Fair enough then

Would have preferred to see Carvell in for Westwood because I think a bench of Crabtree/Carvell/Brugess/Eastmond could really hurt the Aussies.

I think England have to keep it in the middle and try and steam-roller 'em.

It's a shame Fox is not cos when he's in his best form he's the most exciting English three-quarter but his poor performances haven't helped him at all.

See the Fox vs Briscoe debate is a non starter for me, Briscoe might be young but he's beyond his years and a very strong powerful and fast winger with many internationals ahead of him, he's also somewhat of an unknown to most outsiders. Fox on the other hand has faults to his game which can be exploited massively, not that he cant be a match winner on his day but he can also lose you a game just as easily.

For security reasons...etc I think Briscoe has to be in but if it were Fox i'd be happy enough.

On another point I feel we lack strength in the centres, could we possibly use Ellis and Gilmour out wide with Wilkin moving into the back row? I know we'd lose a bit of speed out of the backs but both these players have played at centre and done very well there. The possibility of having some big guys out wide forcing the opposition to go into the middle where our strengths are could be a winning tactic.

I certainly agree with the Gilmour comment - I thought he was unlucky not to be in the squad and I think he could have been a good option as a powerful athletic centre - he is also a proven international who has performed against the Aussies and NZ

Ellis is a world class second row and at least Smith is playing people in position (I know Peacock is usually a prop but he can handle second row)

That team is set for BIFF, then Tomkins can pick the gaps with Eastmond later on.
Go rip their heads off and down their necks guys.

I am just gutted that Senior and Gleeson are not in the centres.

It would have added much needed strength and experience to that back line. If they were in, I would actually look at that England team and fancy their chances.

We can't use Eastmond as a replacement hooker. Hookers defend down the middle and take a lot of punishment. Eastmond has tremendous talent, but physicality isn't something many Saints fans would say he excels at.

I think Smith may be thinking that in the era of slower PTBs as officiated by Ganson, interchange hookers are no longer essential. So play a young, fit tough-as-nails hooker who rarely misses a tackle, and yet has speed and an eye for an opportunity. Roby's our closest hooker to the sort of role that Cameron Smith played last week.

I'd have thought that you're more likely to see Eastmond used as cover for the backs. Anyone picks up an injury or starts dropping , and Eastmond can come on to cover pretty much any position there.

Agreed, we should definatly not pick our best half and our goal kicker.

Smith controls the game a hell of a lot more than Roby can and that will be a massive difference with Tomkins and Maguire at HB

I agree Roby is probably our best option but he defiantly needs to re evaluate his game. Looking at the game of one of the finest hookers of the past 20 years imo in Smith isn’t a bad start. Smith can not only scoot but also offers excellent distribution, has a killer off load, a phenomenal engine, leadership as well as top place and hand kicking games.

Roby has the engine, the ability to scoot well, the good defence and excellent strength but he defiantly needs to step up to the plate more with his game control and leadership as well.

A stint in the NRL would most defiantly help him advance his career.

I thought Cameron Smith was poor last week. The Aussie pack never got going and they lacked direction. The fact that none of their backs got any ball at all suggest their pack didn't really do the job it was meant to.

The Ausie pack is the worst Aussie pack i have seen and i thought Smith did well to say most the pack was hidding from the Kiwis.

Last year people called for change and time to bring young blood into side with more than 2 teams having all players in the side and credit to smith he done that so all English people should rally around the team because this team will turn Aussies over.

one over thing i am sick and tired of listning about people going on about Inglis if you watch him more than once you will notice his defence is poor and tageted by the kiwi last week in defence when more than once he got run over.

and a lot more offensively capable, peter fox is a pudding

Nice comments except the last one
We will NEVER produce a player of Inglis' ability, he will go down as one of the greatest to have ever graced the game. I think he's still younger than Michael Shenton and Lee Smith?? and been around for years. I could be wrong there but there's not much in it.
Every try he scores is of freakish ability, he doesnt do walk ins, just look at that famous video site. he could tackle like a binliner and it wouldnt matter

Inglis also weighs 110 kilos - 17 stone+ in old money. The only way to defend against him is to get in his face every time he gets the ball. In fact, our centres could do worse than watch the way Daryl Powel and Carl Gibson defended against Meninga and McGaw in 1990 (?). Two centres both giving away massive weight and power managed to keep their opponents in check for virtually the whole series.

I like Fox, but Briscoe looks a bit more physical. That side of things is sadly lacking across our backline. Hall is the only back with any size. It's a darn good job IMO that Australia have Lockyer and not a Fittler-esque stand off against McGuire/Tomkins.

Just on the halfbacks, it'll be interesting to see how they're played - left/right or one outside the other. In any event McGuire needs to turn up and those two plus Sinfield and Roby need to get some plays sorted out. If we go in attempting to be all 'off the cuff' we'll get eaten alive.