GaryO - You're wrong.
In game 1, despite a relative lack of territory, it finished 5 tries to 4.
In game 2, england posted 30 points in circa 20 minutes. Has any team scored as many points yet in such a time frame?
It's become a cliche to criticise the england halves. It feels like it's all fans have done for the last 20 years, since we had the likes of Schofield, edwards, gregory et al.
England's problem, for some time has been the forwards. They always run out of steam (insert time here 50min, 60 min, 65min), they never manage to maintain a high intesnity for the full 80 minutes.
The problem in game 1 was the forwards, not the halves. They give silly penalties away and make errors. Not enough provide consistent hard hits ups. In game one, G.Burgess (who was one of our better forwards) made a mistake in midfield under no pressure. You simply can't give up field position that easy in test match footy against the best.
So england gift australia field position, and then lack the structure and decision making in defence to shut down the plays that australia put on. Remember the semi in 2008 against NZ? We constantly gifted NZ field position, NZ would move the ball down our right, with a 2 wave dummy runner and it was like a parting of the red sea, again and again. Naturally that defeat was all the fault of mcguire and the halves - ha!
My point is, it's incredibly bemusing for me to sit here and read someone bleating about sinfield and the halves again, considering the play we have witnessed in the first 2 games. Do you want me to go through a play by play analysis of england's first 2 games?
England's problem isn't sinfield or the halves.