Brown and Ratchford definitely..
They was both was fantastic in their shock England call ups...however Currie out all season and Hill I question. Hill escapes all criticism yet has been pants and one 6th the reason Brown has struggled.

I'm behind all 4 and hope they bring the faith Bennett has back for 2018.

Only Ratchford and only because white line fever from over the hills is out.

Currie and Hill are clearly International material but if you're picking on form, then Hill should be no where near and Currie has only played 3/4 games.

That said, I know us supporters always say "should pick on form", but you've also got to take your best crew to have a chance. For example, Watts has had a much better year than Hill but would I want him in my matchday 17 v Aus over Hill, not a chance.

Brown looks an awful call but he's preformed every time for England under Bennet.

Brown looks an awful call but he's preformed every time for England under Bennet.'"

Do you genuinely believe this?

Some Widnes supporter friends of mine also said he picked his games when playing for them.

Well Brown has had two games against international quality opposition this season and had very good games in both. It's not rocket science to see why he's been picked.

Currie i would take as he is absolute class, Hill - not on this season's form but will probably produce for his country, Ratchford - I'm not his biggest fan by any means but played well against Samoa and adds utility value.

We're clearly a big club now anyway when our players start getting picked for their country when they shouldn't be!!

Looking at the forwards, at best Hill will only get a bench spot.

More than he deserves on current form.

he.s 100% right on this as are most of his posts unlike some on here who post long winded drivell..mginty did bulk up and did have a decent tour but after that did sod all..as for this comp give it the aussies now...walk over

awwww shucks, s a m



No Wigan paranoia from me.
If people don't realise that the omission of TomkinsJ and Farrell (both rampaging runners) and Burgess (scores tries for fun) smell a little, then that's their funeral. TomkinsS, I grant you, hasn't had the best of seasons, but STILL is one of the few English players that possess the " X-factor" and is worth a squad place. Did Monkey Man and the Wigan board request their non selection? I wouldn't put it past them.

As for the selection of McGinty all those years ago.. The world's great minds are still scratching their heads. In those days, if you were British and played for Wigan, you got a GB jersey, regardless of form/quality /reputation.

See. No paranoia. Just looking at the situation, level headed.

I'd question whether Joel Tomkins is good enough for the Wigan team, let alone an England squad.

As for Farrell, I probably wouldn't want to take both Farrell and Bateman on tour together, both very good SL players, but I'd question whether a back row of Farrell and Bateman was big enough for international RL.

Burgess I probably would have taken - seems strange to only take two wingers in a squad, although Hall and McGilvray have performed well on the international stage in the past - i'd have both in before Burgess.

Of the full backs that have missed out, Shaul can count himself unlucky. Both him and Ratch ahead of STomkins, not sure why Lomax has travelled.

I'm not going to question Bennett.
He has a squad that he feels is the best he can muster to topple Aus.
It says to me one thing, if you're the skinnier, smaller, weaker of your position...you aren't going to feature.....the golden rule applies...a big good un, always beats a small good un....so no place for Burgess or Tompkins.