Have the likes of Lee Mossop, Liam Farrell, Gareth Hock etc really proved with their performances this season that they're better than Morley & Peacock? If Morley & Peacock are still 2 of the top 4 English props then surely they should play shouldn't they?

As for JJB - I thought he did pretty well this series, added some speed and dynamism to our backrow in which Heighington and Ellis were largely disappointing.

As for Brough - it amazes me. Year on year we plead with the selectors to pick players in form. Danny Brough was not in form so he wasn't picked. Where's the drama?

As for the argument that players who have lost shouldn't play again - embarrassing. When Australia lost in 2005 they didn't dump all the players, when they lost in 2008 & 2010 they didnt dump Slater, Lockyer, Thurston, Smith & Inglis whilst saying "well they lost, they've had their chance we're going to pick Ben Cross instead. After all he's done ok for Newcastle and played SOO."
It's just stupid. You pick the best 17 regardless of age and whilst taking into account current form. The best English 17 still contains Peacock & Morley and does not currently contain Gareth Hock.

The suggestion is that going forward we should now be looking beyond certain players and have an eye on 2013.

yes break the hegemony of the 'leeds circle' its a bit like radio one trying to hang on to dave lee travis ,mike read etc

Have an eye on - fine. But until they prove in SL that they are better than the current incumbents then they shouldn't be shoved straight in simply because they've "not lost to Australia before".


The Leeds circle of who?
Reed & Hall?
Sinfield & Chase?
Peacock & Graham?

As someone who has watched at least Watkins and Hardacre most weeks, if you think they are anywhere near ready for international RL you really need to give your head a shake, one of them maybe, but both of them out there instead of Yeaman and Briscoe? against Inglis? really?

Burgess would be in there anyway if he wasnt injured, im struggling to see what Hock has done in the last 2 years other than prove he is a bigger grub than Thurston and Danny Brough has got to 28 as the epitome of a flat-track bully, Brough has been found wanting at every challenge he has been given, yes he looks good when the forwards give him a great platform, but there is a reason Brough couldnt get a gig at a side challenging and there is a reason his game went to pot towards the end of the year. When the going gets tough, Brough disappears.

You really should learn to spell like an adult before you go accusing others of being juvenile.

I agree we need to clear out the old if we want to move forward, Morely and Peacock have been great and will be a big loss but its time to look to the future bring in the next set of players, if the replacements fail then what have we lost.

All the others should be considered on merit going into the next series.

You'll never beat the club colours boys on here Clan, they will defend at all costs.

i have read most the posts on hear and i have got to say i agree with them i would not have chase anywhere near my England team and it has got nothing to do with him been a N Zealander he is crap and wile you are at it get a decent coach but were from i don't know but something has to be done

Correct. Waste of time trying really.

Think we can all see that Peacock and Morley are falling short of the standards they have set in the past. However untill there are other players who can come in and take up their roll then they will still get picked. When Burgess finally gets himself fit he will be one of the first names on the sheet and rightly so.
Hock shouldn't be anywhere near an England shirt. If Brough had stayed fit and remained in form he would have been picked, but Australia still wouldn't have let him kick.
If we were to throw Watkins and Hardaker in now the result would be a shambles, but both have great potential.
Hopefully Lomax and Gaskell can continue to develop a partnership at Saints this year, but once more it would be too much too soon to throw them in now.
Think it's a shame Burrow was injured for the series, he was electric back end of the year and could have added that spark off the bench we were lacking.

Along with peacock, briscoe and yeaman have been shocking, for a winger briscoe has no pase and he is not strong enough. McGilvary is the player who should be infront of him.

England's biggest problem was the total lack of impact off the bench. No point of Widdop been there, get Robinson off the bench to replace roby. Carvel should stay, westwood and burgess when he is fit.

Widdop should start, very dissappointed that he didnt get more of a chance. On the subject of Peacock and Morley both should now retire. They have been great players but their international career has come to an end. Not a criticism of their performance this series but we need to build for the furture now and particularly the 2013 World Cup.

I agree Widdop should start but coming off the bench is pointless

Completely agree

Sinfield was shocking (again) should have been benched after 25mins and the NRL minor premiers No6 put on. Not sure who was worse Sinfield or McNamara for even playing him in front of Widdop. Agree Widdop/Brough should have been our halfbacks from the start.

Carefull fella, you'll have the Amber & Blue Chav brigade after you.
Don't you know it's impossible to criticise a Whino without having a club bias and a huge chip on your shoulder.

Sinfield was awfull yesterday, JJB was poor, Peacock should now retire from rep football, Hall was OK and had a very good series.

Certainly was - his kicking game in particular was absolutely woeful; bad decisions, poorly executed resulting in no threat whatsoever from just about every kick.

Given that Lee Briers kicked them to death for half an hour last week in a team of part-timers, you'd have thought we might have learned something from that in terms of a potential chink in the armour.

Widdop and Brough have to be the partnership for 2013, with the Sinfield and Chase experiment consigned to the 'embarassing failures' folder.

But Brough was hardly setting the game alight for the second half of the season was he? He goes through the same process every year, starts well but by the last ten games of the season looks like he's had enough and starts to become anonymous.
Perhaps Brown should leave him out for the first ten games, then he might still be interested come the play-offs?

England's main problem is a failure to play players in their proper positions.
We had a second-rower playing at loose forward.
A loose forward playing at stand off.
The best stand off and MOS playing at scrum half and second receiver, when he plays 1st receiver for his club.
And the NRL minor premiership team's stand-off on the bench (he would be a better 7 than Chase as he generally plays 2nd receiver for Melbourne).
We seem to pick our players by making a list of the best 17 players and adapting positions to fit.
Australis pick their players by looking at each position and choosing the best player for each.

Perhaps Brough was rushed back too early from a serious injury and was then expected to revitalise a woefully out of form Giants team all on his own.
Brown did him no favours by pressuring him into coming back early but given a few weeks off at the end of the season he would have been firing on all cylinders for England.

Happens every season though, doesn't it.

not quite on the same scale, but they did have the best loose forward in the world at prop.

Partially true, he has played prop quite a bit this year , including in State of Origin.
Though this is highly unusual for Australia, but normal for England.

Did hear a Leeds fan seriously suggesting we'd have won with McGuire in for Chase and Burrow for Roby after the game.

It was mainly Tomkins fault as well which is laughable as is blaming any individual. Sam Tomkins somehow got away with some abysmal errors but we didn't get away with the lack of direction the halves give us but like I say our problems are far more deep rooted then blaming the odd individual.

i dont know how this is still related to jamie peacock, but would people say that having now been hammered by aussies as per, the only reason we were ever in it at wembley was because they had to shuffle the team and lost a sub?