We need a quick halfback to partner the organising Sinfield. Not sure it's Widdop, but plenty of time for players to show what they've got. Will be interesting to see if Brough can be consistent.
I like Hock as a sub, he can make an impact either at 2nd row or prop. How much he plays can depend on the state of the game - if we're winning do a McDermott and don't use him.
Tomkins has to be at fullback.

At Least with Brough in the team we'd have a bona-fide open play kicker in the side, who has the boot to go for 40/20's.

Sinfield will play regardless as he is captain, therefore I'd go with:

1) Tomkins
2) Charnley
3) Cudjoe / Watkins
4) Reed
5) Hall
6) Widdop
7) Sinfield


Hill
9) Roby
10) Mossop
11) S.Burgess
12) Farrell
13) O'Loughlin

14) Burrow
15) G.Burgess
16) Graham
17) Ellis................. if fit?

I'd have an impact bench!

I'd go with:

Tomkins
Briscoe/Charnley
Watkins
Cudjoe
Hall
Sinfield
Brough
Graham
Roby
Hill
Westwood
Ellis
S Burgess

Burrow
G Burgess
Crabtree
Hock

Still out suspended. Should be hungry by the time he returns, just so long as he doesn't bite off more than he can chew.

_________

I expect the captain will play and if he does I expect he'll play at six.

Tomkins

Hardaker
Watkins
Reed/Cudjoe
Hall

Sinfield
Widdop/Brough

Graham
Roby
S.Burgess
Westwood
Ellis/Farrell
O'Loughlin

Burrow
Hock
Hill
G.Burgess/Crabtree

Have bracketed a few because I haven't seen enough of the NRL players and have no idea how Ellis will come back from injury.

Peacock in with Burgess to 2nd row, Westwood to bench and Crabtree out should JP decide to unretire.

Ratchford, Charnley, Ablett, Myler, Lomax, Carvell, Clark, McIlorum, JJB, Ferres to round out the squad.

[url=http://www.loverugbyleague.com/news_11528-inu-suspended.htmlJames Graham will miss one match after being charged by the match review committee for dangerous contact during a Holden Cup clash.[/url

Graham will be available to face the Roosters on April 12.

From the limited NRL I have seen wouldn't have widdop in the team or reed either Watkins and either cudjoe or Atkins in the centre for me

Thanks for the update wheels - in truth I don't follow the NRL - does it show? www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/leag ... 271tw.html I particularly liked this bit: Quote ="Daniel Anderson" He said he saw the prop ''goaded on a number of occasions'', but that Graham ''didn't retaliate; he didn't really react other than to just get on with the game'''" Hardly an accurate description of the player charging off the bench while frothing at the mouth to replace Fa'asavalu in March 2009 and no-one was even goading Graham then - although in fairness that was after Anderson's time in charge at Knowsley Road.

Thanks for the update wheels - in truth I don't follow the NRL - does it show? www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/leag ... 271tw.html I particularly liked this bit: Quote ="Daniel Anderson" He said he saw the prop ''goaded on a number of occasions'', but that Graham ''didn't retaliate; he didn't really react other than to just get on with the game'''" Hardly an accurate description of the player charging off the bench while frothing at the mouth to replace Fa'asavalu in March 2009 and no-one was even goading Graham then - although in fairness that was after Anderson's time in charge at Knowsley Road.

Either way we'll get stuffed by Oz.

Sinfield is too slow and will be shut down easily; Widdop cannot organise and needs Smith and Cronk. Now that would be better...find a reason and good enough incentive for the latter two to represent England.



Now who the heck suggested Watkins as England FB?? Credibility shot to pieces there methinks

I wouldn't agree with this at all. Gareth Widdop is in the best team in the world for a good reason, not just because he is playing with Smith and Cronk.

To keep them under the cap?

Widdop's is fine player however, I think that Myler, Chase, McGuire etc would do just as well playing alongside the pivots Melbourne have.

Indeed.

He's also cheap, I would imagine.

Melbourne's answer to Ian Kirke.

I know. I hate it when people ruin their credibility by suggesting stupid positional switches and other far-fetched team selections.

Steady on.



He was good enough for GH to try and sign him.

So was Kirke..... successfully in fact.

You really think that?

Widdop is a decent half back, playing on limited cash in a team of very expensive Superstars.

Widdopp has very little experience in either organising the Storm or kicking in open play. From what I've seen I think he could do a lot more, and would if it were necessary. Until one of Smith/Cronk retires, Widdopp will remain a bit-part player - then I think we'll see him move up the ranks to take on more responsibility. At the moment he'd have to be played alonsgide Sinfield rather than replace him, if he plays at all.

I'd be really happy if England had a stand off (or scrum half) that could control a game and be dangerous with the ball. But we don't. Sinfield, for all his faults (lack of pace etc) is the sort of player who can keep a team structured throughout a game, and generally shows the sort of calmness and control that is vital. I don't like the fact that Sinfield may be the best stand off option for England, but I fully understand McNamara's reasoning in selecting him.

The difference is Australia have halfbacks who can provide structure and are outstanding playmakers.

BTW George Burgess is looking like a complete monster. If he stays fit and in Souths' first team, he'll be an automatic pick for the bench.

I'd agree with all of that, Brisbane.

Though I would say it's often easier for Australian half backs to fit in and play for Australia as I think the NRL teams play is more similar to each other than it is in SL.

The more I see Tomkins play for Wigan nowadays, the more he seems to be starting to look like a player who doesn't just thrive from having space as a fullback, but also can create that space with his elusive capabilities. Thus the more he plays, the more he looks like a stand-off and not a fullback to me.

For me, we need something special to stop falling embarrassingly short at the international level. We need the four most explosive players in Super League. With this in mind as well as what I've already said regarding Tomkins, this leaves the pivots for England to be Lomax at fullback, Tomkins at 6 and Brough at 7 and Roby at 9. Each of those have the X-factor needed to defeat Australia.,

An "X" factor won't beat Australia without being part of a highly structured unit. The lack of ability to focus on each set of 6 and stay calm under pressure is what undid Sean Long at international level - one game in Sydney being the exception that proved the rule.

Tomkins aside none of those 4 players have an X Factor or anything else that Australia would be that worried about either TBH.

If (and it's a massive if) Tomkin plays at 6, Hardaker on form is different class to Lomax at 1.

Fully agree with Brisbane's last post but one re Sinfield. As for Tomkins, I don't see him enjoying more than a fraction of the attacking opportunities from fullback that he does in SL. If his duties were purely defensive I'd rather see a fit Hardaker at FB.
It'd be utter madness to leave Sam out but even with his undoubted X factor there could be problems ahead.

Tomkins should be picked at fullback IMO. It allows him to be spontaneous, pick and choose where and when he joins in and attack and generally be the sort of off-the-cuff opportunist that can make things happen.

Of course he'll get fewer opportunities against the Aussies than he does against a SL side, but he still needs to be in the best position to take them.

I wouldn't actually object ot pairing Lomax with Sinfield in the halves, with the right threat in the 3/4 (for me ths means Atkins playing alongside Watkins).

There might be better options than this defensively, but I'm sick of England/GB being ultra-conservative against the Aussies and still getting beaten. I'd rather we at least posed a few questions and played some rugby. I'm all for pragmatism to get results, but if it isn't getting the results....