My god you Leeds fans are slow. I and most people accept he has been a good domestic player but his performances have not followed as an International, that is the arena he is being judged in and thus far has produced 120 good minutes to a 21 game International career.

I am 31.

Hanley never looked , Schofield never looked , Jackson and Ward always held there own a few examples of a select few that did stand up and be tested.

Is the failure of a generation really a bench mark by which to assess our current International players?

SInfield has generally been poor for GB/England. Hooker may well be his best role, although given the halfbacks he was playing with his role as key organiser and in generally keeping everyone talking was very important. I suspect that if Sinfield were in the NRL he'd have played at hooker his whole career.

agreed.

I think part of what we're seeing as Smith nudges towards a side that somehow works is that attempting to play against Oz in particular using a 'SL template' is doomed to failure.

A Sinfield-stytle loose forward simply doesn't exist in the NRL. Neither does a hooker who's whole game is based on runs from acting halfback. I've said for years that England in trying to use the loose forward as ball handler in fact detract from the performance of halfbacks (same true at club level IMO). The Sinfield/Farrell/Sculthorpe role of loose forward doesn't exist in the NRL because they have generally better halfbacks and need the loose forward to be a powerhouse not a playmaker.

Sinfield has been nominated for this years Golden Boot award apparently www.totalrl.com/home/

Sinfield has been nominated for this years Golden Boot award apparently www.totalrl.com/home/

I'm not a Sinfield fan, but I thought he fully deserved MOM on Saturday.

Based off Saturdays game, I'd say he's a better unorthodox hooker than Loose Forward.

That is a surprise, what's the easy link with those three?




Well done to Sinfield, he has been one of our best players in this tournament. Not a chance of winning the golden boot as the Australian nominees are vastly better players, but he has proved a lot of people wrong.

All three have never let England/GB down?

Apart from Morleys sending off!

I've always rated Sinfield.

He would in all probability have been a Wigan player except for a certain Mr. Eric Hughes.
Sinfield has had a great series particularly since being moved to the dominant dummy half slot.

Sinfield has Been voted best 13 in the world 2009 to go with his golden boot nomination! Ryan hall voted world rookie of the year too!

A fair call imo.

The Aussies don't seem able to(or possibly just don't want to) develope a skillful 13 like a Faz, Sculthorpe or Sinfield who can pass and kick aswell as do the graft in the pack.

Sinfield has earned his place because he's always been a classy superleague 13 and has backed up a great season by so far being Englands best in the Quad Nations.

<cough> Greg Bird <cough>

If it wasn't for his 'indiscretion', Greg Bird would have walked that. What little I've seen of him this year, he's been outstanding.

I suppose so but he's easily forgetable as a 13 because he's played so much at 6 for Cronulla, Catalans, NSW and Australia.

When he does play at 13 though he is a class act.

Ill informed and churlish comment on a classy creative player. Named MOM (half at 9 and half at 13) against NZ was the key player in our revival against Australia shortlisted for the coverted Golden Boot award named at loose forward in the International Ferderation Team of the Year (one of only 2 SL players + Ellis) on top of leading Leeds to 3 SL finals on the trot etc etc. Pretty impressive CV mostly at 13 but is skilfull enough to play internationally at 13, 6 and now is our best 9. I really do not understand why you pick on one of our successes unless you are just trying to justify your previous poor judgement. Why couldn't you just say that you have had your doubts because he previously did not show his club form at international level but now he has done. That would have been fair.