Brough elected to play for Scotland previously so for me it's a non starter having him in this World Cup England team. Then he throws his Teddy's out and opts for Scotland again. He has chosen Scotland twice himself, no one put a gun to his head, he took himself out of contention.
Sinfield has had a good tournament I think a lot of people bagging him have just got a pre conceived idea that he wouldn't be in the team. He could out perform thurston and Cronk single handed and people would be still having a go at him

Fair enough but why is it a straight choice between the MOS and one of the most successful club captains in the SL era

or is that your prejudice showing again ???

Its one thing having a an opinion but once you commit it to an open public forum then it becomes a statement which you can expect to be challenged, or is your opinion the only one worth considering???

PS still waiting for some examples of Sinfields failings.

2011 Four nations at Hull to get us to the final? Was MOM that evening if i recall correctly, ran the show.

Just seems people always want to look past these things as if it never happened.Just like they will look past him being our most consistent performer so far in this WC and he will inevitably be the scape goat wherever we fail in this Competition.

New Zealand at full strength? That was arguably the weakest ever touring NZW side.

New Zealand : Locke; Beale, Brown, Mannering, Nightingale; Marshall, Foran; Matulino, Leuluai, Packer, Manu, Blair, Smith.

Replacements : Taylor for Locke (11), Glenn for Matulino (16), Waerea-Hargreaves for Packer (1icon_cool.gif, Luke for Leuluai (32).


Oh yeh, full of mugs that is!!!

I agree. But the player you allude to chose otherwise.

Did he choose otherwise before or after being snubbed by the current England coach?

I think it is just the contrary nature of RL fans and the semi-on being nursed by some in the RL media that Danny Brough is now the saviour of international RL.

Had Brough been appointed as the England half-back a year ago, I think his performances at the back end of the year and in big games throughout his career would have resulted in a campaign to see Sinfield back in the fold.

Brough was godawful at the back end of last year, besides hull rolling over and having their tummies tickled Brough was the worst half back on the field in the games against Wire and Wigan, he was outshone in both by Robinson.

Perhaps under Brough's leadership we could have topped the qualifying group by a fair old margin. Then crashed quickly out of the playoff section. Then seen our fans complain we were the true champions really.

England's chances (such as they are) would IMO have been improved had Cooper Cronk's heritage been thoroughly investigated and the player persuaded to be English. Just as irrayional as discussing the "decided to be Scottish" Man of Steel in the context of England's team but there you go.

England's chances (such as they are) would not IMO have been improved one iota by including a player who has never shown the mettle to perform in the biggest of games and has shown such little character that he goes from Scottish to English to Scottish again when he thinks his selection is unlikely to be handed on a plate to him several months before the tournament began.

Englands chances (such as they are) are better improved by selecting natural leaders who display some of the finest attributes a player can possess, a player that inspires team mates, rather than riles them.

Englands chances (such as they are) are better served with the qualities a certain captain brings to the table, qualities his predecessor as captain praised in such a fullsome manner during the BBC coverage that he almost said anyone doubting him was a fool. His predecessor knows a thing or two about playing the Aussies and Kiwis, unlike the current Man of Steel.

The current Man of Steel is about to find out what it's like to face the kiwis. He's about to play in a big game. Unlike when his team is putting 60 on the likes of Salford he won't be behind the bigger of the two packs. I've always said I would judge the current man of steel on his playoff performances as his seasons form would regularly nosedive. Another playoff series of underwhelming mediocrity denied us again seeing Brough peroform on the big occassion, despite playing for the season's most dominant team (in itself enlightening).

Now he will get his chance for his chosen nation. Now we will see.

Why not find a place for Brough, Chase and Sinfield - bit if radical thinking, or not!!

Difficult to argue with any of this , most will probably agree , I should think .

This made me smile though ,


Englands chances (such as they are) are better served with the qualities a certain captain brings to the table, qualities his predecessor as captain praised in such a fullsome manner during the BBC coverage that he almost said anyone doubting him was a fool. His predecessor knows a thing or two about playing the Aussies and Kiwis, unlike the current Man of Steel

A line of argument that predecessors know far more about the qualities a certain player may bring to a team .

Yet an argument that excludes a certain player at Leeds , even though the present back to back Grand final winning coach and his predecessors saw fit to include him regularly in their successful teams , Hmm....

Mainly because Brough is Scottish.

How can anyone be serious about selecting a player whose response to not being selected wasn't to play his nuts in the hope of a belated call up but instead preferred to lower his standards and expectations? At the time I wasn't certain that Macnamara's choice was a wise one; Brough's response has convinced me it was.