No but it did have a bad headache after it hit the wall at the opposite end of the room in full flight.

We used to breed them. They shag more than rabbits! A couple of days after giving birth and she was pregnant again!

...The male wasn't above trying it on with the kids either. Regardless of their sex!

No.

The hamsters are a bit smarter!

You're not very good at thinking laterally are you?

I was not using his nomination for the Golden boot as the sole basis for considering him a great. just another achievement on a long list of achievements.

I also never claimed he was going to win the award, I simply offered his nomination as further evidence of his greatness. Of course the winner can claim greatness because they have been voted the worlds' best player. However, does that exclude anyone who doesn't win it?

Hanley was undoubtedly a great of the game. El Diablo can't admit that though because Hanley achieved even less success in internationals than Sinfield has.

Well actually, I seem to be the only one answering questions for some reason! Do you think he passes the 'Wally Lewis' test I posted earlier? Do you think he would need to be universally accepted as an RL great, rather than just by Leeds fans, to become one? Do you think his game and a half of quality at International level is sufficient to be regarded as a great? Do you think the fact that he, himself, considered his International career over after never having made an impact on the Interational stage and a disasterous WC counts against him or is it superceded by a good game and a half? In fact, feel free to answer any of the points I've made (I mean actually answer them as opposed to posting a further question) as I'm genuinely interested to know how someone who appears to make reasoned posts is happy to ignore all these things. Moreover, would you be prepared to ignore them if the player in question was from, say, Saints?

As for the Golden boot/international 13 post, there was no lateral thinking involved. You asked a specific question to which I posted a specific answer. In fact I even addressed the 'cumulative' aspect of all the individual achievements if you care to read my post. Please feel free to tell me where 'lateral thinkng' comes into it. I'm intrigued. Just in case you're confused:

Lateral thinking: •Attempting to solve a problem by using non-traditional methods in order to create and identify new concepts and ideas.

How are you quantifying this? This is exactly what I'm referring to in our other posts. What exactly has Sinfield achieved at International level. More so, what has he achieved that Hanley did not? This is more revisionist history based on Sinfield playing a starring role in 1 win against NZ (interestingly something even the much derided on this board Sean O'Loughlin has done!) and playing well in 1 half in a loss to the Aussies! Not exactly an 'achievement' in International terms and certainly not sufficient (IMO obvioulsy) to put him in the bracket of 'World greats'.

He has played in a series win for his country. I don't think Henley ever did, though I stand to be corrected. Thus I don't think results achieved at international level are an accurate barometer for British players, given the antipodean era of dominance.

IU do not intend to discuss the issue any further with you because you have a clear agenda. I do not accept your proposition that Sinfield has only played well in the last "game and a half" and therefore there's no further basis for discussion.

If his international career has been such a failure to this point (it hasn't) ask yourself why every international coach since 2000 has continually selected him?

You should read JJB's interview with him in this months RLWorld magazine which explains that for the first time at international level he's been asked to run the show like he does at Leeds with the same results. Previously, he was not given this role because of the presence of Farrell and Sculthorpe etc. Now they're gone he can be the pivot (from 6, 13 or 9) and we're seeing the results.

I think that the 1 and a half games stuff is garbage. Sinfield has had plenty of decent games for England/GB, although he may not have been MOM in any of them.

he has been a part of the international scene consistently for 9 years.

I don't think he's a great of the game yet. Internationally I think he doesn't have the profile, but at club level he's done it all, including playing in 3 WCC games.

I'm sure most of the Aussie players will have an opinion on him, even if all the fans don't

I stand to be corrected too, but I'm sure I remember Hanley playing in at least one side that one a series against NZ. We need an international equivalent of tvoc. When Hanley was at his very best I was about 10, so my memory is a little uncertain. I'm still not sure Sinfield has had the same impact at international level as Hanley. He hasn't done much wrong, but I don't remember him being outstanding prior to this series. I just think to be a great of the game your international resume needs more substance than that.

Maybe you're right and it is unreasonable to expect trophies at international level for Eng/GB players, but I still think Sinfield needs to carry on what he's started this year for a bit longer to earn that tag.

I'm not trying to sell him short, I'm at least as big a Sinfield fan as anyone (bar those who luv im coz he iz well fit innit). If I had my way he'd have been knighted by now, and is probably edging his way ahead of the competition as my favourite ever Leeds player, I just think he has more to prove at international level yet. Plenty of time for him to do that.

That's true, and it is probably what has prevented him realising his potential at Test level thus far. If he stays in that role he may very well earn himself a claim on greatness. I hope to see him lead England in the same way he's lead Leeds over the last few years.

We won a series against NZ in 1989 but IIRC hanley was injured. We may have won a series in NZ in 1991 but again, IIRC he was injured. Then we won the series in 1993 but I don't think he played, Schoey was captain.

I probably do stand corrected then don't I?