yet he still waltzed around several Rovers players and went the length of the field in the 2008 KC derby.

maybe we had his identical twin playing that day

Eastmond made a big difference when he came on and must start next week be it centre or at half.

T.Briscoe will not play next week. As I had said all week I feared for our centres against Oz, particularly the right centre up against Inglis simply because we do not have a world class or even international class centre available at the mo in this country. Unfortunately for Tom he suffered on the back of this.

Morley, Peacock, McGuire and Lee Smith all had poor games but I cant see any of them missing out next week.

Watch the DVD again he picks the ball up and runs in a straight line.
The main chaser was Dobson and Vella almost made up the ground.
It was a great try but he didnt waltz around any one at all.
Talk about rose tinted specs

IMO Tom Briscoe deserved his place in the two opening games Fox has has been said before has dipped in form of late. I thought Lee Smith along with Mcguire left Briscoe very exposed on the wing at times by moving to far infield and jumping into the line. Neither of the second rows or Sinfield covered across the back line in the first half and this again left the outsie backs exposed to the long cut out passes and pace of the aussies. Will be interesting to see the selction for the game against the Kiwis.

He fended off diagnol chasers who caught him and it was a good try but like I say, he doesn't have the athletic ability to play international RL as a three-quarter because his ball recovery is too slow and can't stop people from long distance - Why can't you just accept it?

You mean he's erratic and a liability in defence? I take it you're not comparing his attacking prowess to offiah's

The previous 71 posts you have made on this subject since last night were increasingly extreme in their tone, but this morning you've outdone yourself. When someone posts that Briscoe had actually been physically sick after a heavy collision, you try and make an unnecessary and spiteful joke about it.

He wasn't last night. Even tug boat wellens would have given more

So how many tries did the Aussies score off short range kicks? You question his pace yet he was gaining on Inglis all the time which is something even i didn't think he was capable of doing.

Not at all. It was a genuine post. It can't have been nice for the kid to be in a game he could have little effect on due to his lack of athletic ability.

Tony Smith is the one to blame for picking him in the first place.

Inglis is not particularly fast as such although he ain't no slouch. He scores tries by fending off defenders rather than running around them.

Look back at the footage of that particular try. Shaun Briscoe was gaining quicker than Tom Briscoe and Fox leaves Shaun for dead.

He was found out and it was the right decision to replace him. The second half performance in both attack and defence justified it

Think McGuire [ihas[/i to be dropped. I'm not convined by Myler though. I think if Sinfield moves it should be to hooker (slow ptbs suit him there), with Burgess at LF. Eastmond worked well at right centre (and Tomkins, Eastmond and Burgess is an odd looking 'creative triangle'). I wish Brough was in the squad.

Inglis is quicker than most, no point bringing Fox into this he can't handle it at any level where there's pressure,besides if we just went on pace Calderwood would be ahead of everyone.

Yeah ok then

Glad we agree.

He evaded three defenders and Vella only caught up as Tom had to keep skipping out of tackles.

You should try taking those tinted specs off too.

So you are "genuinely" saying he vomited due to psychological trauma?

If it even happened

That's not the point. It's been posted a couple of times that he was physically sick after a heavy collision. Zod made a "joke" that he was sick because he wasn't up to the job and when challenged said it was "genuine" comment.

well said, at least one Rovers fan isn't sat with red and white glasses on

Eastmond was a revelation when he came on yesterday - the back line defense solidified with the removal of Smith to the wing. He must start next week and Smith should be dropped. Eastmond as centre, and Tomkins, Myler and weak McGuire as the halves, one of which on the bench. Looks inexperienced 'cos it is and exposes Smith's madness at leaving out Burrow.

Shaun Briscoe had a good game and should remain at fullback. If Briscoe's confidence hasn't been blasted to smithereens he should not be penalised for yesterday's shocking display by his inside backs and tried again next to someone competent. If he was substituted because of injury this should happen.

However, I suspect Smith did make him the scapegoat and his unfathomable decision to leave Rah-Rah bound Smith on leads me to believe him blind with regards to Lee Smith. He must be, as otherwise he would never have included someone about to leave the game in this squad. This series is his chance to cement the future - Lee Smith will not be the future and - even if he had proven himself a competent centre in this tournament, should still not be in the squad. If Fox can prove in training he is out of dropsy mode, I think he'll get the nod.

As for ZZZZZod, I can only assume you suffer from some sort of psychotic obsessive delusional disorder.

if your talking obsessive, look no further than a few black and white posters on this forum.

I'm afraid you're delusional thinking that Tom Briscoe is good enough at this level - a 42 point shift in both halves indicates otherwise.

To put Briscoe outside of Eastmond is laughable because Briscoe just doesn't have the athletic ability to follow him.

I think it's time for the black and white tinted specs to come off and accept that a 42 point shift from both halves proves the harsh reality that Tom Briscoe just isn't good enough - end of.

It's certainly could have been a possible contributory factor (if it even happened) don't you agree?