Still doesn't change that 'All Star' matches should be in addition to the international programme, not replacing them. As far as I'm concerned, England should have annual games against France and Wales at the very least and also alternate between playing against Ireland and Scotland in that time.

And you say you arent arrogant or disrespectful to France

. Eventually yes, they would. They have, and they will again.
France i think.
That would be different. Not necessarily better or worse. Just different.

No, I mean whopping margins like 60-6 and 66-12 in the last 2 years (we are making this decision based upon recent results remember). In the same period, our worst loss has been by 30 points (46-16) in the final of the Four-Nations (which we reached by beating the world champions). You have to go back to 2002 to find a defeat as big as the one the French suffered at home to England - the only, albeit teeny tiny, difference being that GB had to fly to the other side of the world to play a midweek test in Sydney.



You can get worse, you can lose 100% of your matches over the same timescale, like France against us. And you could top it off by losing to Wales in a second tier tournament too.

in the last 21 years?

I can't see why people seem to have a problem with the fact there could be an interesting and slightly different Rugby League match coming up to go and watch.

If this was football and England had the chance to play a team consisting of English based foreigners (we could call them 'Arsenal' or something) I reckon the public would support it.

It's little wonder that the sport of Rugby League hasn't spread with any success much further south than Warrington.

All you people do is argue all the time. It's getting a bit 'previous' now.

why just the last two years? and Why ignore the 34-12 result?

You are comparing 2 friendlies 60-6 and 66-12 then ignoring the last friendly that England played against Australia which finished 64-10.

Oh btw and France havent lost 100% of their last 20 matches against us

oh yeah thats why football does it all the time. invents teams and gets massive support.

What it definitely doesn't do is make sure that even the big international sides have to play the smaller international sides very very regularly.

It certainly wouldnt make sure that a team like San Marino played the big sides, or Andorra.

In fact football is known for its lack of internationals and its dumping of them for gimmick games.

Oh hang on................

How far back do you want to go to make a decision as to whether the current French team are providing decent competition for the current England team? What have results from years ago got to do with the decision as to how best to prepare an England team in 2011?



You are missing the obvious conclusion here - did Australia continue to play mid season friendlies against England after that friendly result or did everyone decide that it was pointless?

Nobody is saying France can't play in competitions they qualify for, just that these friendlies are as pointless as the one you refer to, which was never repeated.



I didn't say they had.

So you think if it was announced that the England football team would be playing a one off game (maybe to become a regular fixture) against a brand new side containing the best foreigners that are currently playing in the Premier league no one would be interested?





Yup.

People are right.


You ARE deluded!

I dont know, how far do you want to go back? the 34-12 result was between the two results you quoted

Do Australia continue to play against England? When we were demolished by Australia in 2002 we had an Australian tour in 2003 and the start of the tri-nations (in earnest the 99 tri-nations wasnt really the same format, or regularity) in 2004. What are replacing the game against France with, that includes France? We swapped the friendlies for competitive games, our results were closer, when we have done the same with France the results have been closer. If we follow your logic, why are we casting France out and not bringing them in?

So which time scale was the same timescale if not the same as the timescale which was mentioned?

Why do you think they dont do it Barry?

Not in mid season friendlies, no. That is what we're talking about, is it not?



We have given France the chance of competitive games against us in the 4N - they didn't qualify as they couldn't even beat Wales.



The "same timescale" was the same length of time over which the 20 games against Australia had been played, obviously.