Smith made some pretty strange decisions regarding selection; Dropping Smith, retaining Calderwood, Wellens, Gardner, playing two 6's and two 9's in the 17, Wellens rather than Hock, only picking 4 props, etc.

However saying all that the players on the pitch were only 6 points off and could easily have levelled the game until the last 2 mins despite making more mistakes than I have ever seen in a test match.

THe fundamental problem however is not the coach - before the comp started almost everyone was sure that the likes of Pryce, Roby, Morley, Peacock were very good players.

We have to look at why players who look like worldbeaters at club level look like amateurs at internatonal level.

The MAIN reason is that we play a COMPLETELY different game in ESL than they do in the NRL (and therefore at International level due to the pathetic obsession to pandering to the aussies).

ESL rules reward the style of players who are superstars in our game.

The NRL does not.

The outcome is obvious. When we play to NRL rules, our superstars are not given a platfrom to peform and are therefore made to look ordinary.

When we play to ESL standards (World Cup Challenge) our superstars have the platform to display their unique style of skills and we show we can compete.

So,

the real issue is how we want to police and enforce our game which ultimately dictates how we will develop our game - do we want to develop a quick, speedy, entertaining thrills/spills, game or do we want to develop a more controled, technical, skilful game?

can smith share the blame ??

And if he was aware of this you would have thought he would have blooded more players with an eye to 2013.
But what does he do he says 'you are playing Leeds and you have played for Great Britain and wont be available in 2013 and have got slugged by the Aussies in the past so you're in and you are playing for Saints and you have also played for great Britain and wont be available in 2013 and have got slugged by the Aussies so you're in' etc etc

read Ricky Stuart b.b.c.co.uk/rugby league,totally agree with every word he says.

The thing is that 24 players left our shores with reasonable form and ability and confidence. When you can say only 4 players performed to a reasonable standard and the remaining 20 players didn,t, the fault has got to belong to Tony Smith.

I don,t know what has gone on over there, time will tell......but when you see a team play without any skill, passion, pride, "british bulldog" mentality, you wonder if the coaching of the national side is good enough.

For my team players St Helens, I,ve seen more errors by them in the world cup than the whole of superleague last year. So who is responsible for that.

The coach should stay. It only masks the problem.

Maybe only a handful of players performed up to scratch because only a handful of players are able to?

I wouldn't fault the effort, just the execution of simple skills and decision making in attack and defence.

At the end of the day the coach can't stop players dropping balls that they wouldn't drop in SL. Maybe the step up in pressure was too much for some players to handle?

Smith is totally useless. People slagged off nobles selection policy's etc but Smith's was worse even his handling of the media out there smacked of a desperate man without any idea of what he was supposed to do. He and his employers should do the decent thing and walk as they have done nothing to improve the state of things since 8 years ago.

Without the players what can the coach do?

Noble or Smith - was the end outcome really any different?

Nobles column on the BBC says the same but then he is one of the worst for utilising poor quality imports instead of developing english players

First version please.

And there lies the problem.

Our game can't get much quicker and look at the end result in the last few weeks.