aussie forwards on the front foot until our forwards collapse and they go on to win the game. The only real big difference between Aus and England is 6 7 and 9. Even in the backs we arnt anywhere near as far behind as we used to be.

Tomkins is slightly worse than Slater, but he's just as good in attack.

Uate and Boyd who played in 2011 arnt clearly better than Briscoe and Hall, infact I question wether they're better at all. Fair enough they're better in the centres but Inglis has so many bad games in him, Lyon and Morris are class though but Reed doesn't seem to struggle against playing against this level of opposition every week and Watkins looks better than him.

Its only Smith Thurston and Cronk who just make the difference, but people still insist we are miles behind them but will never explain how. If we swapped our 6 7 and 9 with there's we'd win.


I am surprised that you can omit Slater as being of no importance within the Australian set-up? There is a difference in the opposition that Tomkins face in each and every domestic game that they take part in B/kid and as good as Sam can be in S/L he is a long way from proving that he would be equally as dangerous facing much sterner defencies on a weekly basis like those in the NRL.
Sorry but you are misguided to believe that there is little if any difference between Sam and Billy and I would definitely swop theirs for ours withou any hesitation whatsoever.

You though absolutely spot on concerning the halves. The coach should have the know how to perceive that the combination of Sinfield and Chase is on a World scale a pretty poor combination and simply not good enough to compete with either Thurston /Cronk or Johnson/Marshall. Unfortunately although we now do have a decent array of players from which to select our side from, we have a coach who it seems is focussed upon players whom he cannot look beyond and can simply only choose from his own favourites without recourse to others who are not being given opportunities to show their worth.

Finally; yes again, Watkins does look a superb athlete with the ball in hand! However his defence does leave a lot to be desired and unless this improves dramatically (which I for one hope that it does) he could prove to a be liability also if called upon to defend against teams from OZ and NZ. The latter which you seem to dispel as poor or worse? Well I would not be shouting that too loudly as the Kiwi side next November will bear little resemblence to that which we beat in last years tri series, on that score you can rest assured.