3 seasons in a row scoring 30 tries for Hall yet some deem him still not good enough. A lot said we would find out how good he was without Senior next to him. He still kills it. As good as some of the younger ones are coming through they arent yet as good as Hall or Briscoe.

Because he's had his chance and I feel it's time to give someone else a go. I would have actually picked McGilvary and Briscoe, but McBanana decided against picking him.

Do you think Hall is the best winger but wouldnt pick him as he's already "had his chance" at international? Havnt Graham, Roby, Morley, Ellis, Westwood and O'Loughlin already "had their chance"?

Sam Tomkins
Ryan Hall
Ryan Atkins
Kirk Yeaman
Tom Briscoe
Gareth Widdop
Danny Brough
Jamie Peacock
James Roby
James Graham
Gareth Ellis
Ben Westwood
Kevin Sinfield

Eorl Crabtree
Adrian Morley
Sean O'Loughlin
Rob Burrow

Hall was excellent last night. He's fast, strong, very impressive under kicks, he's nobody's fool and can make good yards out of dummy half. He's also played well at international level before.

I think Robinson deserves to be in the england squad as he was one of few decent performers last time round.

Wouldn't have Joel Tomkins in the team to be honest. Definiatly not at centre anyway.

We just need to support the team because usually we are on a hiding to nothing. The NRL is a lot tougher and they play less games so I expect our players will start to feel the pain. It's great to have competition for places though. When was the last time we were arguing over wingers because there's more than one who could do a job.

Just let's not leap down their throats if we don't win. There's a lot of kids coming through and it would benefit the national team if we could encourage them even when mistakes are made.

The problem we have is that we lack athletes. Most players in the England side are pseudo-athletes. Good players, but lacking in athletic ability.

League is a game of inches, our players aren't big enough, fast enough or explosive enough to hang with the Aussies or Kiwis. We might go okay every now and then, but generally we're not there.

More and more the gap will widen as the Aussies and Kiwis fill their teams with freak athletes, especially with the rise of Polynesians and Melanesians playing the game down there, practically built for collision sports like League and football.

Size isn't everything but our players aren't near fast enough or explosive enough. Look at players like Bill Tupou, Hoffman, Uate, Slater, Vatuvei, Inglis, Hayne etc. We have nothing to compare.

I'm not saying we don't have players with close to the same skill level, but that's only half the battle. Athletically we fall short, certainly in the backs, but also in the forwards we lack any sort of bench impact or genuine explosiveness - too many work horses.

The rise of athleticism in League has been England's undoing, in my opinion. So skill and athleticism must improve, hand in hand... and it is doing, but that improvement counts for nothing when Aus and NZ are improving too. Our team is good, our players are better and more athletic than they've ever been, but we haven't closed the distance or come close to it.

I'm sorry to say that I don't think it will happen. The only way we'll surpass Australia and New Zealand is for the NRL to crumble.

Take it you dont watch many games?

Take it you never went to school? If you have some disagreement with what I've said, state it and argue to the contrary - or don't respond.

SL players have less skill and are inferior athletes. That much is obvious. You can't name a single English player as explosive as Tupou, Hoffman or Uate, and they're but 3 examples.

I think the problem is that this is far too much of a sweeping statement

Very few people would disagree that the NRL is top class rugby and has some great athletes but watching the NRL Grand Final this morning, George Rose is a ridiculously fat man who is clearly not an athlete

Naming individual players is fine, but saying things like “SL players have less skill and are inferior athletes” is just silly

I agree slightly in that Australiaare probably slightyl faster stronger etc.

But i always was coached as a kiad, Rugby league is 20% Physical, and 80% mental. It's a simple game, get your shoulder into their ribs and work hard.

In 09, Hayne was the best player in the world, think he was the Dally M medal winner. Fast, physically superb condition. in the 09 four nations he got outjumped by Peter Fox (who probably wouldn't even be considere dfor England now) to score a superb try from a kick. I know it's one example, but my point is, if you want something more than the other player, you'll probably get it.

But SL players do have less skill and are inferior athletes. And George Rose is an enforcer, nothing more. He's also exceptions, there's always exceptions. Generally speaking NRL players are far superior athletes. It can't be questioned.

So the NRL players are all better athletes and more skillfull than Super League players – apart from the ones who aren’t

OK, now I understand

Woh, hold on a second! Where the did I say all NRL players are better athletes and more skillful? Don't put ing words into my mouth, mate.

I was, quite clearly, speaking in generalities. Not once did I imply or suggest anything to the contrary. And you know it.

Absolutely, I'm not trying to say physicality is the be and end all because I don't think it is. But the problem I think we have is that right now the Aussies and Kiwis have the edge on us mentally and in terms of skill. And most people address this and say we need to get better here.

But I do think a lot of people overlook the importance of raw athleticism. We don't have enough 'gun' athletes. Haynes aerial game has never been superb as he strikes me as quite a heavy kid, but with ball in hand and off the mark he's like a ball of energy. I remember seeing a clip from the NRL Footy show of Hayne training with Usain Bolt and my god for his size he can get into gear in a blink!

This is something that can be easily changed with better training, I think.

The problem I think we're close to having is that while we have a skillfull team they're falling short athletically. I definitely believe it's far more important than people realise. I would be the vast majority of Aussies and Kiwis would wipe our respective opposites in some sort of cross-athletic test to measure speed, power etc

Whether they have better playing numbers or better conditioning and training or even a better combination of the 2 I'm not sure. All I know is every year a couple of kids come into the NRL like Tupou and Hoffman, but I've never seen any fb/s and wingers bred in the SL who are as fast, strong and explosive. The NRL seem to be developing kids who wouldn't look out of place in an NFL team were they raised in that part of the world. We're short on freak athletes I feel. Jason Robinson was probably the last truly outstanding athlete we had.

It read to me like you were making sweeping generalisations.

And why not take it further.

queensland players are for the most part more athletic and skillful than NSW players, and they wont catch up unless Queensland RL collapses...

But I wasn't making a sweeping generalisation, I was making a generalisation - There's a difference. One is a fallacy, one isn't.

And to compare the gap between QLD and NSW to the gap between AUS, NZ and England is, at best, laughable. NSW could go on a 4 year winning streak starting next year, England cannot and will not.

Another reason for the superiority of NZ and Aus may well be their appreciation and love for most sports. Touch football over this is massive, and I've seen many players credit their skills to basketball, both of which are largely absent over here.

Basically you wont accept any argument that isnt "ZOMG the NRL is the BEST!"

To be honest, this statement



You’re not saying some Super League players are less athletic than the NRL players, you have collectively called them ‘Super League players’

If you didn’t mean that SL players are inferior athletes to NRL players, why did you say that SL players are inferior athletes to NRL players?

I'm sorry but you're wrong. I neither said nor implied, at any point in this thread, that every NRL player is superior to every SL player.

What I'm saying - which is quite clear if you'd care to read - is that NRL players are (generally) superior athletes and have superior skills than SL players. My posts aren't complicated or confusing.

I suppose you would also like to me to start - or end - every sentence with 'in my opinion', just on the off chance that some semi-literate members wrongly assume I'm promoting my statements as fact?

Gareth Ellis is a far superior player to Hoffman and was when he was here in this country.

And if you read carefully, you will see that I have said that is far too sweeping a statement

Sure some NRL players are better athletes that Super League players but equally, some SL players are better than NRL players

I can honestly say that watching the NRL Grand Final this morning that the players were not clearly more athletic than the Wigan and Saints players the day before (the player I have mentioned before, George Rose, would be a laughing stock in SL)

28 thousand post later and you still retain the ability to talk .