Dunbar

Welcome to the board, I hope you enjoy the chat. At risk of turning this into a cross code conversation (let's not do that everyone please!), I just wanted to ask, as I am genuinely interested, was it Rugby League you played briefly as a kid and is it Rugby League your son is now playing in school?

While we are having a bit of a user experience discussion. On my device, when an ad pops up (which I understand is part of the commercial world of websites), and I close it, it scrolls the screen back up to the top of the page. That is annoying.

It's taken me almost 20 years to get over that tri nations final... and it gets brought up again. Back to therapy.

That’s a good question. I think the answer is; could they have beaten Australia, yes; would they; don’t know. What I know is that Australia have not played particularly well in their two games in the Pacific Championships despite an 18-0 win over Tonga and a 22-10 win over New Zealand. But these two opponents were desperately short of creativity in the spine: The Kiwis turning to Shaun Johnson, partnered by Charnze Nicoll-Klokstad who is never a stand off. Keano Kini is a good young full back and Phoenix Crossland a decent (but second choice) club 9. Tonga had a young Lehi Hopoate in at 1, Tuimoala Lolohea at 6, Isaiya Katoa at 7 and Siliva Havili at 9. Again, not a spine full of creativity. What they both had was good forwards and outside backs that could carry the ball well. But England have those and in Weslby, Williams, Smith and Clark they a far superior spine to either of the two teams Australia have defeated. Turning to the Kangaroos themselves. We have said for years that every generation is not as good as the last… but one day that will be true. Moses and Dearden in the halves are good but not great, Harry Grant is a genuinely world class #9 while Dylan Edwards is a solid full back (I personally think that there are better full backs in the NRL Tedesco and Ponga the main two) but Edwards plays a key and specific role for the multi Premiership winners and so got the nod. What Australia will always have is good players from 1 to 17, they don’t have weaknesses, just some players better than others across the team. What I find interesting is that we always assume that the Kangaroos are the consummate professionals. But when we look at some of the key indicators from the two games that each side has played, we see: Errors: England 16, Australia 28 Penalties conceded: England 5, Australia 11 Completion rate: England 86%, Australia 67% Now, there are loads of variables, I get that but those stats almost always stack in Australia’s favour. I really don’t know if England can beat Australia. But do we have the players, yes. Do we have evidence that we will not be blown away by Australia being too professional for us, yes. I would liked to have seen it.

Your first post included 'My grudge is the halves and whilst their were obvious examples of skill, I wasn't impressed with their control or how little they squared their hips and ran the ball.' I assumed your grudge was the part that you were most disappointed with. Anyway, it is not something to have an argument about, if you take my points on what they did well and yours on what to improve, you probably have Wane's plans for the next 12 months.

Well, we are all entitled to our opinion but I think you are wide of the mark in your analysis. I thought in both games Radley (initially) and then Knowles did a good job of regularly taking the run option rather than the shift out the back. This kept the discipline of the set structure pretty well. As for the halves. They clearly had a better overall kicking game than Samoa and Smith’s long kicking game complements Williams who excels in the shorter attacking kicks. I cannot agree the halves were the weakest part of the English performance. Game 1: Williams 4 line break assists and 3 try assists Game 2: Smith 4 line break assists and 2 try assists Where I do agree. We can and should get better but we have the best half back combination that I can remember.

Yes, that has happened to me. When embedding a tweet, sometimes it works and sometimes it says there is no tweet at the url.... yet when I paste it into another browser window, it is fine. I blame Musk. Or his mum, one of the two.

My personal view is that it would be less valuable than a camp and a game against France. But I am not the England coach,

Is there a limit to how many players Wane can bring into a single England rep camp... not sure why having two separate camps is favourable? If the game was going raise the bar in the quality of Rugby League in this country, I would be all for it. But I don't see how it is going to do that.

With a bit of bring back the biff... a good old fashioned 'all in' 18 man brawl!

I really can't agree about the halves - I thought both Smith and Williams engaged the line and squared up the defense really well in the shift plays and their execution consistently created space on the edges. You can see this in the tries but they were doing it well all game. Add the game management of the long kicking game (Smith in particular) and the repeat sets won and I don't think there is a lot to complain about with the performance of the two.

I don't really understand Shaun Wane's perspective on this. I really can't see how a Roses match can offer any type of preparation, it will have player withdrawals and I am not sure it would be any more intense or competitive than a top end Super League game. What could he learn about the players that he doesn't already know. I would have thought having the squad together to bond and practice together would be far more valuable time - even if 80 minutes on the pitch are not the most challenging against France, the time spent would be.

There are only 3 things that seem to be universally true on the Internet... well the part that I seem to inhabit anyway. The answer to any boxing question is 'Prime Tyson'. The answer to any superhero question is 'Batman with prep time'. And the answer to any Rugby League growth question is '9's'. In fact, I'm surprised we haven't had a suggestion that the Ashes next year be a 9's game yet.

I just don't see it. If we could ever get to the profile and rivalry of Origin then maybe but that is a separate argument. What will happen in reality is that clubs will pull players out claiming injury and player welfare and the gane will be less intense than a Super league round and Wane will learn nothing about his players. There is already loads of noise about how many games our players play... the best preparation for a Kangaroo series next year is for them to actually play less and be better prepared physically.

I can only see good things in the future for this topic.

I think where your argument falls down is that England will not be playing in a Roses fixture.

It would be. We hear all the time on here that the Australians and NRL don't care about anyone else and only look at their own best interests. With our attitude to playing France, we are no better.

I hope that the Raiders play Nicholson on an edge, I think it was a mistake moving him to 13.

Two clean breaks is not bad for your first cap. He didn't look out of place at all, and of course he is still learning. It is impossible to see the future but if all goes well, I remain convinced that Nsemba and KPP can be an outstanding second row partnership - 6' 5" and 6' 6" respectively and both good athletes.

I agree. This is an area Nsemba has to improve, he did look knackered at times. And he wasn't an 80 minute player for Wigan this year, he needs that in 2025.

England made 5 errors today, conceded 4 penalties and one six again. Set completions 36 out of 40 (90%). That is a pretty disciplined performance considering they were happy to move the ball around a bit. For context, the Kangaroos completion rate in the Pacific Championship has been 61% in week 1 (24 from 39) and 79% in week 2 (31 from 39)

Worth noting that Bateman was the only England forward to play the full 80 today.

Australia are better, and the Vegas game and series will be tough. But I am encouraged that this new generation of English players seem like good athletes and technically pretty good, they are clearly getting better coaching from a younger age. They have to test themselves against the best and I am sure they are looking forward to it.

Well, considering they suggest Simi Sasagi never got on the pitch when he actually played 43 minutes, I would suggest the BBC got it wrong yes. May played 56 minutes across 2 stints, details here England v Toa Samoa - Round 3, 2024 - Match Centre | NRL.com

He played 57 minutes. Thompson played 58.