That is true, but I don't think it applies to Andy Lynch. When playing for Bradford he was always one of our best players, always one of the best forwards going by the stats year on year, and he's carried that on to his Hull career.

No, because he will be applying for the Leeds job

Excellent post

The other problem is, when you do the match-ups one on one quite often England look OK in a number of positions - e.g. prop when Moreley and Peacock were a bit younger looked OK. However, in the really vital positions of halfback we've been laughably far behind. Add to that the fact that our much vaunted forwards simply don't play anywhere near as well as a unit as the Aussies (dummy runs, intelligent defence etc), and that goes a long way to explaining why we can't get near to Aus when it counts.

The plus signs for me are the emergence of some threequarters with size and speed (its not just because I'm a Leeds fan that I want to see Watkins get over his injuries and get into some form), Tomkins at the back and some NRL experience in the pack.

The downsides are still a lack of halfbacks, and the fact that some of our best forwards of recent years are shot.

Bottom line is, even if everyone is fit and in the best form of their lives, I wouldn't bet on England getting close to Australia in a 'must win' game. We simply don't have the players.

the future halfbacks are coming through but they are not ready yet

gaz o'brien
richie myler
stefan ratchford
johnny lomax
gaskell
stevie ward

I agree McNamara isnt the best man for the job, however not even Wayne Bennett could make the current england side whoever is picked compete with Australia!!

more often than not we beat NZ over here and compete with australia for an hour before they run away with it and over in aus/nz we get thrashed by australia and compete with nz for an hour before they ease ahead. that has happened under numerous coaches and has continued with mcnamara

He's been coming through for a while now. At the moment I don't think he's good enough for England - not that I don't think he's a dangerous player. Still has youth on his side but hasn't developed as quickly as the likes of Tomkins and Lomax.

For me, McNamara should go...Wigan are by far the form team of SL and look to be a level above everybody else and at the moment the other 13 teams look like also rans, yet Wigan players are outnumbered by Leeds players who have been performing way below their best and aren't currently in the Top 8 of SL - it is a joke!!

The difference in this case however is that Wigan are the best team in the league because of the performances of people like McIlorum, not despite him. This year his distribution is superb, seems to pick the right pass every time and makes a daft amount of tackles. That isn't because "he's behind a good pack". He's just playing very well.

Posted this on the Saints board during a discussion about us producing more better quality players now that we were ten years ago.

This is the team which lost 64-10 in Australia.

Radlinski (Wigan);
Johnson (Wigan),
Wellens (St Helens),
Senior (Leeds),
Pratt (Leeds);
Sculthorpe (St Helens),
Sheridan (Leeds);
O'Connor (Wigan),
Cunningham (St Helens),
McDermott (Leeds),
Peacock (Bradford),
Fielden (Bradford),
Farrell (Wigan, capt).

Subs:
Gleeson (St Helens),
Newton (Wigan),
Joynt (St Helens),
Sinfield (Leeds).

Of that backline I estimate one (Senior) would start at international level now. I haven't included Sculthorpe in that because he was a loose forward but the fact that we couldn't produce even one stand off to fill that spot says a lot about the increasing success we're having. It may not be enough to stop Australia but it's doing better now that it was before.

Agreed, but on the flip side the forwards and the bench is better than the current squad

I disagree. The forwards are similar but I think our back rowers have more impact and are more mobile now than they were then. Farrell was undoubtedly a great player but O'loughlin is becoming an increasing good loose. And I think we could put out a better bench than what we had there for sure.

Correct

And there are three players - Farrell, Cunningham and Sculthorpe who were significantly better than anyone playing today (other than Tomkins).

Sculthorpe out of position was better than any 6 we've currently got (as was Farrell when he played stand-off) and in recent years we've been playing foreigners to try to strengthen the side.

I don't think that 2002 side was very representative though of where standards used to be.

If you look at the 2003 Ashes series, it was a 3-0 whitewash but GB were much more competitive than they are today and who knows what might have happened if Morley hadn't got himself sent off in that first test. (As an aside, Farrell was immense that day and anyone that says he never proved himself at international level needs to sit down and watch that game. One hit he put in on Webcke - during which he stole the ball - will live long in my memory, partly because an Aussie sitting behind me had just been forecasting that Webcke was going to smash the GB pack single handed. I heard barely a peep out of him for the rest of the game.)

This was the 2003 side, from the first test

Radlinski (Wigan); Carney (Wigan), Connolly (Leeds), Senior (Leeds), Horne (Hull); Sculthorpe (St Helens), Long (St Helens); Fielden (Bradford), Newton (Wigan), Morley (Sydney Roosters), Peacock (Bradford), Farrell (Wigan, capt), Forshaw (Bradford). Subs: Anderson (Bradford), McDermott (Leeds), Deacon (Bradford), Gilmour (Bradford).

And then there's this great side from 1992, in an era when we regularly give the Aussies a game

Great Britain: Joe Lydon, Alan Hunte, Gary Connolly, Garry Schofield (c), Martin Offiah, Shaun Edwards, Deryck Fox, Kevin Ward, Martin Dermott, Andy Platt, Denis Betts, Phil Clarke, Ellery Hanley.

Replacements: John Devereux, Alan Tait, Kelvin Skerrett & Richard Eyres

What a pack!