Also some of the players are injured?

i.e. Ben Jones Bishop, Leon Pryce, Richie Myler.

Andy Lynch will probably pick up an injury or decide he'd rather go on total wipeout round about the time the team is due to be named any way. So I don't think there's much point in anybody naming him in their squad.

Lockers has performed well everytime he's played for England apart from when he's been forced to play at 6. He's an outstanding loose forward and no one would do better than him there. Westwood has been immense in his performances for England as well and has showed he's easily comparable to the Aussies/kiwis its players around them that haven't performed. Morley is still one of the top Props in our competition and him, Peacock and Graham should be shoe ins imo.

Lockers has performed well everytime he's played for England apart from when he's been forced to play at 6. He's an outstanding loose forward and no one would do better than him there. Westwood has been immense in his performances for England as well and has showed he's easily comparable to the Aussies/kiwis its players around them that haven't performed. Morley is still one of the top Props in our competition and him, Peacock and Graham should be shoe ins imo.



Ben Harrison is injured aswell aint he ?

Andy Lynch ruled himself out of playing for England a few years ago. Family issues being the main problem. If he was gain for playing I would definitely have him in.



[size=50But in answer to your question - no I thought we were stuck with that squad. Wooops![/size

I think we will see both Farrell and Harrison as 2nd rowers.

Im not sure of the wisdom of throwing in young Burgess, he has done nothing as of yet, other than be young and a Burgess.

Re Brough vs Long, I think it's important that we have a scrum half who plays with structure. That for me was Long's main problem for GB (and he wasn't alone by any means) - great at unstructured plays and the odd planned move but not in just consistently working through sets of 6 to a plan. The idea (still spouted by some of our older 'experts') that some kind of British style of play involving off-the-cuff and inspired moments at the expense of organisation will somehow beat a well-drilled team with any regularity surely has no credibility. What we desperately need is a scrum half who focuses on organising forwards and setting up plays for the 6. If Brough can do that consistently there is no reason why he can't be seen as 'better' than Long at international level.

Watching GB/England in recent years against Australia has far too often being like watching a bunch of park players trying to throw the ball around against a physically superior team with class players. The lack of structure we show (and other basic issues like poor ball security, dreadful kicking games, lack of quality athletes in the backs and complete inability to defend against a structured attack) has made us look worse than we are.

Agree completely we need to play with a simple game plan especially to start with. Complete sets, good kicking game and build pressure. We also need to improve defensive and with that like you say physically as we get bullied in the backs far too often.

Maybe we should go with Brough at 7 and Sinfield at 6, that should ensure theres the organisation plus a good kicking game and S.Tomkins at 1 can implement the speed and running game of a 6 from fullback. The only thing is were that leaves Widdop but that will only be an issue if he plays well throughout this season or could play him from the bench. Maybe in the summer look at a team something like ...

S.Tomkins
Lawrence
Cudjoe
J.Tomkins
Briscoe
Sinfield
Brough
Graham
Roby
Morley
Burgess
Ellis
O'Loughlin
-----------
Widdop
Peacock
Crabtree
Westwood

Reserves... Robinson, Lomax, McGillvary, Shenton, Watkins, Farrell, Harrison, Wood, Patrick, Mossop etc.

Welham and Yeaman are both top try scorers this season. Shenton has defensive capabilities better than most other SL centres but his stats may be flattering due to the amount of work he is having to put in to look after his younger team mates at the moment? What I do not understand is why Bridge is getting in so many peoples teams? He doesn't have as much flair as those at Huddersfield, he is nowhere near the top of the try scoring charts even though he is in a free scoring team right now and his defensive work is nothing compared to Shentons.

Also as someone said we can't go playing players in new positions for their country to those that they are used to playing this season for their clubs like putting Briscoe at centre when he has been playing brilliantly on the wing. Yeaman and Welham are hard to really choose between but overall you would have to say Yeamans defence and partnership with Briscoe could swing it but then Welhams age might be what appeals to SM.

If we are to use this game as a warm up to the 4N then we can't go in to it picking players that are deffinately not going to be involved at the end of the year. If he has no intention of taking someone like Welham because he wants more experience and a defensive back line then don't go picking him for this game, the game is being played so we can be more competative at the end of the year and learn how to play together. Consistancy is the key IMO.

Leroy Cudjoe has scored 1 try in 13 games. Might as well go the whole hog and play Fox on his wing!!

some people are debating whether or not Sinfield should be in the team.

A guy who is IMO one of, if not the best loose forward in SL due to his kicking ability. He can also fit in at 6 (which he has been doing an outstanding job for in place of Mcguire) he also can fill in at hooker.

some people are picking o'loughlin over sinfield? that seems crazy to me, as having sinfield playing (90 mins) is like having an extra stand off and hooker on the bench. and the bench can then be 4 forwards.

The problem with Sinfield (in some people's reasoning) is that he's an inbetween, a jack of all trades. There are better forward orientated players, among them Lockers, and yet he's not a player people consider to have the ability to be an all out half back.

In club rugby, I think you can get away with it, having a guy like this at 13, but when you're up against the Kiwi or Aussie pack, watering down the physicality of the forwards is a poor move.

I have a lot of respect for Sinfield, mainly because I think his on field execution of game plan beat my side for 3 GFs on the trot, but I think [iif[/i he's playing for us, it should be in one of the half backs shirt.

I don't think it does particularly water down the forwards having Sinfield at 13 since his defence is good. The problem has been that Sinfield has been picked at 13 at international level whilst not playing the same role as he does at Leeds and being expected to be an extra second rower. If we're going to have Sinfield at 13 we have to make sure he's playing the same role as he does at Leeds otherwise he should be at 6 or not in the squad.

If we want a workhorse 13 rather than a ball playing 13 then look no further than O'Loughlin. If we want a ball playing 13 then it's Sinfield.

This post sums up some of the problems that England / GB have had over the years.

There is not point picking a team of the best players in their positions and then the coach telling them to play in a different way to what they are used to or in a way that is not based on their strengths.


The coach has to decide the system he wants to play , how he wants players to play and THEN pick the players who can do the job he wants.

Last year Kevin Brown played poorly because his way of playing in a tight structured, organised team was very different to the role that McBanana wanted him to play, so it exacerbated his weaknesses and none of his strengths.

The same was true of Crabtree who was told play it tight and do not offload. What is the point of having a prop whose strength is offloading the ball and then telling him not to do it.


There is no point picking Sinfield and then saying to him, your job is to tackle non stop and bring the ball up strongly.

Both o'Loughlin and Sinfield could be first choice LFs depending on what job the coach wants them to do and how to play.

What i think would be wrong would be picking him for his versatility at hooker etc as that is such a pivotal position and there are 3 players in the squads who are far better at hooker than him.

Spot on Durham. Too often we've picked good players but played them either out of position or doing a different job to which they're used to. Richard Horne on the wing being an obvious example. As we've seen when some Aussies come to SL, they're not supermen (apart from Brent Webb obviously) who are so monumentally better than our lads that we don't ever stand a chance. They have a better setup, a better mentality thanks to Origin and a more competitive comp, plus a couple of freaks in Inglis & Lockyer. If we get ourselves sorted off the field and really give em a battering in the first 10 mins we've got a chance.

I'm sure the Aussies are arguing about whether to pick a smaller 13 with good skills because he can slot in all over the place, or a big 13 who'll beast more in defence and attack, and is actually a perfectly good ball-player.

Perhaps they just pick the best man to do the best job at 13 and let the half-backs worry about the rest.

I admire Sinfield as a player (even though he's a whiney bastrd), but against the Ockers/Kiwis you need the biggest and best. It's a hard enough task to beat them but if you give them a weight and size advantage in the pack it's twice as hard. Lockers for me, every time.

1. Tomkins
2. Hall
3. Shenton
4. Yeaman
5. Briscoe
6. Brown (would say McGuire but he's not had chance to prove himself yet)
7. Brough
8. Morley
9. Roby
10. Graham
11. Westwood
12. O'Loughlin
13. Sinfield

14. Robinson
15. Peacock
16. Crabtree
17. Harrison

Regarding the centre spot – the senior squad that McNamara selected has Bridge, Welham, Shenton and Clubb as players who play there week in week out plus Tomkins and Cudjoe (Tomkins is listed as a forward but has played the season in the centre and Cudjoe is more of a versatile back)

Add to this the centres from the Knights squad which include Arundel, Atkins, Lawrence and Watkins

I suspect that the centres for the Exiles game will come from this list and probably the 4 Nations as well

Welham is in the senior squad and has 14 tries to his name against Yeaman’s 15 this year – surely this indicates that he is favourite for the left centre spot? I would suggest Shenton for the right pushed by Bridge

I'd have Sinfield at 6 ahead of Brown, especially if Tompkins is FB and active in the attacking pattern, and leave the Sinfield/O'Loughlin debate for another day when Widdop and McGuire are fit and available.

Strongest side available:

S Tompkins

Briscoe
Shenton
Bridge
Hall

Sinfield
Brough

Peacock
Roby
Graham
Westwood
Patrick
O'Loughlin

Robinson
J.Tompkins
Morley
Crabtree

The Sinfield/O'Loughlin debate is not over who is better, it's over what role you want from your loose forward.

And that depends entirely on who's playing halfback, and how good their kicking/organising game is.

Indeed - if you're playing Widdop/Brough as your halfback combination then you need an extra runner at 13 rather than another playmaker.

A couple of runners in the halves such as Tomkins and Brown, you'll need an organiser/tactical kicker at 13.

1. Tomkins
2. Hall
3. Shenton
4. Yeaman
5. Briscoe
6. McGuire
7. Brough
8. Morley
9. Roby
10. Graham
11. Westwood
12. O'Loughlin
13. Sinfield

14. Robinson
15. Peacock
16. Crabtree
17. Harrison

Yet Brough at Hudds often plays with Brown, Robinson, Lunt, and Faiumu. Sometimes on the pitch at the same time.

What's your point?

Of those, arguably only Robinson is an additional playmaker with the others posing more of a running threat.