I like Burrow(pace) and Sinfield(vision-kicking game),but I am a great believer in playing half backs at half back,so Sinfield would be loose forward in my team.But I am afraid I would still put an in form Danny Brough at half back as he adds zip/pace/vision/kicking game to the middle of the park and we have had years of playing our loose forward at stand off against the Aussies and it hasn't worked then,so why should it work now as we lose PACE in the middle by following that route.We should be able to compete up front with such as the Burgess's playing regular NRL week in week out and we have Tomkins steaming in from full back so IMO we need regular half backs to knit this lot together and Brough would have been great.To not even be in the squad is a HUGE mistake imo.I just hope we ain't counting the cost later on in then tournament.

You're a great believer in playing half backs at half back, so you'd play a half back at Loose Forward? That makes sense.


This argument that Sinfield is a loose forward hasn't held water for ages. He's played 6 for Leeds for years now. In fact, it's probably a long time since he's even played loose forward. And yet those who say he shouldn't be picked out of position, all want him playing there. Think more people need to pay attention to where people actually play at club level rather than just the number on their back.

Incorrect,

where do you think Danny Maguire has been playing?Sinfield plays stand off when Maguire has been injured.Sinfield always was a loose forward first and foremost.IMO he hasn't the speed to play at Test stand off.

Danny McGuire plays at 7 (although 6 and 7 are essentially interchangeable these days), so Sinfield & McGuire play both really. Rob Burrow plays hooker almost every week (at least when everyone is fit anyway).

Sinfield has played a little hooker this year, but only a little (while Sutcliffe was in the halves with Burrow). He has played absolutely no loose forward. HTH.

Just because I enjoy proving people wrong when they say I'm "Incorrect", I've just had a look at Leeds' starting line ups for this season.

Danny McGuire has played in 23 out of 33 competitive games. All 23 of those, he was named at Scrum Half.

Rob Burrow has only missed the one game this year. He has played 10 games at Scrum Half, and 22 at Hooker.
Coincidentally, every single one of the games he played at 7, was when Danny McGuire was injured and not playing.

Kevin Sinfield has played in 28 out of 33 games. 3 of them were at Hooker. 25 of them were at Stand Off. Absolutely Sweet F.A. of them were at Loose Forward.

That combination of Sinfield at 6, McGuire at 7 and Burrow at 9 was also the lineup for both Leeds' games against us this year. You obviously didn't notice.

Just hang on,I thought you meant where they actually played when the game started,sweet fa to do with where they were named before the game .Of the games I have watched Maguire took the stand offs role in most attacks and Sinfield was where I would expect a loose forward to be and in defence Sinfield tackled as a forward not a back.

What are you on about?

It doesn't really matter where a specific player is named on the team sheet IMO. Sinfield may be picked at stand off, scrum half or loose forward but his role is the same - to guide the team around the pitch and provide composure and leadership. I guess McBanana wants him to do the same for England. Chase is there to run a bit wider and link up with Tomkins. Same applies to Widdop if he gets picked.

Brough isn't as devastating a wide runner as Chase or Widdop so he's up against Sinfield IMO. Is he a better leader? Is he more composed? More reliable under pressure? I don't think he is. He may be better in other areas but I reckon McBanana has gone for Sinfield because of he provides the things in the middle that Brough isn't as strong at and complements the rest of the team.

Watch Sinfield get picked at hooker now to explode this theory into smithereens!

Because he decided in June to play for Scotland?

To be honest I think Brough is probably the most overrated player in the game at the moment, just my opinion of course...

ha ha ---man of steel overrated.

Just going back to sinfield,my point about playing him at No6/half back is that the opposition know he his just going to pass the ball on or kick on the last tackle,he's never gonna do a Roger Millward/Alan Hardisty and dummy then go the length of the field which means he's easier to defend against as they can just lay off him.
Just my thoughts.

What? He's had one good season and that makes him immune from criticism? Brough is a similar type of player to Sammut. When he hits the ground running he's devastating and can win games by himself. If he doesn't, then he's largely anonymous.

That's the dilemma for the coach: relaible - but predicatable, or unpredicatable but erratic. We don't seem to have the Millwards/Hardistys with the all round game and individual skills to call on now - or maybe that reflects the way defences are more tightly drilled, and the increased number of substitutes in the modern game mean you don't get to run at tired players as much. Have to admit McNamara has probably got this call right. Just hope the Burgess clan don't decide to enter their own family team this year!

Which is a fair point. However I would counter that with the idea that the reason Leeds work so well is that they have the organiser, the puppeteer, in Sinfield. The one that guides the team around, dictates the plays and organises very very well. Then they have the flashy, off-the-cuff, break out of nowhere halfback to complement that, in Danny McGuire (or Burrow when McGuire is out). There's a reason they chose not to play Sinfield & Sutcliffe together in the halves this year, instead swapping Burrow and Sinfield around between halves and hooker, to accomodate Sutcliffe (who is in a very similar mould to Sinfield).
Addy plays a similar role for us when he's at 6 (albeit not as well as Sinfield), which I believe is one of the reasons we looked better this year with Addy & Sammut, rather than when Gale was in the side.

I have absolutely no problem playing Sinfield at 6 for England. I think it's the right thing to do. But the 7 that plays with him MUST be one of those players like you describe. If you played another "organiser" type half, then exactly what you describe will happen. Which is why the most likely combo will be Sinfield & Chase I think.


As far as Brough goes, I agree with the idea of him being like Sammut. When Brough hits form, he's outstanding. And he's hit form in most games this year, hence the accolades. He does have that inconsistency though, where if he starts off badly, he either goes missing, or completely messes everything up. It's that same dilemma of whether you want to risk him having a bad game and you losing because of it, in order to have that chance of him having a good game and winning you the match almost single handedly.

Can someone name me one British half back from the last 30 years that has dominated every game he has played in?