Good at kicking & organising is an excuse for mediocrity. This is the same Smith who has been regularly slagged off on the Wigan board, who might have the time & field position in SL. I hope he proves me wrong.

Well, that would be a huge waste of £1M. George Burgess has no obvious position on an RU pitch.

I definitely understand and have similar reservations regarding Smith but he does bring something I don't think anyone else does with his kicking. For the other poster to say being good at kicking and organisation are bywords for mediocrity is overly simplistic and devalues the importance of a good kicking game.

Sinfield got blamed for our loss to NZ last year. For me his crime wasn't that he missed the tackle it's that for the last 5-10 minutes he failed to slow the game down and get the ball out of play. This game sense is the sort of thing Smith has shown as Wigan.

I'm not saying he's Andrew Johns, he is limited but he has virtues that could make the team better than it has been. We have Graham, Widdop, Tomkins and presumably O'Loughlin who are all play makers, I think Smith will be there to facilitate them.

I'm not sure we'll make or win the final, I've seen far too much international Rugby League to ever think that. I do think this is the best chance to do well in the southern hemisphere for a long time. We've got a selection pretty similar to last year, a lot of the team already play in Aus/NZ, players aren't out of position and both Aus and NZ look weaker than they have done for a while. I'd love to see a game where we look like we might actually beat Australia.

Yours positively,

Tom

I am struggling there as well. Andrew Sheridan was a similar build and was a great prop while his back/ankles etc were functional, but he would have been learning the techniques and developing the right muscles for that position since he was a kid. Gloucester's pack are a pile of $h!te at the moment, they could probabaly spend the money better within Union.

No disrespect to Smith, but he could be Cristiano Ronaldo when it came to kicking a ball and he's still going to end up looking like a Sean Long used to in internationals (or GF's against Leeds) - awful. Kickers are as good as they are allowed to be by the opposition, he'll get the ball off a slow PTB or going backwards with defenders in his face and in poor field position if the forwards don't win some collisions. Aussie and NZ refs are going to allow camping out at the tackle by defenders so forget that.
You need three options, two outfield and a hooker who can kick if the markers go shooting off upfield. If we get near the oppostion line we need the ball in the hands of Tomkins, Watkins and Hall.

However, I do feel relatively positive, so hope we both have something to cheer.

I decided to watch the highlights of the WC semi from last year again in my dinner break. Apart from the obvious loss of Sam Burgess, I see another problem. Sinfield may have missed a tackle at the end (we actually had 5 players under the posts marking 2 kiwis at the PTB, so not convinced we weren't doomed anyway), but he was also responsible for opening up the defence with 2 beautifully timed passes for England tries. He may not be fleet of foot, but I am slightly struggling to see where that bit of guile is coming from in the current team, and we don't have enough frightening ball carriers not to need it.

Word has it scrummaging is still quite important in RU. I doubt George Burgess has ever contested a scrum in his life.

As well as being able to kick a good HB needs to be able to draw a defender & put someone through a gap, dummy & go through a gap, support a man who makes a break & finish off the break. Otherwise they are mediocre. Apart from Brough, Smith is no worse than any other British based scrum half in that respect.

Smith looks ok at Wigan, but that's behind a pack that's usually dominant and next to the best stand-off in the competition.

I don't remember him being any good at Salford when he was playing in an underdog team, which is probably more relevant for how things will be against Australia.

Like others, would have gone with Tomkins and Widdop in the halves and Hardaker at fullback, with the added bonus that you get a fullback who can catch and defend his line and one-on-one.

i too would have gone for this option
i also have concerns about farrell and Joel tomkins in the back row against australia and nz as they will get steam rollered imo and wont be able to offer much in attack

i recall that the majority of wigan fans were outraged that england chose sinny as england captain irrespective of form prior to the tournaments?
funny how biscuit bones is unavailable for selection again eh despite being named england captain prior to the tournament?

i am hoping for at least one win against samoa and 2 respectable defeats to australia and new zealand,but we could also end up with some serious drubbings without a doubt

If Australia don't get some props from somewhere then they'll be the ones worried about getting steamrollered.

Farrell might be a bit lightweight, but Tomkins won't be troubled unduly by the physical side of the game.

It's a pity Australia are so good everywhere else, because our props ought to destroy them up the middle.

One things for sure though.we should get to see how good a player Widdop is, as the front row should be able to set a platform for him to do the business.

Well, after all that I'd put Matty Smith as England's Man Of The Match against Samoa.

As for our much-vaunted pack...apart from Graham, who was just ok, every one of them was poor.

Now that's odd, because I'd have given MotM to Chris Hill, great stint off the bench today.

The England pack were "poor"? In what way?

Consistently made metres and set the platform for Smith to put up some excellent attacking kicks. Some individual errors, but you can say that right across the side pretty much.

England will be better for the run-out and additional time to acclimatise. Certainly didn't see anything in the Australia pack to scare them for next week.