Would the right result on Saturday change your opinion?

It would certainly go a fair way. I don't think any of this generation of players have been part of a team that has really "delivered" on the international stage. It's harsh tarnishing individuals with the team's brush, but it's only my opinion. It's the same reason I refuse to acknowledge Ryan Giggs or George Best, for example, as football greats.

In which case do you consider Ellery Hanley to be one of the greats?

Why does being part of a 4 nations winning team mean so much more than being part of a team that won a series against the Kiwis in 2007?

Hanley is a tricky call. I'd argue that he did more at international level than Sinfield has done yet, but he didn't win a right lot at that level either. The door's very much open for Sinfield to surpass Hanley I would have said.

Without wanting to go into too much more debate over the much-discussed 2007 tour, it would be fair to say that I wasn't, personally, too impressed with the quality of the Kiwi side. I'd really want to see an Ashes win or a win in the big tournaments that have replaced the Ashes. There's no formula for greatness, it's always going to be subjective. I want Sinfield to do more at international level than he has yet done before I'd call him that. If he's consistently outstanding in those Tests over a few years and helps at least make England more competitive I am more than prepared to reconsider.

The alcoholic waster I give you, but Giggs? Are you out of your mind? What that man has achieved is enormous. He had three kids ten years younger than him in his pocket the other day against Chelsea.

Well in short I suppose the difference between a 'club great' and a 'great of the game' would be what he does on the world stage. I personally don't think a good game and a half at International level from a 12 year career qualifies. Obviously you do. That said, if he continues to put in the sort of performances he has in the last game and a half over a sustained period, then certainly he could lay claim.

Here's a simple test for you. Ask anyone who watches RL, on any continent, whether they regard, say, Wally Lewis as a RL great. I'm sure you already know the answer (and indeed would give the same answer yourself). Now do the same for Sinfield away from this board. Do you really think you would get a resounding 'Yes' from someone in Australia, NZ, PNG, France etc. Hell, you wouldn't even get a resounding 'Yes' from the majority of English fans! It takes more than a few Leeds fans hailing him as a 'great of the game' to make it so. It would need to be pretty much universally acknowledged. I'm certainly not saying he won't get there, just that it's way too early given what he's done at International level to date. Don't forget that it's only a year ago that he, himself, thought that his International career was over after a terrible WC. Do you honestly believe that is the stuff of 'world greats'?

Playing for football Manchester United is enough for me to not aknowledge them at all. Unfair?
But there are lines to be drawn and that's one of them.
My son is a closet Man Utd fan (I can tell by which Match Attax are in his favourites pile), he has no idea that if he doesn't sort himself out soon he'll be living in a cardboard box and eating out of the bins. No son of mine...etc...etc...

Aw diddums! Does the big, nasty man not agree with you?

This is where the argument falls on it's IMO, Ramrod gave you Gazza as his prime example earlier, its all about personal opinion.

Like I said, it's just an opinion. For me football has a particular stage on which the true greats are defined. Giggs has never played on that stage. Harsh perhaps. I'm sure he doesn't weep too often about my opinion mind you. Great club player, arguably his club's best ever, but no pedigree worth mentioning on the international stage.

But thats due to his nationality and not his ability, He has played in for many years and won the best club comp in the world (CL).

What if Pele was born in Bolivia or Chile?

Then he wouldn't be the acknowledged legend of the game he is. He wouldn't/couldn't have achieved everything he did in the game playing for Bolivia or Chile. That's life.

Do you honestly think (and I am genuinely asking, I accept opinion varies) that if he had achieved everything he did (and it was a lot) with Santos but never made an impact at a World Cup he would be regarded as one of the greatest players of all time? Or just a Santos legend?

Tough one that. He certainly wouldn't have been a World Cup winner, or been involved in any of the exploits that defined him as a world great. Would he even have been as great a player in an inferior team, given that a player only gets to make career defining performances in the big games. I think in these instances we can only deal with what is or has happened, rather than trying to imagine 'what if...'

Like, say, being named the best 13 in the world or being shortlisted for the golden boot?

Re: the 2007 kiwis.

How much do you know about the quality of the Australian teams from past era's where the GB England players that have achieved legendary status by playing against and beating them?

Does the awful state of the 1982 GB team and the quality of our game in general in that year diminish the greatness of any of the 1982 Kangaroos?