I only participated in physical education when it was rugby league. Must of only done about 5 PE lessons in my last three years at school.

I would never have guessed

I see the same "well he's won lots of cups so must be ace" argument derided by all and sundry when used about Saints players underperforming for England is out in force.

I take no pleasure from any player playing poorly for England. I've spent thousands trasvelling the world watching us lose and would cheer 17 Wiganers to the rafters if they were wearing England shirts.

Problem is, the people defending such a clearly abhorrent display are just as daft as those revelling in it.

He was TERRIBLE and was anonymous against France too. He's a very lucky boy if he gets a crack on Saturday. But if he does he'll get my full support and the people who cheered when he got substituted and those who sang abuse at James Graham don't deserve to see an England team be successful.

Not going to slate Smith as he clearly should be England's full back, not in the centres.

Is that meant to be sarcasm or just hypocrisy, given your "contribution" on the VT?

I'm not slating him on the VT, I'm agreeing he was constantly out of position, which he was.

He read plays very badly all the first half. He shouldn't have been put in that position, but that doesn't alter the fact that he struggled massively.

My contribution to that thread is in response to a seeming inability of certain people to accept he was anything other than faultless.

You've not been looking on the VT? Every time I look at it I can hear the noise that I imagine Broadmoor would make if you set it on fire with all the doors still locked.

Where?

Saying he was constantly out of position isn't slating him?

Man, I would love to see how effusive you are with praise when someone plays well...

Who has defended McGuire's display?

I think you misunderstood me.

I was saying where league is available is where there is a club set up specifically because the pupils are interested in it. League is not taught as in class time.

Example been Brigshaw Comprehensive, one of the earlier posters mentioned Garforth just down the road. Brighshaw teaches Union in its lessons because it has to. But it has a RL training club out of shool, pupils prefer this, and Brigshaw has a team.

I think I'm with you...

I think more League would be played in many schools in RL areas instead of union if it were up to the kids to choose what they'd rather play rather than it be left up to the teacher. Union isn't compulsory is it? I don't think it's on the national curriculum yet. I think many PE teachers tend to come from a union background so that's why they choose to play union in schools. I suspect the RFU gives them plenty of backing in terms of resources too.

The first try and break we made in the 2nd half was from the Tomkins kick. That sparked us into life. What part of that don't you understand? I agree that Burgess, Ellis and Crabtree (and Sinfield who you've missed out for some reason) had excellent 2nd halves too, but I wasn't posting about who had good 2nd halves, just the first 'success' we had in the game... you know?...the thing that sparked us to life....

He said you were talking bollox, and then explained why. What part of that don't you understand?

The part I dont understand is the part where you say Tomkins sparked the team into life. I dont understand it because its bo!!ocks.
It was the forwards, who just before half time actually, decided to start playing which they hadnt done since the first Australia try.

I missed him out because I dont think he sparked us into life either. That doesnt mean I think he had a poor game. Quite the opposite. I also thought Tomkins was good in the 2nd half but that wasnt what I was talking about. The forwards, most notably, Burgess, Ellis and Crabtree really upped it and thats what gave us the space for Tomkins and Sinfield etc to do what they did.

Neither was I 4.0234375:10