Quote: Andy Gilder "I love this line of argument.
If Tony Smith had picked an experimental side full of young kids who weren't the first choice selection and it had got stuffed by 60, he would have been crucified for selling out those who had paid good money to see a competitive game.
He picks what was arguably his best available side, it gets as close to Australia as any GB/England side in the last five years (with one exception) and all of a sudden he should have been building for the future rather than picking a side to win in the here and now.
If people want teams picked for development purposes, why is nobody questioning the selections of Morley and Peacock?'"
The point you miss is that Lee Smith simply isn't that good and he offered no clear evidence he was was clearly better than the other contenders for the job even before his pitiful effort. If he was at the Mark Gasnier level of centre play then you would have a point - Smith isn't anywhere that close. Morley and Peacock OTOH have a justifiable case that they can offer a good deal more than the alternatives, plus they will still be around next year at the least. Smith will be gone, sadly for England a month too late.
