Looking at that side and considering who the coach is we'll be lucky to get across the line vs NZ. If they'd have had Johnson and Foran (and JWH, Mannering, Taumalolo) we'd have had no chance, but their halves are nobodies so we still have a chance.

Try actually watching Sam next time he plays instead of relying on the old prejudices. That's if you are capable.

From a purely selfish club point of view I'd hoped Tomkins would have pulled out of the squad, he's had two serious injuries this year and I doubt he's had a proper off season since he first broke into the Wigan first team.
Got to say though I'd prefer Hardaker at fullback anyway, I'm old school and think being a top defender should be no.1 priority in that position.

You are Eddie "Paul Wellens is the worlds best full back" Hemmings in disguise. I claim my £5.

Hardaker is better at defending the line, at defending breaks one-on-one, at catching the high ball, and is infinitely better at returning kicks. Tomkins has a better creative and handling game, and certainly used to have a better broken-field running game but I don't know how much pace he's lost with his latest injuries. Hardaker is also on form. It's a no-brainer that Hardaker should be full-back, but you'd want both of them in your team.

So the other thing to consider is that though Tomkins hasn't played half and Hardaker hasn't played centre for years, Tomkins used to be a better half than Hardaker was a centre. Tell Sam that and it might massage his ego enough for him to accept the position.

Nope, not even close, and Hardaker is blessed with the one thing Wellens never had, pace.
If he was 100% fit I'd have Tomkins at 6 but he isn't so I'd rather he wasn't playing at all.

I think next autumn it'll be a totally different story. Ratboy will have had a season playing behind one of the best packs in a team that will dominate defences and strangle attacks with great enthusiasm but those defending him must be remembering his Wigan performances instead of the dross he's served up for the last 2 years. He has been truly awful and out of his depth entirely. That considered he's been playing outside the current golden boot winner and a pack containing Mannering, Hoffman and Matulino.

Personally, I think both are exciting and top quality players. Its not wrong to try to shoehorn them both into the 13. We don't have that much quality that we can not pick players of their quality. One will have to be out of position. Question is which will have least impact?

I'm not sure I know the answer. I think a lot of the stuff that Tomkins does brilliantly could be produced at halfback, but we may lose the structure or creativity that one of the others brings. If you move Hardaker to centre you still get the benefit of his good defense, but you miss his ability under the high ball. If both make the 13 then I will be comfortable. If one misses out, I think its a mistake

Hardaker at FB for me, with Widdop and Gale in the halves. Pick people in their positions or not at all.

I don't think McNamarra can put anything but the most basic structure into England. He does not have the time or the capability. I would have my best guys on the field, starting with Hardaker at FB. Then have Tomkins in the halves and let KOL and Widdop organise the forwards. Precedent for this is the previous selection of "wild card" Rangi Chase.
You have Roby as well running the dummy half. I'd also be a bit radical and have a half back on the bench (just not Smith).

That makes no sense.

The Australian team that won the World Cup at Old Trafford when they hammered the New Zealanders contained no less than 4 full backs - Slater, Boyd, Hayne and Inglis.

You pick your best players then find a way to accomodate them all. The idea that Gale has more to offer than Tomkins is, frankly, ridiculous.

And then you end up in David Waite territory with a team full of loose forwards but no ball player.

You have to find a balance to the side. You wouldn't pick Hardaker at 1, Tomkins at 6 and Rangi Chase at 7 for example, because that leaves you without an organiser or a kicking game

Of course you wouldn't. But you would choose Hardaker/Tomkins/Widdop (or Gale or Smith).

Is Rangi one of your best players?

FWIW I think he's immensely talented at Super League level, but probably not at International level. Smith, who doesn't have a fraction of Rangi's ability actually slotted in quite well last winter.

But back to my original point. We aren't blessed with enough players of real quality that we can afford to discard Tomkins on the basis that he has had a poor season in the NRL. Class is permanent as they say.

1. Hardaker
6. Widdop
7. Gale

^^^ For me but Steve Mac will no doubt "stick" with the usual suspects

It makes sense. You just don't agree. I remember watching Richard Horne on the wing at Hull against the Aussies. Or Karl Pratt. They looked rubbish. Mainly because they were out of position.

If Tomkins had been ripping up trees like GI, or Hayne, or any of the others maybe I'd agree with you about flexibility, but I don't think he has, and he's injured.

So I'd like to see people given a go in their actual positions. They can change it as the series progresses if they want, but at least start with giving people a chance to show what they can do. But Tomkins in the halves when he hasn't played there for at least four seasons? After an injury? In an international as the first game? Why take that risk when he's got Widdop and a choice of Smith who's played there before internationally (albeit not very well)? Or take a punt on Gale and see how he goes.

But like Andy Gilder says, balance is another factor. I wouldn't be gutted if Tomkins and Widdop were the Halves but I'd be hoping it had been bloody brilliant in training and putting a lot of faith in the coach. Faith I don't have tbf.

Agree.

Fundamentally Hardaker is well equipped to fulfil the FB role; without question it is HIS position. Defensively one on one he has no equal; taking the bomb, equally so; returning it probably at least.

He is [unot[/u an international class centre where the requirements are different; not least being able to make a good pass. Playing him at LC would be even worse. At RC he can be okay, but never at LC. Hall?Burgess? whoever on the LW would never get a pass. It would be pusillanimous to select him there simply to accommodate Tomkins at FB.

Agree. Whilst I'm sure Hardakers running would still make him fairly dangerous at centre his passing would restrict winger opportunities. But mostly the defensive responsibilities are very different. You have to cover your half and makes lots of decisions very quickly plus you've got to get your shoulder into second rowers who are going to be running at you and your half.
It's a very different defensive and tackling requirement than at full back.

Just to defend Tomkins, he was very good last year at times. This year he's looked a shadow of his former self when he has played. He seems to have lost a yard of pace and TBH I think playing alongside such a dominant halfback as Johnson (in terms of being the go to man) has blunted him as well.

I have no doubt that when he's back at Wigan he'll get his mojo back - its an easier competition and he'll be the go to man. But nobody should believe that he is the same player today that left Wigan.

It'll be interesting to see how he and they cope with the expectation, which will doubtless be sky high when the season begins. They're already favourites for next year's GF. Do they perform well as favourites? I personally think they're more dangerous when they develop the siege mentality of the underdog. I rather suspect their more rabid element will expect ST to turn them into an all-conquering side. Is that likely? Probably not. An early shellacking in the WCC could pick away at any insecurities. Fascinating stuff and I, for one, am already looking forward to next season.

Me too!

I think ST has suffered from injuries and poor form of over the last two seasons. It would seem that there have been a number of reasons for the poor form and many of them are likely to have been solved by returning home. He will still be a potent threat, although I accept, if he has permanently lost a yard of pace, he will not be the player he once was.

I think its fair to say that Wigan, as things stand, will be the team to beat next year. It's almost certain they will also go back to the old style of most things catered for, and going through Sam Tomkins and if he isn't that same player of a couple of years ago and teams are able to shut it down, it could create problems for Wigan as it is very one dimensional. I suppose we will get an idea in this coming series.

Tomkins is a great player....no doubt but i will be mightily relieved to see the back of Bowen who seems to save his absolute best games for us.

Leeds have, on occasions, got some mileage out of Tomkins failings at full back but Bowen seemed to destroy us every time we played, inc last Saturday when he was one of the better players on the pitch.

I'm also not quite ready to crown Wigan. Burgess will be a loss and I've heard rumours that O'Loughlin may hang up his boots due to the injuries.

If that's true about O'Loughlin, then why pick him over Cuthbertson for England? Shows McBanana up to be exactly what he is. A Useless Rugby League Coach.

Wigan are on two GF defeats. As saints can testify, that can become a habit.

Man for man there is no way Wigan should be favourites. Their scrum half is garbage, they are weak in the centres, their props are mediocre, hooker one-dimensional, loose forward on borrowed time. How they achieve so much has to be a credit to Wane.