I can't believe that posters have slated Hill's performances so I'm not sure what they expect from a front row forward?
Maybe they would care to elaborate?

IMO Hill and Graham have been our best players of the series.
Both can take the ball into collision and win the ground, They both have great footwork going into the tackle, they both have a great passing game close to the defensive line, and they can both defend very well

Looks like a pair of top quality International props to me

I was forming my opinions on what I saw yesterday plus his performances v France, 1st test and last weeks stats. In general I'm sure you will acknowledge that his International performances have been way below his supposed "superstar" rating.

Being a good SL player doesn't mean you are going to be a good international player. Faz is a good SL player but I personally don't see him ever being a good international player.

Hill is very good in SL but he is an absolute plodder at the top level. You get good work from him but he generates no quick play the balls at all. Yes he is solid but solid doesn't cut it at this level.

If the Burgess boys are fit and Cooper continues like he has in the NRL and add Graham to the picture I can't see any way you can pick Hill.

Watkins I though was poor in defence as well. The first Kiwi try was his poor play that created the opportunity. He showed his opposite number the outside using the touchline as his extra defender and then allowed him to cut back inside him.

As I said it's great seeing him tear SL apart but he simply has not delivered in an England shirt despite the hype he is given.

Yet Wigan fans thought Tomkins should stay at FB if fit when he's just as guilty of the above.

As for your view on Hill, that's just laughable.

Well this went downhill even faster than I expected. Thought it would be at least Monday morning before individual players began to be pulled to bits.

I thought England were very good. They moved the ball well despite the heavy rain and so did NZ. The best thing about it for me was the determination the players showed and the team ethic. They all worked hard for each other and soaked up a lot of pressure before coming back strongly to take the game out of site.
As a Leeds supporter and an Englishman I am happy to retire to the off season with all the boxes ticked.

You might be right.....and I'm the first to admit none of the Leeds contingent (for whatever reason) did not cover themelves in glory. However, the basic fundamental question I always ask is would you want the respective individuals playing for your own club side.

Those that state they would not Hardaker, Watkins or Hall in their team are lying. Personally, of this winning non Leeds English contingent I would covet only [iBateman[/i (but not as a bluddy centre), [iWilliams[/i (because we know he can produce the goods at Stand Off, and for sure, rather him than the hugely disppointing Widdop - I have yet to see anything I would covet above our very own Sutcliffe for example), [iRoby[/i, [iGraham[/i, and the [iBurgess [/ibros.

MCGildary played well enough, but is not worth displacing Briscoe for; simlarly Smith is without a doubt no better than McGuire. Hill and Cooper are decent players, but not worth displacing Cuthbertson or Garbutt for IMO.

Then as for the apparent first choice English second rowers...pfftt! Give me Stevie Ward or Ablett anytime. On his Catalan performances I would once have coveted Whitehead, but less so on these England performances.

So that's Bateman, Williams, Roby, Graham and the Burgess bros. Can't say the rest of the England contingent have had me drooling in any way whatsoever. Even the apparent Man of the Series is not worth upseting the Leeds applecart for.

It has been an untidy winning series against an average-at=best NZ team, but I guess we should be happy for small mercys. It will go down as an historical win. Not convinced though for much more from this present set up.

Hall did what he could. Had nothing to work with in the oppositions half so left him doing his role of extra forward taking carries away from our line to give the forwards a breather.

He did this role well and in the first two tests he got little help from his other winger.

Nice feeling isn't it

Quote: jonh " Watkins I though was poor in defence as well. The first Kiwi try was his poor play that created the opportunity. He showed his opposite number the outside using the touchline as his extra defender and then allowed him to cut back inside him. As I said it's great seeing him tear SL apart but he simply has not delivered in an England shirt despite the hype he is given.'" except that just isnt what happened. Watkins didnt show his opposite number the outside, Watkins had to cover the man on the outside, the inside man was clearly Smiths man. If Watkins commits to Kahu the ball goes wide and Nightingale is in acres of space with men on the inside. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9LFwybZ4GA Watch that again and see your wrongness. There is a clear and obvious reason we conceded that try that is over any individual errors (o'loughlin giving up, Smith not effecting a tackle twice, McGilveray's positioning and decision to come in, apparently Watkins not committing to Kahu and leaving the man on the outside in space), We were short stacked and slow to get back so they stacked that side and executed pretty well.

Quote: jonh " Watkins I though was poor in defence as well. The first Kiwi try was his poor play that created the opportunity. He showed his opposite number the outside using the touchline as his extra defender and then allowed him to cut back inside him. As I said it's great seeing him tear SL apart but he simply has not delivered in an England shirt despite the hype he is given.'" except that just isnt what happened. Watkins didnt show his opposite number the outside, Watkins had to cover the man on the outside, the inside man was clearly Smiths man. If Watkins commits to Kahu the ball goes wide and Nightingale is in acres of space with men on the inside. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9LFwybZ4GA Watch that again and see your wrongness. There is a clear and obvious reason we conceded that try that is over any individual errors (o'loughlin giving up, Smith not effecting a tackle twice, McGilveray's positioning and decision to come in, apparently Watkins not committing to Kahu and leaving the man on the outside in space), We were short stacked and slow to get back so they stacked that side and executed pretty well.

England's best centre was Bateman on Saturday which rather highlights how poor was the performance from Watkins. Was it nerves or a lack of concentration? You can only earn the tile of being world class by proving it in big games including the international stage.

Watkins has been great this year. Lets look on bright england still won, his defence has been good over the series and poor game yesterday won't get the nrl or union teams knocking the door down

It's been a while since England have been able to have so many players supposedly not living up to their potential but still manage to win a series.

To be fair, Watkins has produced in all the big games this season, and he's been solid and shown glimpses of his talent for England. So the notion that he only looks good against the likes of Wakey is inaccurate.

Love how the usual Wigan idiots have got some digs in. International season gives them a chance to vent and gain back some ground after another season of falling short. It makes them sleep a little better after how gutted the 2014/15 seasons have left them. I only know one pie who is a total champion bloke and he is not even from Wigan. Most appear to be bitter single minded bell ends.