Bring back GB

I wouldn't.

Usual debate about feelings of national identity etc, but I would need some convincing in the cases of all 5 that anything has changed in their circumstances other than that they hadn't previously been deemed good enough to play for England. Since none of them, as far as I know (I'm prepared to be corrected) have ever been resident in Scotland and weren't born there, it's hard to remove my cynical hat.

My cynical hat also remains firmly on my head with Rangi Chase. Acknowledging the possibility that his choice reflects a genuine feeling of allegiance to his country of residence, I just can't quite believe it given how little time passed, and how little else in his material situation appeared to have changed, between his stated aspirations to play for NZ and his decision to play for England.

I suppose though, we should defer to the England coach, and trust that he is happy with the motivations of the players he has selected.

On a happier note, it's pleasing (to me, not to you I don't suppose Keith) to see the entire Leeds 3/4 line selected for this squad.

are burgess and ellis only not in as they are in the NRL?

Who are we due to play when the Exiles game goes ahead? Surely we won't play with that volume of players missing!?

I'm surprised by the omission of Atkins & Shenton from either squad.
No Luke Robinson either.
None of the Aussie based players (8 in total I think) were considered.
IMV Hardaker is fortunate to be in the elite squad.

Well we've deliberately rearranged the Wakey game for the Monday after one of the exiles games, so there's not much getting around that one!

A severe oversight on my part, for which I have given myself a good old rollicking.

I'm confident that none of the Leeds players will look out of their depth on the international stage against Wales and France. The same would apply to the two faux international fixtures against Exilia.

The most dissapointing thing for me is that these faux international fixtures present a much stronger test than Wales and France. And teams like Wales and Scotland will never get better while their best Players (brough, Henderson etc...) can choose to change their international team as they like and play for England.

Don't worry about it. The problem is this 'England' malarkey. As others have pointed out, we should play as GB. That's our international RL heritage and it simplifies matters concerning national identity. I don't care who is selected to play for England. It matters not a jot to me as I consider myself British.

I must admit if it was up to me I'd go rather have a GB side.

As a matter of interest, why do you not consider yourself a citizen of the United Kingdom? What do you have against Northern Ireland? Or, for that matter why not European? Why draw the arbitrary line at a collection of three countries if you don't feel your identity is covered by just the one?

Because my passport says I'm a British citizen.


My passport says I'm a British citizen which constitutes the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.


Europe isn't a country. It's an economic union. My passport says I'm a British citizen which constitutes the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland as well as being a member of the European Union.


Which three countries have I drawn an arbitrary line at?

How come we have 2 games against Exiles this season. Aren't our top players complaining we have too many games?

It'd be hard to see where we'd get space to re-arrange a game, with the extra game from the WCC still to be fitted in as has been mentioned above

I hate agreeing with you, but I have no idea how, even in my own most wildly optimistic moments, I'm struggling to see how I can get excited about an international series with Wales and France. The Exiles game is an amusing carnival show and might at least be entertaining, though not terribly meaningful, but the other two are traditionally warm up matches for something juicier.