Does anyone else think the WC is wrong

[highland convert]

I state again, England were a disgrace. The game may have been gone but the lack of effort was there for anyone to see. Stovo was going ballistic. Where's the passion, where is the pride. They just rolled over. Next game against NZ will be the one to add any value to the competition. If PNG holds Aus better than England the scene is set for a farse of a finale. If England beat NZ questions are asked, If they loose then beat NZ in the semi's Questions are asked. If they don't win another game do they loose their number three ranking. They should. I would rather watch the excellent do or die RL of the lesser nations that the tripe offered up in the E v Oz. NZ v PNG was a good game. One sided but the other was there till the end. Not England. More reminicent of the hud v wigan game, Jim

[cpwigan]

I would ignore Stevo. He has no idea. Do yiou honestly think the English players did not try, were not busting a gut. Truth be told they were shattered. They had to work far far too hard. The Aussies looked veruy fallable when asked to do what England were asked but alas they were only forced to do so for 10-15 minutes. England were asked to do so for 65 minutes. I saw NZ make Aus look awful in a Tri Nation Final, I saw Aus produce 40 minutes in a Tri Nation when England looked awful. Truth be told they were not in both cases.

People often talk about effort/pride etc etc. Far too simplistic IMO. Had the English brawled from the kick off trhemn Stevo would have said nothing about pride but discipline. Why you win or lose a match at the highest levels is about execution of skills and decision making (particularly UNDER PRESSURE).

James Graham was outstanding. Far better than any Scottish / Irish player. Does anybody seriously think Rob Burrow lacks pride/guts/courage when he plays. I always say one hing. If you are prepared to say something, would you say it face to face with the player(s) concerned. I would. Stand me in front of Mathers and I will repeat what I say here.

Analyse the first half. Woeful kicking killed England. Tell me what has kicking got to do with pride/effort? It is a skill. In contrast the Aus kicking was world class. As good as it gets. Calders cocked up on a bomb. An easy take - Skill execution. Bad planning re defensive line up - Skill execution led to the first Aus try - still needed a grubber to get through. A referee mistake failing to spot a knock on gave Aus their second try. Having gained control of the game England blew it by not kicking well, by not passing well - Skill execution. They let the Aussies off the hook. Mary then made 2 glaring errors and the Aussies took advantage - Skill execution. How often in sport does failure to convert pressure into points = points conceded at the other end soon after. First half = Aus had 20 minutes dominance, we had 15. They scored 4 we scored 1.

[cpwigan]

If you want a comparison. Try Leeds v Wigan - GF Eliminator. That game went exactly the same way.

[cpwigan]

Why the nationalistic attack BTW

Was this never about the format?

[Fujiman]

I would ignore Stevo. He has no idea. Do yiou honestly think the English players did not try, were not busting a gut. Truth be told they were shattered. They had to work far far too hard. The Aussies looked veruy fallable when asked to do what England were asked but alas they were only forced to do so for 10-15 minutes. England were asked to do so for 65 minutes. I saw NZ make Aus look awful in a Tri Nation Final, I saw Aus produce 40 minutes in a Tri Nation when England looked awful. Truth be told they were not in both cases.

People often talk about effort/pride etc etc. Far too simplistic IMO. Had the English brawled from the kick off trhemn Stevo would have said nothing about pride but discipline. Why you win or lose a match at the highest levels is about execution of skills and decision making (particularly UNDER PRESSURE).

James Graham was outstanding. Far better than any Scottish / Irish player. Does anybody seriously think Rob Burrow lacks pride/guts/courage when he plays. I always say one hing. If you are prepared to say something, would you say it face to face with the player(s) concerned. I would. Stand me in front of Mathers and I will repeat what I say here.

Analyse the first half. Woeful kicking killed England. Tell me what has kicking got to do with pride/effort? It is a skill. In contrast the Aus kicking was world class. As good as it gets. Calders cocked up on a bomb. An easy take - Skill execution. Bad planning re defensive line up - Skill execution led to the first Aus try - still needed a grubber to get through. A referee mistake failing to spot a knock on gave Aus their second try. Having gained control of the game England blew it by not kicking well, by not passing well - Skill execution. They let the Aussies off the hook. Mary then made 2 glaring errors and the Aussies took advantage - Skill execution. How often in sport does failure to convert pressure into points = points conceded at the other end soon after. First half = Aus had 20 minutes dominance, we had 15. They scored 4 we scored 1.

But would you do it waving pom poms

[cpwigan]

I'd bloody give him the pom poms Fuji

[highland convert]

CPW I think the national pride is coming from you. Graham was woeful. Pryce non existant. Wellan lackluster. He is slow but not that slow. Burrows tried his best to lift them but was fighting a loosing battle. A poor display and I am serious when I say I would swop Mathers for Wellans at fullback. Apart from a short period of the match where Ozz was on the back foot they pushed the English boys around at will. Trust me when I say I would like to see England overturn NZ and the Austrailians but the passion and fire displayed in that game was poor. Jim

[cpwigan]

Ray Warren, Peter Sterling, Matthew Johns, Laurie Daley all raved about Graham and Roby on C9.

Wellens was poor. He made a bad mistake letting a ball run dead that had been touched and was ineffective with the ball in hand. He actually had his worst season fior several with Saints in 2008. Gardener was very poor in defence. Calders was poor too. Senior was okay. Gleeson poor. Pryce. He looked okay when we were dominant. On the back foot non existent. Is he only oood when his team is on top? When needed, he must get in at dummy half and run but is that a stand off? Burrow dangerous from dummy half. Passing/kicking poor. Gutsy in defence. Is he an organiser? Would like to see far more. McGuire did okay when he came on, brought runners back on the inside so at least there was a link. Can he pass the ball to outside backs? Can he organise.

The team was crying out for a Shaun Edwards IMO

Graham - Outstanding, Roby Outstanding Morley, Good. Peacock - BAD TATICAL DECISION by his coach. Ellis - Okay BAD TACTICAL DECISION by his coach. Sinfield - Okayish but what is he? A half back or a forward? Other than his kicking game would Purdham not be better? Purdham can kick. GB need v both Aus and NZ a right hand defence of a Prop, Hooker, Second Row, Loose Forward, Centre, Halfback, Winger. Maybe a halfback then centre. V Aus are they better with Ellis at centre?

Reserves - Hock okay- BAD TACTICAL DECISION by his coach. Should be playing left hand side second row. Mary - A disaster. Wilkin - okay, ran well off Graham.

[cpwigan]

Back to what the thread should be about?

England's record World Cup defeat, which followed Australia's hammering of New Zealand, clearly damaged the credibility of the tournament but that is not to say it should be dismissed as an irrelevance.

Away from the 'super pool', crowds from Canberra to the Gold Coast have enjoyed some spectacular rugby league from the competition's supposed minnows.

Boosted by the presence of a host of stars from Super League and Australia's National Rugby League, Samoa, Tonga, Fiji and Ireland have provided some thrilling fare which has gone a long way towards justifying the controversial and contrived fixture format.

Only the matches involving Australia have so far failed to live up to expectations and the tournament is currently enjoying a healthy average attendance of just over 16,000 which should ensure a decent profit, compared to a £700,000 loss in 2000.

Of longer-term significance, the game in Fiji and Samoa, in particular, will have gained a priceless boost from the performances of their national teams with the promise of more excitement to come.

[highland convert]

How would 4 pools of three work E, A, and NZ in supergroup. they play the roundrobin as does the other three groups. then the supergroup 3rd has to playoff with the winner of one of the other group. The other pair also play off to give the semi finalists. That would save someone like PNG being a saraficial lamb. Jim