Just watched Rabbitos vs Raiders (cracking display by Raiders & their two Englishmen btw; woeful display by Rabbitohs & their two Englishmen).

During commentary one of the guys said the rumour is that Blake Austin could well be playing for England this autumn, as he qualifies apparently. Two thoughts:

1) would we want an Aussie playing at 6 for us (as it stands, our current 6 has never played top grade RL in England)? The question may be moot as he may decide that he will wait to see if the Aussies come calling.

2) Austin is an absolute cracker & takes the line on (something very few do nowadays). He would be in my top 3 or 4 half backs currently playing (all in NRL unfortunately).

in what way does he qualify?

he is a fine player and if he really wants to throw his hat in the ring foregoing the chance to play origin, I'm all for it. doesn't stop the Aussies with the South sea islanders so why should it us?

Don't know how he qualifies, pretty sure he's played for Portugal before.

Cracking player, Mot sure if he's an international player though. In terms of whether I'd want him if he's put his hand up, maybe more than others named mainly because he's younger, hasn't really been capped (Portugal doesn't count really) and would be turning his back on other opportunities that mig by come his way which might at least mean he's committed to the cause.

Cracking player. Get him in.

The namesh Aushtin, Blake Aushtin.

If he declares for England and says he doesn't want to play for Aus or NSW then no problem, as long as he qualifies.

However if he is only playing because the new rules say he can still play for NSW and Aus if they pick him next year then no thanks.

Is he eligible?

Is he better than any of the other alternatives in his position?

If the answer to both is yes, then get him in. Stuff the little Englanders.

I read the other week that he's got an English grandparent. The article was about him being eligible and asking if he was interested. The main thing was that just with the Morris twins, Bennett hadn't actually spoken to him.

Although he's a bit up and down, at his best he's a far better attacking prospect than Widdopp, but not as good a defender.

I don't think think many people would have such a problem if the eligibility rules hadn't been changed.

For all we know he identifies as english, but we need some conformation of this.

What happens if we pick him, but next year he decides he wants to play origin and so makes himself eligible for Australia and NSW instead?
The England team and England RL in general wouldn't live it down, and we would be confirmed as the Aus B team

Who cares? Seriously?

Do people slag off Tonga, Fiji and Samoa as "Australia/New Zealand B"? Of course they don't.

You play by the rules of the game. If the rules of the game allow you to fight with both hands, why would you tie one behind your back? They don't hand out trophies for moral victories.

Much to the dismay of Shaun Wane

If they beat Australia when it counts, so long as they were eligible I wouldn't care if the whole team were called Bruce and wore cork hats on the field. Making international RL a big event won't come from insisting everyone was born and bred within 10 miles of the M62 but from England being competitive. Being honest, nobody outside core RL supporters would know that the Morris twins, Austin, Hodkinson and co aren't pureblood English, and they'd care even less.

The idea that fans are so obsessed with narrow definitions of nationality drives me nuts. As far as I'm concerned Wayne Bennett has been tasked with making England a genuine top tier team. If he thinks that's only possible with a few plastic poms then sobeit.

When is the last time any of those teams beat Australia or NZ?
I certainly can't remember it happening

That is because the players form Aus DO teat it like a B team, and whenever they are good enough to play for Aus or even play origin they stop playing for Samoa/Fiji etc. see Milford recently
Do you want England to be on the same level and in the same situation as these teams?

You are still ignoring the major issue here!
The RU captain was actually born in NZ, but most union fans don't really care because he can ONLY play for England, and couldn't with to the all blacks if they wanted him

Would you really be okay with say Austin playing for us this year in the 4 nations, but next year he has a great year and Cronk gets injured so Aus want him and he plays for them in the world cup?
Don't think he wouldn't because the Australian players get paid more, and if he does play for us it will likely be for the money

There needs to be some way that players are aligned to certain nations other wise the 'internationals' will just be a bunch of post season friendlies
In football you can only play for one country and have to be legally a resident, in RU you have to play in English League to play for England

So why not get 16 Aussie NRL players and James Graham representing England - is that really what international RL is all about?

There is difference with the SSI players as most have been brought up or lived exclusively in Australia or NZ. Some of these Aussies commentators are saying qualify have never set foot in the UK.

leedsnsouths - right now I couldn't care less what the criteria are so long as they are applied. Using grandparents etc is fine by me. If and when England ever get competitive then agitate for a change to the criteria. But we're not ompcetitive, and we don't produce enough players via SL to be likely to for the foreseeable future. What I think is absolutely bizarre is seeking not to use the criteria that exist (flawed or otherwise) for some notion of purity which like I said only RL fans seem to care about.

You could also add that the scenario you paint about Austin is very unlikely. He hasn't even been talked to by Bennett as far as we know. Bennett is a seriously good manager of people and I would think he'll talk to existing England players as well as any NRL players who put their hands up before deciding on them. I doubt he'd pick a player knowing he might change loyalties later. McNamara didn't do that when clearly he could have, and probably for same reason, the impact it would have on the rest of the team.

International RL is the one area where our sport can grow and make itself bigger. We can go on losing badly and occasionally narrowly to Aus. What we need is to get back to a position where we lose narrowly and occasionally win. Competitiveness is what will sell international RL in the long term. Like I said, I think attempts to get England NOT to apply existing criteria for some mythical purity is just madness.