Because the team as a whole might benefit?
I said before the tournament id have gone with Hardaker at 1, Tomkins at 6 & Widdop at 7. I don't think you miss much, if anything, attack-wise at full back and gain defensively.

Most players aren't playing exactly the same role at international level as they are for their clubs anyway, even when named in the same position so I don't see a problem with moving players between positions where they would excel or have similar skill sets.

Having said all that, if McNamara has nailed his colours to Smith & Widdop then go with it. I'd like to see them retained as England halves until after the next World Cup. We chop & change far too much at international level.

Let's shuffle a couple of players out of position to get hardacker on the team fwiw I rate hardacker very highly but Sam Tomkins is a much better player

Correct, it's a Leeds thing where Whinos fans will argue for the inclusion of as many of their players in the England team as possible, ad nauseam. If Carl Ablett was in the England squad, they'd be arguing for him to replace Dan Sarginson! Meanwhile, the decidedly overrated Kallum Watkins retains his place in the opposite centre position despite the fact that his performances stunk throughout the whole tournament.

I'm really starting to think he's being wasted at full back. I also think the Warriors was the worst club he could have signed for. Sam plays second-fiddle to Johnson every week and i'm sure it's harming his development. He should have signed for a club where he was going to be the go to guy. Instead he seems to have a bit-part role and only has a chance to shine when Johnson doesn't play. A great season for Hardaker and his position could come under threat (although doubtful with SM as coach)...

His passing game is terrible, why would you want him at 6?

On what evidence do you base that?

I was going to say, if anything Tomkins weakness is his kicking. His passing seems fine to me.

I knew you would be along first page Billy with this exact response.I could probably have gone word for word.Nice to see you are consistent these days.Keep it up (*waits for response of Whinos fans being consistent in Whining for player inclusion blah blah...)

Back in the real world, i am making a genuine point with my England hat on that we would be better served with Tomkins moving to the halves where it would allow Hardaker and Lomax on his return from injury as the full back options where we would lose virtually nothing in that position and probably gain another threat in the halves.Like i say, probably hinges on how things go at the Warriors and will be interesting to see how this next season pans out for Tomkins.

Hardaker is a fantastic full back and IMO one of our few world class players.

We should have found a spot for him and in my opinion it should have been at full back with tomkins in the halves. My worry would not be tomkins ability to play there, but his ability to defend in the line.

Having seen Matty Smith's defence for a few years, I would say there's no weakening of the defensive line.

That said, with Graham and O'Loughlin do we really need a ball handling fullback? Too many chiefs and not enough Indians. Given Matty Smith's kicking is hit and miss and the more natural attacking game of Tomkins, I would move the latter in to the halves and take the former our of the team. Smith has proven himself effective in SL, especially with Wigan protecting him in the defensive line, but his all round game isn't strong enough/consistent enough for international RL.

As for moving players out of their club positions, where did jared Hayne play for Australia in the World Cup final and where did he play for the eels?

All totally ridiculous. He's in his best position as determined by numerous coaches. Leave him be. England played OK in that tournament IMO - nowhere did it feel like we were outclassed, we could easily have won all three.

Finally, it's stupid to make sweeping judgements of someone based on one game (or three for that matter). A few weeks ago we were hearing that Tomkins was an appalling defensive liability at full-back. You could have said exactly the same about Hall (on the wing) in the last game (if you're inclined to ridiculous over-reaction that is).

Can Hardaker play centre instead of Watkins? Watkins was poop.

He can, but there are a few better options there.

This is not a thread about getting Hardaker in the team at all costs anyway as you and others seem to assume, its about maximising England's potential with the talent they have available.Continuing with Tomkins at FB and having an average half back with no threat in Smith and having 2 players of the quality of Hardaker and Lomax when fit in the stand seems criminal to me.Like i said, i can't see things changing unless the Warriors decide to switch Sam to HB anyway but if they do i think would be to our benefit.

Does Tomkins have any type of kicking game if he plays at no6?. If you look at Australia when all are fit they have Smith,Thurston & Cronk. NZ have Johnson, Foran (& Leaului when he's on).

If we lose a kicking option at half back to accomodate Tomkins wouldn't England be easier to close down on the last tackle, bombs, touch finding etc?

Shame the best kicking half back in England is running around in a Scotland shirt.