i rate watkins highly but he is someway off being in the calibre of other centres we've produced as named above - yet!

To be fair I'd say he's a better centre than a few of those were at 21.

I know what you mean but most of those names i quoted were raved about at an early age as well. The difference is I felt more confident of them fulfilling that potential than i do Watkins fulfilling his. We have a tendancy to overhype our youngsters way above their actual talent and Eddie/Stevo are major culprits of this. Its probably down to the fact we dont create the world class youngsters as regular as the aussies do so anyone with a scrap of talent is stuck on a pedastal.

I hope Watkins does become world class but i'm a little sceptical.

I'm not one who buys into the hype every time, but the only thing that will stop Watkins being world class is injuries. His pace and particularly his acceleration are outstanding, he has good hands, knows how to put his winger away and he's a big lad too. His defence is pretty good but suffers from how Leeds play where he defends at least half-way to second row and there are often overlaps to exploit on the Leeds right. That's the coach not the player. Watkins should be the best British centre at least since Newlove.

However, it's not down to the 3/4s as to whether we compete with the Aussies. When we were *nearly* there, we were playing decent club centres (Carl Gibson, Darryl Powell, Paul Loughlin, David Stephenson) who were good players but nowhere near the Meninga/Miles class, but back then we could match them in the pack and halves.

I agree to some extent but what i keep coming back to is the quality of competition. Our game doesn't have the depth of quality in it like the NRL does and players don't play against players with high enough quality week in week out therefore "Good" players like Watkins, Yeaman, Shenton etc stand out more against the lesser quality players more making them look "world class" when in fact they are nothing of the sort. I know the level of competition is not Watkins fault but portraying him as the next best thing and great hope like some on here are, is stretching his actual quality to the limit. As far as the Pack and halves are concerned, IF Macca can pick a full strength pack witht helikes of Hock, Burgess, Graham, Ellis et al, then that part of our game doesn't worry me at all. I agree the halves are a problem, Brough, Myler, McGuire, Burrow are not good enough. Lomax is still unknown at top international level and Sinfield should not be playing at 6. Sorry hoing off the original topic but quality halves and quality centres are the 2 areas we ahve struggled to fill for a long time.

You say that we've struggled in the halfs and centres but really when was the last time our mythical pack out played the Aussies, and laid a platform for our backs? In the last 4 nations we beat New Zealand and IIRC Sinfield was MOM and England managed to win fairly comfortably on the back of our forwards out playing the NZ forwards resulting in time and field position for the halfs to execute a good kicking game. In contrast, in the final we were unable to match the Aussie pack which resulted in the England half backs kicking the ball from well inside their own half, and we ended up getting hammered.

Yes, I do agree that we've not produced many top class backs but until our forwards can out perform their Aussie counterparts as a unit then it won't matter who we have in the backs.

The only one to come close to Watkins potential at 21 was Newlove, but physically he was nowhere near at that age. He didn't really produce internationally either, partially due to players around him & a lethargic approach. Senior was a world class centre IMO but at 21 was completely uncultured. Connolly was the best full back we never had. Lydon was class but I can't remember much at international level. The others were average. If he can stay injury free & yawnion free he is going to be awesome.