It was after his stint at 9 where, to be fair, he was excellent.

Makinson would have picked if he wasn't injured,but I also think he is done as a international player.

I also think Young and Marshall are a better combination than any other you care to mention.
As you was proven wrong re- Farrimond you could equally be proven wrong (or right) re-Marshy,but at this rate we will never know,am glad you think he should be given a chance to silence the doubters (like yourself) as did Farrimond.

He did quite well at 9 didnt he.

Few references to Robinson because of Marshall’s stature.

I think that’s unfair on Marshall as JR was a once in a generation player.

What was interesting though is how JR was targeted under the high ball particularly in Union.

May have been the World Cup Final where they used Tequiri to great affect against him targeting him on the cross field kicks. He conceded the first try to that I think where it was a no contest.

I genuinely hope he gets a crack at Samoa in the Autumn. We all know he would go well against France and Samoa will be a step up, however I don’t expect them to be anywhere near full strength it will be a better test than France.

With maybe a few withdrawals our side he gets a chance to have a dig and force his way into World Cup contention. If he doesn’t play in the Autumn though I’d say unfortunately he will be out of the reckoning potentially for good.

The difference though JR had that electric pace over 30/40 years and illusive style which Marshy doesn’t have.

Aye, it's just crazy how one eyed people can be. I like Sneyd, I have no issue with him getting Man Of Steel (as looks likely) and he's a good player but Smith out performed him over the course of last season, got his England chance and absolutely killed it. His form for Wigan was iffy at the start of the season (Outside of Penrith) but he's been absolutely outstanding in recent months and whenever big games come round the lad is just outstanding. He's also 10 years younger than Sneyd and will be around for multiples series/tournaments to come.

There wasn't even a decision to be made.

Smith is a very old head on young shoulders and I think Sneyd is on a similar level in certain elements of his game but in defence in particular he’s way off Smith.

I’d go so far as to say Smith is the most important player at Wigan at the moment such is his influence over the way we play and the freedom he allows other players to do their thing.

Harry I agree is prob the most important player what with his game management skills and his kicking out of hand being of a level being superior to any other SL player inc Sneyd (who I think is a great player,just not as good a Smith)

I'm not. I said that's my point with Jon, as in the point I was making during our conversation...

In the same week that SOO was played at the iconic MCG in front of 90,000 fans we have England v France that is not televised on free to air TV or Sky. It is also a curtain raiser before the Toulouse game.

Wane may not even be able to make it and Andy Last was late back into the UK meaning that the senior players had to lead the first training session themselves.

Moreover they are flying Ryanair today and there has been a 4 hr delay. They are also only receiving £250 each.

If you don't laugh you'll cry

All of that is bad really bad

Farcical

Hoping our players came through this match unscathed, that would be the only positive from what can only be described as a catastrophic shambles. As a UK rugby league supporter I'm struggling to remember a lower point for the sport.

Agreed. Also the game(s) only being made available via Our League which (for me) the feed keeping on dropping out added to the chaos. I probably only managed to view 15-20 mins of the first half and none of the second. For a service being provided by the uk RL governing body, this was very poor, and not an advert to encourage subscription to the channel, not withstanding the negative impact to the sport's image. Marketing and promotion of the event absolutely amateurish. If the RL wish to push the site, then they need to ensure that the system can handle the demand.

I fear it would take a monumental effort to get International RL back to where it was (which in itself was only ever average compared to RU anyway).

We desperately need an end of season test series against the Kangaroos. Played in the heartlands to ensure decent attendances: Etihad, DW and Elland Road.

We had a 25k attendance against Penrith arranged over a few months so the appetite for RL is obviously still there. Tour details home and abroad, dates and venues need to be set in stone 5-10 years in advance, with tickets sales 12 months in advance.

I can't believe we had better organisation in 1982 when the Invincibles came over and blitzed us. Subsequent tours and tournaments (86 tour, 90s World Cups) were incredible compared to today.

i've been saying for a while we need a long term international calendar that all RL playing nations buy into and by saying that i'm aiming it mainly at the Ozzies, and have often referred to the same period that you have. My 1st ever game was at Central Park GB V Oz in 1982, and i love the international game, but believe we need to focus on GB, but equally in the background have home internationals to develop the game alongside what we all want to see GB v OZ, GB v NZ etc etc

The sign of where we all think our international game is currently at is the stadiums you mention, as we used Wembley and Old Trafford during those late 80s to early 90s. We should be able to sell out a 3 test series v Tonga / Samoa etc and use Wigan, Huddersfield and Hull for those (approx 25k), these nations are now packed with NRL and SL stars and we should back the game against them with good crowds. However, we should be aiming for 50-60k v the Ozzies and should be disappointed if we get nowhere near that

the international plan should include growth of lesser nations to help build them internationally, for me a home nations as a development path to GB etc, regular series between GB, Oz, NZ, Tonga, Samoa as well as a long term commitment to the RL world cup (not just trying to fit it in if anyone can be d as it feels today)

The lack of long term planning is criminal and ultimately much of it comes down to the whole sport being in a choke hold by the NRL. They call the shots on what can and cannot go ahead. We're meant to be going on an Ashes tour at the end of 2025 and if they want that to be a success and for people to travel from over here, the dates and venues should be set in stone. It isn't a cheap trip and people will need to plan ahead but they'll likely not get that opportunity. I wouldn't bank on it even going ahead tbh, as the NRL is likely to throw out their 'duty of care' line. That's the same league who will let players play Origin on a Wednesday night and then turn out for their clubs on a Friday night. They will then say lads cannot play in a WCC fixture because they've not had the minimum number of months off. They're a joke and I hold zero hope that International Rugby League has a chance of thriving going forward due to the money in the NRL.

to compound the problem further, the Tongan, Samoan players are all being pulled into the NRL mindset (being told they cant play)

it should be an honour / privilege for Pacific Ocean sides to tour to GB, but given that Tonga have declined this year, and we've squeezed a 2 match series in with Samoa, just shows who is running the show

i like to watch test cricket and they have such a well defined cricket calendar. I can see now up the the ashes tour in 2027/8 so know exactly when or where they are playing for the next few years. we are winging a schedule if someone remembers about it i.e. i know lets play France and then let see if we can get someone to come over here and play us in a post season test series

rugby union can manage the autumn internationals, 6 nations and then summer tours / world cups, but again a well defined international calendar

Just bouncing this one to check poster's views now. Smith more important than French?

Bounce it all you want,I know he hasn't played his best but he still is very important and his kicking is still very good.
He also needs someone like French to take the pressure off him regarding controlling the game etc (Hampshire doesn't).
I also feel kind of privileged that you have decided to bring a post I did (others agreed) for your 7th post over 16 years,I await your reply in 2 yrs time,hopefully Harry is playing better by then.

In how we play the game, yes. In terms of individual brilliance, no.

I would have thought that was self evident and hasn't changed since this post was first made so I'm not seeing why you felt the need to "bounce it"? Did you believe you were somehow being clever and proving some point?

So you would choose Smith and Farrimond over French and Farrimond if you had a choice to make?

No, I'd choose Smith and French. As would Matty Peet.

I agree, but that isn't what I was quoting.

You said Smith was more important than French - So if you had a choice, you would choose Smith over French?

No I didn't. I said he "was more important to the way we play" which he is. Matt Peet says the same thing.

Your questions are nonsense. You're asking if I would choose French/Farrimiond over Smith/Farrimiond. Of course I'd choose the former as Farrimiond is a more natural 7 so that has a far better balance than playing 2 scrum halves.You're asking if I would choose Smith over French. No, because French is the best player in the league. Neither of those questions has any relevance to the statement I made.

If you want something relevant to the statement I made, ask yourself these three questions:

1) Would you prefer Smith or French at 7?
2) Would you prefer Smith in charge of our kicking game or French?
3) Who's game is most suited to "getting us around the park? Smith or French?

If your answer to all 3 is Smith (and I'm assuming it is) then how come you would prefer Smith controlling our game than the best player in the league? Is it because he's the one who is more important to the way we play?

Nowhere have I said Smith is the better player. He isn't. The two are not the same thing.

I think Peet has adapted Wigan's play to suit Smith's skills and limitations - dominant field position followed by Smith's high bombs. Also he has developed French from an erratic FB into a brilliant stand off (no doubt aided by Tommy L). He has far more options with Farrimond - a SH who can actually run, pass and support breaks. It's time to offload Smith to Saints on a 3 year deal.