Amused to read "brave England lose" in the headlines. I've always found it a patronising phrase the English press trott out when a naff team loses by a fine margin to a better team. Shoe's on the other foot for once as it's typically reserved for the Scots.
Can't agree with much of the above, England played to their strengths against objectively a better team. If they'd tried to play wide, expansive, attacking rugby they'd have got smashed. I disagree with the "don't score tries you don't win" as, much like NFL, you can be extremely effective with a robust and organised defence unlike football where you do need goals. If you're disciplined, fast and hard in defence then you actually tend to win. Someone earlier summed it up nicely and compared it to peak Tigers which I think summed it up nicely for me. It'd be nice to have more flair, but the tournament would potentially have been shorter lived if they had done that. This is one of the weakest England times with respect to indvidiuals for a while and sometimes the Mourinho approach is a necessity to have a chance.
Either way, was a great effort which is all that can be asked in any international tournament. Unusually England left a tournament with a higher opinion of them than entering. More often than not it's the other way around.