I like Matty Smith, but I think its a case of him being more "steady at every level" than anything else.

It a bit like painting with numbers with Smith, he'll do the things he can every week, to the best of his ability, he'll run the moves, his boot's big and he's no speed bump in defence, but he's nothing to fall back on if plan A isn't working, he wont adjust his game plan, he won't look out for gaps, he won't probe the defence.

On Saturday that was enough. When you play for a top club like Wigan, it will will be enough most weeks, but I'd take a Danny Maguire any day of the week over him.

As someone who doesn't watch NRL, I must say I one of those waiting for the great white hope of Gareth Widdop to materialise. I'm not saying he had a bad game, but my expectation are a lot higher.

I must say, I thought Widdop was very poor for most of the series. He really kills the possibility of creating overlaps by running towards the touchline with the ball instead of squaring up and fixing defenders. Williams was also guilty of this, although to a lesser extent. I was in favour of McNamara's decision to bring Smith in because, while he can't do a lot of the flashy things those other players can do, he plays square and is very effective at the organisational work a playmaker should be able to do. I don't think it's any coincidence that Watkins finally got some good ball in the last test - shame he had a bit of a mare with his hands.

He's not the most popular figure, McNamara, and he doesn't help himself in that respect with the weird public persona that he adopts, but I think it's only fair to recognise that England have improved under his management. Since he's been in charge we've lost some close ones, but I can't remember us ever being out of a game. I think finding a dependable half back partnership will be the thing that decides his legacy (assuming he stays on).

I'd love to see Kevin Brown play alongside Matty Smith for England. I know he plays for a team that finished in the bottom 4, but Widnes are so impotent without him. He makes things happen and defenders don't have a clue how to cope with him. If he had the quality of the players for England around him, he could cause so many problems. He brings out the best in the runners around him.

I think Smith is a very good player and should never have left Saints.
However, I think the best English halfback last season was Luke Gale from Castleford. He has the ability to break the line, has a good kicking game and his support play is first class. Oh I forgot, he doesn't play for Wigan

I don't think anyone is suggesting that if a better option comes along they shouldn't get picked. Like I said though, its Widdop who ought to be more at risk. Smith is the kind of player you can at least structure your team around. Widdop looks like he is, but seems to have lost even basic organisational skills and is absolutely non-existent as an attacking threat.

To be fair to Widdop, he seemed to go into his shell once the Dragons signed Marshall, but a player with his experience ought to be able to take games by the scruff of the neck and he seems less and less likely to do so.

We all seem to agree on Matty Smith's strengths.

I think its important to note that, although what he does well may seem like staple skills for a 7, there are plenty of players who fail to do these basics.

We lost a GF with Smith playing.

Eastmond left, we couldn't hold onto him. Had he stayed (and stayed fiit) he would have been playing on Saturday, and causing the Kiwis trouble. In one GF defeat he scored all our points.

We [ishould[/i have kept Smith instead of Scott Moore. That was the mistake imo

To be honest I don't think Matty Smith has improved all that much since we let him go, bit more experience and composure perhaps but still not creative and dominant to orchestrate a team consistently. Every season the standard of Superleague weakens as the quality of players available suffers, Matty is OK in a structured side like Wigan but Saints wanted created creative open play half backs which we never got for the remaining 6 years courtesy of Eastmond. A fit Walsh is much superior than Matty Smith, internationally we have struggled so long for half backs similar to Saints, George Williams looks very promising and should develop into a much better player than Matty.

Matty Smith is a meat and veg player. Does the basic well enough at a consistent level but has no flair or spark.

I think this idea - that a steady, organising half back is for boring, structured play and an instinctive, pacey half is for creative open play - is a common misconception. Players need space, time and possession in good positions in order to really improvise. A really good organiser at half back provides all of these things. He himself might not be producing crazy youtube moments, but he's creating the conditions for other players to do that. Matty Smith's directness on Saturday meant that we got much better quality ball out to people like Watkins than we had in the previous two tests. Conversely, the improvisational running of Widdop and Williams meant that when the ball got to the edges it was always a blind alley. I agree that Williams will ultimately become a better player than Matty Smith, but I think a player like Williams needs a player like Smith alongside him. It would be great if we had a more talented version of Smith to call upon (look at Cooper Cronk, for example - he is first and foremost an organising half, and the Aussies always have one in their side), but with the exception of McGuire, who now seems to be out of the picture, we don't.

EDIT: By 'we', of course, I mean England, not Saints.

The Grand Final that Matty Smith played in, is this the same one where he'd spent the entire season on loan to Salford and got called back to play in that one game (my memory might be betraying me)? If so, who expects a player to just come back in for a game after spending the season elsewhere and just slip back into the structures etc It's essentially like signing for a new team...
And again, if I remember right, despite losing that game he played well.

I said it at the time and I'll say it now, Eastmond, just like Lomax wasn't at his most effective as a scrum half. He was an explosive runner, who was exciting to watch, but he wasn't the type of player who could guide the team around the pitch and come up with intelligent plays on the last tackle. In my opinion, he was a fullback thrown in to the scrum half role in a desperate attempt to recapture the Sean Long glory days.