Leeds played with two British centres all season.

One has retired (but is still probably the best) and the other was Lee Smith.

If other clubs didn't play antipodeans in their threequarters then Lee Smith might not have been selected.

I wouldn't argue with that.

He did nothing wrong on Saturday and was fairly solid.

Will they play with two British centres next season?

just for a bit of fun.

Pick 3 teams from your club

1) All British

2) All that have come through your academy

3) All local born(i.e for the Saints side all St.Helens born.)

All must be eligible for Superleague 2010

Thinking caps on.

British

1- Richards
2- Goulding
3- Gleeson
4- Pryce
5- Ainscough
6- O'Loughlin
7- Tomkins
8- Fielden
9- McIllorum
10- Prescott
11- Coley
12- Mossop
13- Tomkins

14- O'Carroll
15- Davies
16- Farrell
17- Mellor

Wigan Academy

1- Briscoe
2- Aspinwall
3- Wild
4- Brown
5- Ainscough
6- S.Tomkins
7- Sean Long
8- Prescott
9- McIllorum
10- O'Carroll
11- Gilmour
12- Wild
13- O'Loughlin

14- Hansen
15- Hargreaves
16- Bibey He has 2 challenge cup winners medals you know!
17- Jones/Deacon/Robinson
17-

Wigan Lads

1- Briscoe
2- Aspinwall
3- Gleeson
4- Brown
5- Goulding
6- S.Tomkins
7- Long
8- Prescott
9- Newton
10- Wood
11- Tickle
12- Wild
13- O'Loughlin

14- J.Tomkins
15- Hargreaves
16- Clarke
17- Fitzpatrick

1. Mathers
2. Smith
3. Walker
4. Gibson
5. Hall
6. McGuire
7. Tansey
8. Burgess
9. McShane
10. Bailey
11. Jones-Buchanan
12. Ablett
13. Murrell

14. Jones-Bishop
15. Kaye
16. Scruton
17. Williams

All born and have played for Leeds in last 5 years and doesn't include players such as Burrow, Sinfield, Diskin, Calderwood, Ward, Watkins; If going for Leeds lads can add Peacock.

For next season:

1. Jones-Bishop
2. Broughton
3. Coady
4. Senior
5. Hall
6. McGuire
7. Burrow
8. Bailey
9. Diskin
10. Peacock
11. Jones-Buchanan
12. Ablett
13. Sinfield

14. Burgess
15. McShane
16. Watkins
17. Kirke
18. Amor
19. Pitts

Exactly. Not good enough at this level. Not that do have any fullbacks good enough for this level, mind.

Exactly. this is a lose-lose scenario. As it is he was a marginal selection. What is the benfit to English RL in playing him? If if someone else picked in this position played as poorly as he did (it would be difficult to play worse) then at least it would be a tough experience they could hopefully learn from. Or we move onto the next person on the list until the right one is found. With Smith - he's gone no matter what. And if Smith did play adequately he is still gone and a replacement will need finding. The only beneficiaries from a decent Smith performance would be the England RU who wouldn't miss the opportunity to cash in on the publicity. A truly inexplicable selection.

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?

Why are people banging on about building for the bl00dy world cup, thats not what Internationals are about, we need to pick the best available team to win the tournament that we are playing in. Picking players who may or may not be good enough or available for a tournament thats taking place in 4 years time is pure lunacy.

I'm less inclined to blame Lee Smith and McGuire than I am to blame Tony Smith for another of his magical defensive patterns.

He even outdid the ones he treated us to in the World Cup, which I didn't think possible.

Against inferior sides like the Welsh and the French you can offer them the opportunity to go wide in the knowledge there's a good chance they will muck it up and turn the ball over.

You can't challenge the Aussies and Kiwis in the same way - you have to respect the threat out wide irrespective of where you are on the field.

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.

and the tomkins brothers are from chorley, not wigan