And he would have been replaced by who?


Correct Cruncher, Wane has got a massive job still to do at Wigan,He has had a bit of a revolving door to contend with tbh player wise and has still won some silverware, so its a very good start so far for him thus far, although as he inherits his own squad of players rather than the remnants of Madge's side then IMO his big task is to dominate SL and to actually win "back to back Grand Finals, which is something Wigan haven't been able to do

IMO the next England coach will be Brian McDermott anyway

Regarding Sundays game v the Ozzies
The major change i would make is that i would play Hardaker at Full Back rather than Sam as he doesn't ever appear to ever get near a high kick?
i would shift Hall to Right Wing and Bring Budgie in on the left wing
My concerns are the Back row as i don't believe that we have the answers either in attack or in defense should we stick with last weeks incumbents, We will however be much stronger if our International captain plays and is actually fit,but is he and will he?

I reckon that a 20 point drubbing is on the cards

The team changes aren't what will win or lose the game on Sunday it's the appointment of the Aussie ref.
He will make the important calls that ensure Aus get a convincing win.

Why would you replace Sam because of his perceived liability under the high ball, but take out Josh Charnley - possibly the best winger in the world under the high ball? Seriously, I can't remember the last time Josh dropped a cross field kick or bomb, he's almost perfect at taking those kicks. I also don't thinking bringing Budgie in against the Aussies is the right thing to do, he would be peppered all night. He may pass this test with flying colours, but I feel it's too big a risk to play such a young lad in such a massive game.

Regarding Tomkins; If you take him out because of his perceived lack of ability under the high ball, you lose our most potent and dangerous attacking threat. You know that fella who plays for Australia, lad called Billy Slater? Go back and look at some NRL, SOO and Test matches he's been in, he's no worse than Tomkins under the high ball. Hardaker is a good solid player, but he isn't even in the same league as Sam when it comes to attack.

If you bring him into the halves you lose the organisation and kicking display that Smith & Widdop provided against Samoa. In short, removing or moving Tomkins would be an asinine decision.

Correct

I would replace Sam at Full Back due to his inability to even try to get anywhere near a high kick in his own 20,IMO this is an area that the Aussies will target big time
Why can't Sam get to grips with this big deficiency in his game?
Why does he always look so vulnerable under these high kicks?
Are you not worried as an England fan (rather than a Wigan fan) that should Sam let high kicks bounce in our 20 on Sunday that we could get a right tonking?

IMO Hardaker is the best defensive full back in the world without a doubt,He is also pretty good offensively too and given the choice i believe that Zak is a far better full back than Sam

I agree that Josh is safe under the high ball but he was far too easily dominated in the tackle when he tried to clear his line IMO, I admit that i may have been hasty with Josh here so I'll hold my hands up
although i would love to see budgie given a go at this level, he will make mistakes defensively but he looks electric with the ball in his hands

I hope that i am wrong on this and that Sam has a blinder defensively and diffuses every Aussie high ball and that we go onto win........But i doubt it unfortunately

Hardaker isn't the best defensive full back in the world.
The best defensive full back, as well as being the best attacking full back, is Billy Slater.

I think you need to discuss this one closer to home


Where do you stand on the Sam debate?

One thing is for sure, Sam at fullback or not at fullback simply must be in the team somewhere. That frailty under the high ball is a big worry for me but if it's a choice between him playing fullback or not at all I'd choose fullback every single time.

I just wish Smith was a slightly more robust defender. If he were I'd be moving him in to 9 and Sam in to the halves.

He's the best English full back in the world. Hardaker is solid at the back but offers nowhere near the attacking options Tomkins does. Tomkins may cost us a try, maybe he won't, but I can almost guarantee he will create chances for us to score tries that Hardaker simply doesn't have the ability to.

I believe Tomkins' kicking game is inferior to that of Widdop and Smith, his organisational play leaves a lot to be desired. His main attribute is his off the cuff running style, this style fits perfectly for the modern full back.

England would be a poorer team without Tomkins at FB.

Sam tomkins seems to have gone back after his first season in the NRL. He doesn't beat a man anymore, he doesn't attempt to take the high balls either so maybe a move to the halves would help as he has to be in the 13.

Couldn't widdup just slot back to fullback ? I wouldn't want to move Matty smith out the halves even tho I think that hodgson isn't good enough.

I agree with poster regarding Charnley at international level. He just isn't the same as he doesn't run as hard and is very easliy dominated so maybe young burgess couid come in ?

I've been hearing a lot of talk about Charnley being dominated with the ball. Here's an interesting stat from today-

Hall 130m

Charnley 136m

Hall made one fantastic long break as well (and was generally superb). He's not had his best game but I wouldn't be looking to drop Charnley.