But isnt the whole point that we shouldnt be signing potential marque players and trying to produce our own so we dont have to play either kevin brown or lockers at 6

Where do you get this not much bottle,how often did you see him play.

Quite a lot, not as much as some saints fans i worked with at the time.

Just an opinion mate

Nope. He was the brains that guided us to our most successfull period.
In fact, in 1999 he won the SL players' player of the year, which, these days, would have meant Man Of Steel.

Fair enough mate,but for me he should have been given a chance to play for GB,he was all class.

Some one said he and Robinson were the half backs in a wigan reserve team at one period.

Martyn was a truly natural stand-off. I don't think there was a problem with his bottle, but he did have a slightly iffy defensive technique which meant that he could miss the odd tackle. Ultimately I think that was what kept him out of the GB side, but the fact that he was so utterly superior to the players getting picked ahead of him in the position in every other respect (and particularly in areas in which we were woefully inept - kicking game and creativity, for example) just goes to illustrate the negative mindset that England/GB have always tended to take when it comes to selecting players in pivotal positions.

They've always picked a player like Darryl Powell, who'll give you a solid performance but won't present any danger to the opposition, over someone like Martyn, who might miss a tackle but will just as likely come up with something inspirational. The selection of O'Loughlin at 6 just smacks of the same attitude.

Australia don't think in this way. They could pick a safer full back than Billy Slater, for example (before anyone says it, BTW, I'm not comparing Billy Slater to Tommy Martyn). He's prone to the odd mistake, as we've seen in international RL (he certainly seems to make more mistakes than Minichiello used to), but they pick him because they know that in the trade-off between that and his awesome ability with ball in hand they'll come out well in the black.

But they'll leave out a ball playing loose and pick a player who is effectively a prop in that position.

They have ball playing half backs, though.

So? Just shows that Australia will also take a "safer" option in their selection, rather than a flair player.

I presume the opening comment about whoever is coaching our youngsters to stop it was an ignorant joke.

Ok, McNamara is far from a popular choice, but he's playing with one hand behind his back, without Eastmond, McGuire, a form Myler we wouldn't have to play SOL in at 6. He may do a good job, as already said he's a great passer of the ball and Robinson can go through a gap, as he did against NZ. Whoever plays there is on a hiding to nothing.

McNamara does need abit of credit for playing young players with potential who deserve their chance. It was easy to bring over Senior/Gleeson/Wellens etc. but he's looking long term.

And he's an easy scape goat. The fact is, England does not have a team to compete with the Aussies/NZ. Even at full strength all we'd get is the occasional lucky win. To improve England to a competitive level will take a long term plan to produce a minimum of 30 players from u15 upwards to pro level

Micheal Dobson wouldn't get a gig in aus now as he is now SL standard!!!

Regarding the Aus game, England could put the entire squad on the field and they will lose.

BUT!!!!!

SL CLUBS KEEP SIGNING THE OVERSEAS REJECTS.. ALL ABOARD!!!

THIS TRAIN JUST RUNS AND RUNS AND THE GAME IN THIS COUNTRY GETS NOWHERE NEAR THE AUSSIES EVERY TIME,

"MY CLUB, MY CLUB, MY CLUB"

as the international games flounders in the northern hemisphere and shown signs of lack of interest down under.

Playing players out of position against the best teams in the world does not work.