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

Especially when that wide threat involves possibly the best player in the world at the moment.

isnt this going to onion???

HKR Fans?Oh you mean General Zod?Who btw,actually gave his reasons as to why he didn't think T Briscoe was upto playing international RL yet,which is his opinion.He never once said that it was all T Briscoes fault.

Imo I think Tony Smith will keep Lee Smith on the RW

I nearly choked on my coffee then, thought you meant S Briscoe on the wing, presume you mean Tom. In that case good call, definitely on the Ellis centre someone with a bit of strength and speed who won't take a backwards step.

Why would you play your best forward out of position against the Kiwis?

I really don't understand any argument for Lee Smith in the squad. Not for the future - at this stage we have to assume he's lost to the game for good. And for now? Well I personally would have moved heaven and earth to get Senior back in there, as he's clearly head and shoulders above Smith as a centre right now.