tough choices for an England coach to make.I like it!

if you can afford to leave out players of the quality of hardaker and lomax and makinson and charnley in your back line then things are looking good.

When you have 2 talents like these two, you find a way. The obvious way is to play Tomkins at 6. Its not playing him out of position. Realistically he is a 6. Widdop and Tomkins in the halfs and Hardaker at FB? Id take that.

Cudjoe is a good all round centre and rarely lets anyone down, he hasn't reached his peak yet so i would stick with him as the other centre.

Tomkins
Briscoe
Watkins
Hardaker
Hall

Tomkins wasn't the best fullback last year. Hardaker was. Hardaker should have been England number 1.

Tomkins however, is a better player, or was, so you have to make room.

Tomkins in halfs for me, if his form warrants it.

How many years is it since Tomkins played 6?

Sorry Hardaker, you're a great backup and the strength in depth is good to have.

Less strength and more speed, but that's the exact comparison I was making in my head last night for sure.

Great to see the talent we have continue to progress. With Locke leaving the Warriors it doesn't look like Tomkins will be making the transition back to the halves just yet, so we do have a welcome dilemma.

Hardaker blew it when sent home from the England squad.

Based upon the current method of team selection Sinfield should be full back and Rob Burrow prop.

I'm in the camp of having Hardaker/Lomax at fullback with Tomkins and Widdop in the halves but it's a non debate. Sinfield is guaranteed a spot so this side won't move on in a different direction until he calls it quits.

I dunno. Ask Australia, who play Greg Inglis in the centres. (And also play fullbacks Darius Boyd and Jarryd Hayne out of position).

Hardaker is the best all-round fullback England have. Tomkins is the most dangerous attacking player. They both have to be in our strongest team, whether it's Tomkins 1, Hardaker 4 or Hardaker 1, Tomkins 6.

Given Hardaker is the better defensive fullback and unlike Tomkins will also actually return kicks, the latter is the common-sense option for me.

I think Hardaker and Tomkins are too similar to play them 1 and 6. I don't think they would provide the best balance for an England team.

They will both want the ball in their hands in similar positions and they will always look to run with the ball. I don't think that will be good for the team.

I think the balance of Lomax and Tomkins would work far better, for example, purely because lomax is a different sort of player compared with Tomkins.

Tomkins MUST play at 1. It's who plays at 6 and 7 that's the issue.

Hardaker's try last night was fantastic. He really is having a top season. Gives a good headache for the England coach!

There is no way to sugar coat it Hardaker has at least 4-5 years to prove he is at Tomkins level, i would love for him to do it at Wigan. There isn't a better english full back than Sam Tomkins PERIOD.

Darius Boyd grabbed a spot when Australia didn't have amazing wingers and kept hold of it. Inglis was played for years at and add to the Fact Billy Slater was the best full back for many years. Stop talking nonsense.

You know Hardaker is at Tomkins level when people start saying "well it easy to do it super league but its different to do it in the NRL". On a side note Tomkins is doing it in the NRL by the way incase you don't have premier sports.

Has Tomkins learnt how to catch a high ball then?

Look as if he had to show Slater how to in the last match

biggest bull in the world that Tomkins is weak at the back, he might be if Inglis is contending with him but who isn't?