As none of the Irish, Welsh or Scottish players (Brough would have played for England had he been picked) are good enough to get in the England team - why deny 50+ players the chance to play international rugby league? Whether you call it England or Great Britain it's still the same players.

Given the current standards, yes. But isn't it the assumption that bringing the other 3 into one big group would help drive up standards? Also RL in Scotland, Wales & Ireland can never hope to achieve the recognition or cash that even England get (which I know is p.poor before anyone starts).
Strength in numbers & all that....

I disagree. I thought we played to our absolute potential in the NZ game. We were never in with a realistic chance of winning the comp.

Whilst we were never realistically going to win it, we should have got to the final. Our best chance was catching the Aussies cold in the first game, thus avoiding NZ in the semi. McNamara blew it. He didn't pick his best team in the first game, preferring to score pathetic points by leaving out Graham & MMc and getting rid of Hock altogether. We were in with a chance until he had to make substitutions and the bench wasn't strong enough. Also he preferred Chase to Widdop when everyone with eyes could see that Chase was hopeless.

That said we 'd have lost to Australia in the final, but, I think we'd have made a better game of it.

I fail to see how Britain would be any stronger than England. Mind you they'd have a nicer kit.

:39r8ebcs
maybe not, but there'd be a wider pool (& just think how many dummies would have been spit out if it could ever have been a GB & Ireland squad with Pat playing for it

).

Fantasy teams aside - whilst I don't rate McN as a coach/manager (going to Yawnion will be our gain IMO), I don't put the "not getting to the final" all on him. The team played their socks off against NZ & were simply unlucky at the end (you've got to play for 80 minutes after all) & the rather lacklustre displays prior to that looked a lot like complacency (except Cardiff, where they allowed the Aussies to stop them playing).

I don't think anyone could have got through the Aus defence at O/T. I was on their 20yd line (2nd half) & the wall they put up was jaw-dropping in its effectiveness. Nothing the Kiwis did was ever going to get through it & that's what England must learn to do if we're ever going to compete (I hope SW was taking notes too).

Additionally, the whole Hock thing was poorly managed (he shouldn't have been in the squad in the first place), McN has no media nous & the RFL did him no favours - they simply allowed the wolves to circle.

I did a media relations course for work 2 or 3 years ago & the 10 things not to do)

^This.

McNamara made bad decisions from the beginning. I think with the right decisions throughout the tournament, we'd have made the final. And had we played NZ in the final, avoiding Australia; or had we faced a battered Australia in the final, who knows. We were clear 3rd favourites regardless of who was in charge. But McNamara was not the right man for the job, in my opinion.

Been appointed assistant coach at the Roosters full story in the Sydney Morning Herald.

Didn't rate him at all.
Now he's gone, good luck to him.

The first thing he will do at the Roosters is recommend that they go all out to sign Kevin Sinfield.

well he is the worlds best player

Sounds like a brilliant plan to me, and I hope the Roosters can pull it off.