Hes 'good' like you said but good will never win us anything, just look at the aussie centres and you get what i mean

I cant think of anyone to automatically replace him but senior (and to a lesser extend gleeson) both are there due to any real pressure for their places

Exactly, there's no point picking out players and saying they're not good enough to play at international level, if they're one of the best 17 available English players then they will play for England, whether they're world class or mediocre.

thought senior was actually one of our better performers...

He's a star

senior was one of our better players in the last too games for sure, so was gleeson for that matter unlike others

purdem was not up to the job, made 3 errors last night that sinfield would never have made, the first goal kick, the kick out on the full and the school boy knock on when we needed to score at the end, not a lot of errors but in big games this really matters,

purdem has never had big game time, fact..... his biggest game of the year is home to the dragons with a nice end of season holiday whilist the big guns play in the big games.

wellens and gardener were shocking full stop. wellens is done at this level

the fact the callders was for sale and leeds, bradford, siants and the wire didnt even think about him says it all, not to mention wigan wanted rid.

i would have played JJB and smith instead of wilkin and callders, but thats just me.

Purdham may not be an international class 13, if anything he is a decent SL-level second row, but he was a much, much better option than Sinfield last night. It was the first game of the tournament where we had ideas, and looked organised, in attack: Without Sinfield, England finally played a half back combination that worked as a unit. Contrast that to the games where Sinfield was on the pitch, where he sucked in the first or second receiver ball far too often, and his lack of forward momentum or creativity stifled our three-quarter play. Sinfield is an average 5/8th, and to play him at 13 deadens the side. Purdham made too many errors, but structurally it was far and away the right decision to play him.

far point and i dont disagree, i just felt the purdem made errors that have no place at this level, i have no doubt in those positions sinfield would have done better. the buck stops with purdem when he is restart and goal kicker.

Unless Sinfield picks the team you can hardly blame him for Smith not selecting McGuire and Burrow at 6 & 7 until yesterday. In all 3 games prior Smith has never once thought it might be useful to see how the club combination of Sinfield, McGuire and Burrow would work together. It was also the first game so far where we had both hookers in the 17 which quite frankly was astonishing. For me it was the biggest no-brainer imaginable.
Howwever, I think Purdham deserved his place in the 17, he certainly offered more than Hock or Wilkin have so far.

Senior gets stick because he's knocking on a bit, once you get "old" you become an easy target.

Senior gets stick because defensively he is a shambles, he doesnt understand he actually has a wingman, on the rare occasions he realises he does he cant pass properly and finally he comes inside consistently because he doesnt have the vision of a real centre.

These are qualities that make him possibly the best British centre of the past 10 years, it is completely laughable.

silly old goat

I doubt Senior has even noticed Scott Donald all year. You re-define "idiot" in so many ways.

i know what his girlfriend has against him.

Im not interested in what he has done in SL, which quite clearly is light years away from top level rugby.

He has shown his ineptitude to all the world in Australia.

if he's a shambles then wellens do not pass go, go directly to a bottom half SL club or national league 1.

wellens has never been in the same class as keith, and when wellens is keiths age he will be only fit enough to run the tee and water on(if the ref stops the clock for him)

I agree Wellens is also a shambles.

I'd say in their respective positions in the SL, theyre both about equal. However, that is a different story to how they fare against the real good players.

I hate to repeat myself, but you re-define idiot in so many ways.

I dont have anything againt him.

I just think hes cr@p

You dont need to repeat anything.

Its fairly obvious you havent got a clue.

You think the fact Senior has done okay in a competition which has proven to be rubbish is a decent defence of a player who has just shown himself to be garbage against the very best.

No need to come back to your idiotic point.

Well I think Senior has been solid which was about what was expected of him.

Did anyone really think he would have been a stand out player in this world cup?

What's worrying is he is still head and shoulders above most english centres (and probably wingers!)

He smacked BJ Mather callously, never been liked since.

I dont completly blame Senoir for is defence you have blame the Smith because he used to use the same tactics for Leeds putting him on the inside of Burrows and that where most trys came down that side i know a few Pro have noticed the weakness in Smiths defencive plan.

His brother's a Chelsea fan...

The right side of Hock or Wilkin / Gleeson / Gardner was far, far worse defensively.

Its OK bagging Senior for not being as good as the Aussie centres, but he's not exactly in his prime now is he?
In 2003 / 2004 he was at least as anything the Aussies or Kiwis had.
Its not his fault that no other English centre has emerged to dislodge him from the team.

Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.