✋ (raises hand) 😁

Lindsey Hooker, second only to Tyldesley’s Frank Fullback in the list of most appropriately named players.

More to the point, I don't think anybody would be shocked if England won a 3 game series against Australia in football

…League in the UK is played in a region decimated by over a decade of austerity, in a country struggling to fund essential services, contending with the behemoth of the EPL. Contrast to Aus where the game dominates as the number 1 sport in thriving cosmopolitan cities. There simply is no comparison

15. but I'm trying to sum up the broader and overarching picture which is very real and is probably at least 50% of the explanation for those more finite details in these big games.

Australia is collectively better for the reasons given and no doubt many more.

End.

14. I think that's where we are.

I know that isn't examining more finite details like dropped balls, missed tackles, poor kicks, poor passes, timing and poor options etc.

13. I'm not trying to be defeatist or over complimentary to Australia. I'm immensely proud of our sport. Comparing it to Football no one would be shocked if Arsenal won against a top club from the Championship right now....(Checks notes)....Coventry City, 3-0 in a 3 game series away at Coventry.

12. It's a regional sport predominantly over here whereas in Australia it's a juggernaut.

Sky sticking with us as long as they have and the way everyone over here has applied themselves have probably made it more competitive and closer than what it should've been backed up by the cold hard stats.

11. Compare that with Australia...where there has generally been a continued upward trajectory rather than regression. Record revenues are the norm now in the Southern Hemisphere.

Why is all this relevant today?

10. Although it came in, in 1996, it took a few years to see some growth but £87million in 1996 spread across the clubs is a lot more than £30million-£40million across clubs as of the last TV deal in more modern times.

£87million in 1996 is approx. £208million today in terms of real terms value.

9. They introduced video analysis into RL and full time professionalism.

Although we've had the odd win and been competitive against Aus occasionally it traces back to then.

Our Super League in the late 90s and early 2000s probably got us as close as we've been since.

8. We were still on part time training techniques (3nts a week after work and basic drills) by the time the 1982 Kangaroos came over and battered us. That's because they'd shifted RL to an RL that was based more on skill, fast paced and aerobic fitness and had been training as such for a long time.

7. ...because at this time the popularity of RL in Australia grew as did broadcast deals as a result and the money in the game went up and up.

Over here we copied / introduced the limited tackle rule but we were much slower to adapt to it and have essentially been playing catch up since.

6. Previously when there were unlimited tackles, it suited our rough, raw-boned forwards to grind with tricky halves playing short passes.

The limited tackle rule switched RL from being less reliant on size and more about fitness and high tempo.

It was a perfect storm....

5. I've done some research and we were competitive or even equal up to the early 1970s.

After that the limited tackle rule came in and we followed. Initially it was 4 tackles per set and then it went to 6.

Australia adapted to this much better.

4. Some of our individuals are better than theirs as seen various players over the years, there'll be more in the future AND we've had joy in World Club Challenges with our club sides, but I still think it's fair to say that the British game collectively isn't on their level unfortunately.

3. I think the way we portray ourselves and think of ourselves is that we see ourselves or think of ourselves as being equivalent to Australia, a bonafide Tier 1 Nation and as big but even though it's hard, untraditional and unpatriotic to think that way, I think we have to accept that we aren't.