It's a valid thread because this is a withdrawal and replacement, and a bizarre one at that. Someone who has consistently failed at international level is called up when the consistent performers of 2011 at scrum-half were overlooked. Even if you want to say stand-off then there several better performers throughout the year, more constistent and with greater potential beyond the ability to back up an attack.

A truly bizarre choice and one that may make the difference between being at Elland Road at the Final or the team watching it on TV.

Because Jonny Lomax is injured.



Had a stinker the second half of the season.

If Brough hadn't gotten injured before the Exiles game, he'd probably be a shoe in. He was one of the most in-form players coming up to that game. He must be gutted.

How is brough somehow now Being touted as Englands best option. We have the current MOS the halfback from the NRL minor premiers and the two players who have played SH and SO for the SL champions all in the squad. Now don't get me wrong I'm not saying we will walk over the opposition in the 4nations but if anyone thinks that the inclusion of Danny Brough would make much difference is kidding themselves. I actually think the squad has quite agood balance and some good options if players get injured.

McGuire's defence is awful and shouldn't be anywhere near the England squad.

What worries me is that none of Widdop, Chase or McGuire are an organiser, I'd even argue Sinfield plays more of the traditional 7 dictating the role for Leeds in partnership with Maguire.

I worry that McNammara will pick Chase 7 and Widdop 6 and it just won't work! Tbh I'd rather Sinfield there and another big forward at 13.

What makes you think that?

Exactly. I can’t say I was in favour of Chase being selected when it was first announced but the Widdop / Chase half back partnership has the potential to be the best English (or GB) partnership for a very long time

Does it? Whose the organiser given that one plays off Danny Orr and the other Cooper Cronk? They both play the 'end product' role IMO.

If we play these two, Sinfield at 13

Too many cooks then, we don't have enough ball in good posistion against the likes of NZ & Aus to need a playmaker at 13 IMO and matching up neither of them will do.

Sorry, I’m not sure I understand your point. If we play Widdop and Chase in the halves, we don’t have a play maker but we add Sinfield we have too many playmakers?

Anyway, I think that Chase can play first receiver very competently – he takes far more ball at first receiver at Cas than Orr

I mean am organiser needed, we don't need 2 players proving touches on the edges. Chase takes the ball when Cas get in the opponents half but to me seems all Orr before that.

I also think that having Sinny at 13 is having too many playmakers. For me you you need a loose with a good running/hard tackling game with decent handling skills. Sinfield has always been Leeds stand off for me. But during internationals i would like a Sean O character.

Chase will act as first receiver if they play him and Widdopp as traditional halfbacks. Or they may go left and right. I do agree that England should not be looking to shoehorn in a 'playmaking' loose forward - if Sinfield is in put him at stand off.