No, Brough wasn't picked because Macnamara is a thin-skinned egoist with little or no managerial skills and can't cope with players who don't insert their tongues in various orifices around his body. His reasons for not selecting him ie "He wasn't committed to England" after he chose to play for Scotland once Macnamara had ruled him out of England contention are laughable given that at least one of the players he has picked has stated he would play for another country if they picked them to.

Similar to his "I haven't picked Huddersfield players because they haven't played well in big matches" when the one player he has picked reserved his worst game of the season for last week's match against Warrington. Plus one of his "untouchable" half backs (to the best of my knowledge) hasn't won a Superleague play off game in his career if he's played in one.

Exactly. McNamara's justifications are weak. Weak. He's an egotistical person, comes across as arrogant and IMO only got the job as GB coach because no one else wanted it.

Some of his comments are derogatory IMO. Martin Offiah said in the MoS awards night that the perception of Huddersfield has changed but it seems not in McNamara's head. Strange as well because he used to play for us, he did well and was well regarded by the fans generally. I'm not sure if someone farted in his hat at a race night somewhere or something but he certainly seems to have a bit of a downer on us.

What people are forgetting over Brough is Scotland came calling and asked him to play for them AFTER Mcnamara had told Broughy he wasn't in his plans or whatever was said between them.
What's Danny supposed to do, sit at home and watch the World Cup with a beer in his hand because the National coach has a personal issue with him ...or represent a country that he is qualified to and have made it clear they will build their side around him??


He didn't choose Scotland over England, England (or its coach) refused to pick him !!

I read elsewhere that having one good season isn't justification to pick Brough! How laughable is that?! The timeframe for jutification moves depending on who the player is!

After all, if that's the case, how does George Burgess get picked? How does Tom? How long do you have to play poor to get dropped? It's just another slash weak argument that is used to jutify personal bias.

I remember a Fans' Forum, where Danny was the main speaker, it was before the 1st Exiles game, when he said that he'd had a phone call from McBananarama saying that he was going with his original half-back pairing.
That didn't give Danny McBrough any other options than to nail his colours to Scotlands' mast.
I seriously think the only reason three Burgesses are in the side is that it gives them free return tickets to meet up with their old mates in Bradford and Dewsbury, and do a bit of clubbing out of the watchful eye of Russell Crowe.

from wot ive been told by a bradford players mum from the burgess brothers time at bradford, mcbanana was always their biggest fans, always looking after them, at the time he got the england coaches job she said then it was only a matter of time before the 3 of them were in the england team, i laughed at the time, not laughing now though.
To be fair sam is quality, george has had one good season and tom err is err a burgess brother.

even morley was shocked about eorl not been selected as todays mirrors article says, no idea how to do links though so cant post the article.

www.mirror.co.uk/sport/rugby-lea ... ds-2328765

www.mirror.co.uk/sport/rugby-lea ... ds-2328765

Just shows what an utterly repulsive character McNamara is. He is more bothered about telling Luke Burgess who has never been near the squad that he is not picked than he is about Crabtree

Just shows what an utterly repulsive character McNamara is. He is more bothered about telling Luke Burgess who has never been near the squad that he is not picked than he is about Crabtree

I laugh when you comment on hardaeker, surely when you take off your claret and gold specs you must have noticed he's been the best all round full back and most improved this year, defensively far better than Tompkins, only Tompkins offers the x factoring attack so will be picked a head of Jim, Farrell is not good enough or big enough, I would have ferris before him imo

You can't beat an all day special from Tingley Fish Bar!

Ratchford is better IMHO and i could also put forward a good case for Lomax.
If Hardaker is chosen for utility value i dont get that either. He cannot play centre and would be too lightweight on the wing.
Lomax and ratchford offer better utility value.

no problem for me with hardaker's inclusion at all, but would have chosen ratchford myself.

no problem with hardaker either, good player as it ratchford...its just finding them a spot in the starting line up, as tomkins is first choice full back. for the centres it has to be cudjoe and watkins.

always injuries and need back up though