WCE - I agree with pretty much all of that. I think we were good enough to win, even without odd refereeing decisions. I thought I was the only one who thought that our right hand defence was all over the shop. In addition to the 3 tries, they could have had 3 more. It was much worse than in the first 2 games. I thought on re-watching that it was because McGillvray positioning was absolutely all over the place, coming in too soon, or not being in position at all. Which made me wonder about the universal "he's world class" acclaim. That said, it was structural, and presumably he can be taught where to stand. Plus, often the wingers positioning is a consequence of what is happening inside him, and he might have had to fly in because of the failings of others. Still, we got away with it this time.
Yes. I thought McGilray had a good game, but his positioning may have been a little off. Certainly, the problems stemmed from NZ throwing the ball wide quickly, and our defence not getting back across in time/spotting the danger. How the Kiwis fluffed so many try-scoring opportunities I'll never now. On such fine margins are test series won and lost.
I think it's credit to England that they ground out the win, despite looking pedestrian for the most part. Our forwards can make ground, but we just seemed lacking ideas. For example, no inside runners. not much running in pairs. In fact we didn't seem to run onto the ball that much at all.
We took the few try-scoring opportunities we had: New Zealand didn't. We have away some silly penalties as well, but for the most part were good enough defensively. At crunch moments, the Kiwis weren't. Fine margins, but delighted we came out on top - on too many occasions in the recent past against NZ and Australia, it's been a different story.