While Australia enjoy the luxury of going into tomorrow's World Cup final here against New Zealand with what is being described as their best side for two decades, the inquest on England's early exit turned yesterday to a central-contracts system as one possible means of addressing the gap between the hemispheres.

Richard Lewis, the RFL executive chairman, wants to broaden the investigation of England's downfall, after two defeats by New Zealand and another by a rampant Australia, to include the engage Super League clubs, coaches and players. “I wouldn't want to see central contracts like in cricket and rugby union, involving massive amounts of money and players being taken out of Super League for long periods,” Lewis said. “It's about the ability to work with them, to work in conjunction with their clubs in developing these players a bit more, to put some icing on the cake.”

Lewis's call came as the Rugby League International Federation (RLIF) mapped out a calendar up to 2013, when another World Cup will be staged in Great Britain or Australia, after which the tournament will move to a four-year cycle.

Based on a modest £2.25million profit and a successful staging of the thirteenth tournament in terms of attendances, sponsorship and television viewing figures, Australia is preparing a counter-bid to the RFL's application to host the next World Cup, which will depend on the support of the Government.

But on a day when the RLIF confirmed a series of alternating Four Nations series, starting with England and France hosting Australia and New Zealand next year, Lewis admitted the need for a root-and-branch inquiry to establish where the British game is falling behind its Australasian rival. “It's important to get coaches' and players' perspective,” he said. “I was impressed with the recent conference involving NRL players and coaches, in order to get a broad cross-section of views. I don't think there's a magic wand. It's about [numbers of] overseas players, the different interpretation over the way the game is played around the ruck in Britain and our depth of talent.

“Some of the things we've done over the last couple of years stand up to scrutiny, such as licensing [the system by which teams are granted licences to operate in Super League]. There's no excuse for clubs not investing in British talent, but I don't think there's a quick-fix solution. There were things that were very hard to explain in the World Cup. So many England players played below their potential. I can't give an answer for that and maybe they can't, either, but it wasn't for lack of effort or preparation.

“It is fair to say the pressure built up more each match. Papua New Guinea took England by surprise and then Australia really blew a hole in the confidence of the team. By the time we got to the semi-final, the team were desperate to turn it on against New Zealand, but I don't think the confidence was there.”

Lewis admits that England's results were a setback for the domestic game, but not an insurmountable one. “We had good momentum going into this tournament, good crowds in Super League and increased TV viewing figures. I'm not sure that will stop. The 2009 Four Nations will be built up as our chance for revenge, and in Super League it will fairly quickly be forgotten because we'll see good contests.

“Clubs say they're keen on home-grown players and better quality and reduced quantity of overseas players. We've got to create opportunities for British players, but they've got to be good enough. Under licensing there is a rationale for challenging clubs more. Licensing gives the opportunity to ask more searching questions. There are times [in the cases of some overseas signings] when you do wonder.”