Out of form for the last couple of years and suffering from a number of injuries last season which cut him down to playing just a handful of games. Now he's out of the first Test against France and presumably isn't involved in the day to day training of the team. Why has McNamara shoehorned him into the squad? It's obvious he's not going to have an impact on the games, if he plays at all, his place should have gone to someone else. www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/34595311

Out of form for the last couple of years and suffering from a number of injuries last season which cut him down to playing just a handful of games. Now he's out of the first Test against France and presumably isn't involved in the day to day training of the team. Why has McNamara shoehorned him into the squad? It's obvious he's not going to have an impact on the games, if he plays at all, his place should have gone to someone else. www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/34595311

I disagree about his form over two seasons. 2014 he was very good for NZW whilst being asked to play a very different game from what he did at Wigan. People seem to remember him dropping a couple of bombs, but don't remember him finishing high up in a lot of NRL attacking stats.

2015 - disrupted by injury, played roughly half the games and failed to make an impact in a pretty poor side.

Class is permanent, form is temporary. He should be in the squad because he can cover 1 & 6/7 to a very high standard. Should he be starting over Hardaker, Widdop, Gale or Williams - no, those others have earned their opportunity.

Are you serious about Hardaker ?

He has been the best full back in SL by some distance and to say that he hasn't "earned" his opportunity in plain bonkers.
Do you wear cherry and white tinted glasses all the time ?

Go back and read what he said again. Should Tomkins be starting over those others - no, they have earned their opportunity.

It would appear from the way McNamara has been speaking to the press that if Tomkins is even remotely close to being fit he's a guaranteed starter. Given the way his domestic season ended, I'd say that's an absolute nonsense irrespective of what he's done in the past two years in the NRL. I'm all for showing loyalty to players, but not to the point where it significantly weakens your chances of winning.

must read more carefully

In fairness, although McNamara has been talking up the France game, it is the ideal chance to try some of the new players within the squad and try and work out if they could perform against the Kiwis.

Everyone knows what Tomkins can do (if fit) and what he brings to the party.

For players like Gale, it's a massive step up but, the dearth of HB options means that he should be given every chance to see how he goes at international level.
IMO, although he's had a great season for Cas, I've never thought he could play at the highest level, although it would be great to be proved wrong.

Again, the France game is the one to try these things.

Yup. Nothing. Based on his performances against NZ and Australia so far, zilch.

Wigan's game plan when he was there was centred around making a gap for him to exploit. Those gaps are harder to engineer at international level, and without them most of his attacking threat is nullified.

At the end of the day, regardless of form and differing abilities to Hardaker. Simple question is, is he fit? That he's not playing against France this weekend leaves a big question mark over whether he's able to play. It'll been around 2 months since his last game when the series kicks off, hard ask for anyone to come in and get right back up to speed at International level from that break.

Obviously Hardaker is first choice at FB but Tomkins deserves a spot in the team.

His form at the Warriors hasn't been that bad in a team which performs very inconsistently. 20 years of performances speak to that. Outside the Jones era, the Warriors have been very disappointing for an area with such a rich tradition of success in rugby league.

He hasn't played for 2 months, has a niggling knee injury and isn't able to take any part in the warm up game.

Would you risk him in a Test match against New Zealand?

Hardaker all the way, be a travesty if Tomkins gets the nod over him. I think Hardaker is far better defensively as well.

With the lack of natural centres in the squad I expect Hardaker to be moved there to accommodate Tomkins at FB. It's almost reminiscent of the 80s & taking an unfit Lee Crooks on tour out of desperation.

You do realise how e he has been this year don't you?

There isn't a lack of natural centres in the squad, there's 2 and we can only pick 2 for a game.

We have a natural left and a natural right centre, Cudjoe and Watkins should play there.
Also I think playing Hall outside his team mate, albeit on the opposite side to his normal position, makes sense and it allows McGillveray to partner with Cudjoe.

Hardaker should be at full back on merit, he's earned the right!

That was based on a Giants fan saying Cudjoe isn't in the squad for some reason. Although I don't think Cudjoe has done anything to warrant selection I would play him there before Bateman or Hardaker. But it's not about what you or I would pick.

Having watched the highlights of the Eng v Fra game, and doing my best to take the French performance into account, Bateman looked awesome playing in the left centre.

He showed his trademark aggression, work rate and toughness but also had some deft subtlety to his play with pace, feints, dummy's, and good positioning allowing him to create space for his winger.

Again, opposition was poor but that left edge of Farrell, Bateman, Burgess (all Wigan) looked smoothe and slick no doubt their club familiarity with one another was an advantage.