And he can kick with both feet, an often under-remarked skill few others have.

I agree with the last couple of posts. ST is a great broken-field runner, but not a better full-back than Hardaker, and asking him to play in the halves for the first time (properly) since he was a kid against the Kiwis would be a massive ask.

Maybe the best compromise would be Hardaker at full-back, Widdop and Gale in the halves, and ST as bench hooker, offering a second-half option.

And as noted above, George Williams is not far away from an England shirt.

and there's is the problem, why do we need to shoehorn certain players in?

if Hardaker is deemed better than Tomkins at FB then Tomkins should be left out, not try and find somewhere for Tomkins to play, to the detriment of the team and another player who is worthy of a call up.

Asking Tomkins to play half-back is too much but asking to be a bench hooker, a position he has never played is a good compromise? What...?

The difference between 6 and 1 these days is negligible. The only difference really is without the ball.

Widdop is a highly rated, first choice standoff playing in the best league in the world, so he should be a shoe in given we don't have anyone else currently demonstrating that kind of calibre. However, I'm a traditionalist, I think we should do as we've done in the past and pick a loose forward to play at standoff, the Kiwis won't be expecting that!

If RTS and Inglis were both Aussies, would you just leave one of them out? The answer is no and you are very naive.

He's played at dummy-half for the Warriors.

If the difference between 6 and 1 is negligible, just ask Rocky Hampshire...

yes, if there were players better than them in that position that deserved to be in the team

i didn't realise the England team HAS to include Sam Tomkins?