Probaly best decison in terms of his leadership. I'm pretty certain we are going to see a Chase/Sinfield partnership at the WC which IMO isn't good enough.

As said in an earlier post, Sinfields not quick enough and probably doesn't have the natural ability to beat a man, so the defence can hold off and look after supporting runners.

However he defintely is the best at controlling the game and should be at 13 for me. All this 2he's not big enough for a 13" is rubbish, against Wigan Sinfield tackled everything that moved and smothered Gareth Hock everytime he got the ball (How many players have managed to do that)

Widdop has to play at 6 for me, he's not just a player in one of the best team in the world, he;s someone who adds to that quality. Lomax or Brough at 7 for me, both having kicking games (we can't rely on Sinfield, we need options) and both can run and create. There are partnerships that would really get me excited as an England fan. If we go Chase/Sinfield at 6 & 7 the Aussies can put all the pressure on one player and we have no kicking game. If we have Brough, Lomaz & Sinfield that will spread our options about.

For me i would go

6. Widdop
7. Lomax/Brough
8. Burgess
9. Roby
10. Graham
11. Hock
12. Westwood
13. Sinfield

I would have Ellis on the bench, fantastic player but ive always felt slightly let down when i see him on an England shirt.

It's bad when we don't have a stand-off better than an average loose forward in this country. Good job we aren't playing against anyone good.

Not sure why everyone is so focussed on the number on half-back's shirts with the game played as it is now.

If they played the game in plain shirts, you'd swear Sinfield (first receiver, organizer, inside pivot, main kicker) was playing scrum-half for Leeds with McGuire playing stand-off. In other words Sinfield plays a similar game to Cronk at Melbourne, and Sinfield/Widdop should be a natural partnership in the halves, with Tomkins joining the line at fullback, whatever way the numbers are written on the teamsheet.

Tomkins should be stand off, he will be wasted at full back for England. They will never be able to play with him like Wigan do, Wigan must rehe those moves over and over which his england team mates won't really get the chance to. It will probably be successful against France and Wales but against the Aussies and Kiwis we will not have enough of the ball to be able to use Tomkins to his full abilities. Tomking should be S-O, at least he will have the chance to use the ball.

aside from not being able to catch the odd high ball...his attack performances,from fullback, against australia & NZ have been outstanding....

this buggo character has been a busy bee since he signed up
any guesses who he is

Even Lance Hohaia is on there ffs.

he tends to play well for NZ...

Quote: Dunbar "Sounds like you are describing Laurie Daley to me, not Brad Fittler... Fittler was a stand off who moved to loose forward later in his career Anyway, back to Sinfield. Really, he should have been captain through the Peacock years – as I have said a few times with Sinfield, you either play him in his Leeds role or not at all. His strength is as a leader and organiser, you either want that in your team or you don’t, what you don’t do is have him as an impact sub as he clearly isn’t that Is McNamara looking to the future here and thinking of Sinfield as his world cup captain or is it a stop gap... with the world cup only a few games away (despite being a year away), he should know this by now'" No I mean Fittler. He was the Dally M Centre of the year two years running (he must have had some pace) www.rugbyleagueproject.org/award ... f-the-year Anyway.

Quote: Dunbar "Sounds like you are describing Laurie Daley to me, not Brad Fittler... Fittler was a stand off who moved to loose forward later in his career Anyway, back to Sinfield. Really, he should have been captain through the Peacock years – as I have said a few times with Sinfield, you either play him in his Leeds role or not at all. His strength is as a leader and organiser, you either want that in your team or you don’t, what you don’t do is have him as an impact sub as he clearly isn’t that Is McNamara looking to the future here and thinking of Sinfield as his world cup captain or is it a stop gap... with the world cup only a few games away (despite being a year away), he should know this by now'" No I mean Fittler. He was the Dally M Centre of the year two years running (he must have had some pace) www.rugbyleagueproject.org/award ... f-the-year Anyway.

Evans was never going to stop Thurston taking over from Lockyer.
Has Evans even played Stand Off much?

Fantasticchoice for captain. Ignore the wigan fans who think the international indadequate o loughlin should be captain

Give him a halfback partner that suit him like he has at Leeds then you're ok. That definitely ISN'T Chase! Perhaps Myler, he's use to playing with a not-too-quick 6 every week who is more of a thinker with a great kicking game.

I'd definitely move Tomkins to 6 or 7, and let someone with a physical presence - possibly Hardaker - take the flak of high balls etc. Five out of 6 tackles Tomkins would play exactly the same role he does at fullback but would not be as easily isolated. Personally, having seen a fair amount of him, I'd go for Widdopp/Tomkins at 6 and 7 with Sinfield at 13. I'd also make Sinfield responsible for running sets of 6 and long kicking, but if/when we get into the opposition 20 I'd be looking at planned moves around Widdopp/Tomkins.

The pluses for England are that if everybody's fit we may actually have some threequarters with punch - Charnley, Hall, Briscoe, Watkins, Reed and Atkins are miles ahead of what Tony Smith had just a few years ago.

On the downside, I simply don't buy into this 'better pack' routine that gets put out every year. Until our pack stands up to Australia in a big game, both physically and in playing as a unit and helping create space for the backs with dummy runners, I will not believe it. If anything I think its our much vaunted pack which has been most disappointing in big games.

If we have to pick a Captain Sinfield is one of a couple of people who are a good choice.

I however disagree with the concept of picking an international captain and would prefer SM to pick a leadership team of 5 players. Once a captain is named the coach is effectively forced to pick him regardless of his form or the form of anyone else competing for his position. With a leadership team we could nominate a captain from the group on a game by game basis and the coach would be in a better position to change the team if needed.

Good decision. But five years too late. I really like Kevin Sinfield but I'd have gone with James Roby.