Widdop 6 - thought he played ok, looked dangerous with the ball in hand, bit weak defensively
Goulding 6 - didn't get much chance to impress, but didn't do much wrong
Shenton 7 - good 2nd half
Atkins 4 - rubbish, got the size for a centre but poor decision making and poor defensively
Briscoe 7 - played really well without getting much ball
Brown 5 - great club player but just not international standard
S Tomkins 7 - looked dangerous when not trying to play scrum half, needs to cut out the stupid stuff though and concentrate on playing rugby
Fielden 6 - few silly errors, not quite up to standard
Roby 6 - very poor first spell, did better in the second half
Graham 8 - immense, played prop and stand off!
Ellis 7 - did well, took the ball in hard
Burgess 5 - disappointing by his standards
O'Loughlin 6 - played ok, not sure if he really has the quality at this level

Robinson 7 - a bit weak defensively, but made a difference going forward
Griffin 5 - not really up to scratch
Westwood 7 - never been too much of a fan in the past but he has developed in a really good quality forward
J Tomkins 6 - did ok when he came on

Think you've been a bit generous with the rest of them but I think that's harsh. I thought he was one of our best players.

To be fair, a team that had a fair few players who had never gone on tour before and was missing some of it's best players (Morely, Peacock, Eastmond) got to 14 points of the world champions, I think it's fair to say it was a better than average performance.

I don't think it was though, too many mistakes, SHOCKING defending. There are very few players there who played to remotely how they could.

I know its a young side but at the end of the day the scoreline flattered us. Say what you want about the ref but we scored 2 tries back to back in a 5 minute spell that saved us from being nilled.

We can play a lot, lot better than that and need to do do anything is this tournament.

Just don't think he's a world class 13. Big, strong, good hands, but not quite up there on the international stage. I'd think rather see Sinfield there if only for his organisational skills, and that says a lot cos I don't really rate Sinfield that much either!

Widdop 5 - out of his depth
Goulding 6 - ok
Shenton 7 - looked dangerous when he finally got the ball in a decent position
Atkins 3 - was he on the field?
Briscoe 6 - never got much of a sniff
Brown 4- give the skinny runt a pie or something and teach him how to kick a ball!
S Tomkins 7- only dangerous player on the field for Eng
Fielden 5 - nothing much has changed
Roby 6 - ok but disappointing
Graham 7- took a while but worked hard and 2nd half looked the only forward to be making a dent
Ellis 6- disappointing, needs to run his Wests angles out wide with Tomkins sliding across and feeding him
Burgess 5 - big let down
O'Loughlin 7 - decent game
Robinson 5 - too small for test football hooker
Griffin 6 - ok
Westwood 8- one bad tackling error but other than that looked Englands best
J Tomkins 6- went ok

No way would I rather have Sinfield at 13 instead of Lockers. Sinfield would be in the side but at hooker for me.

I think O'Loughlin is good enough on the international stage, tackled everything that moved, made good metres, made a break. Couple of quality passes and a couple of decent kicks.

It doesn't matter when you score the tries it's scoring them that counts. At the end of the day that team we had hasn't played together very often against a team who has a core that has played together many times and are the world champions.

In England we bag players too much IMO instead of giving credit. If we'd have got hammered it'd have been "Oh we're crap", if we got close (as we did) it would have been "Oh we were lucky" and if we'd have won it would have been "Oh NZ were poor, Aus would have hammered us". In the last few years we'd have crumbled in that second half but we kept going, we wasn't fluent in attack but stick 4 pivots who have hardly played together into the same team (which misses 4 pivots who would have probably fit in somewhere i.e. Eastmond, McGuire, Pryce and Sinfield) and you'll get that IMO.

But we didn't look like competing apart from those 5 minutes. I can accept a defeat if we completed our sets, and forced them to score tries the hard way. But the ones they scored were from very poor defence, and our completion rate was very poor.

And yet we still got to within 14 points of the world champions. It was an encouraging performance IMO.

They were World Champions in 2008 not last week, its a title only not a current reality.
They have not beat Australia since and have lost against England.
A snapshot in time not an ongoing legacy.

First half was awful, second much better. If we can learn from that then hopefully we can give Aus a game. Still, we are seriously lacking a player with organisational skills and a kicking game, probably one of the biggest problems we've got IMO.