Widdop was guaranteed to be selected so that left a toss up between Gale and Williams. Hard choice but i think Luke deserves his place. I hope he takes it with both hands and Widdop has a shocker, then we might get the rightful England pairing of Gale and Williams.

I couldn't agree more Gale does deserve his spot as he's been outstanding all season but widdop I feel is only playing because he plays in the NRL. I don't want widdop to have a shocker as I want England to win but he should get his place based on merit and not because he's deemed to be a super hero because he plays in Australia

They need to have a good game this week, because it would be a hell of a lot of pressure on Williams if he got thrown in next week.

I wouldn't worry about them being too similar as it works okay for Thurston and Cronk, who play similar roles for their clubs

You guys obviously watch Williams more than me, but from what I see he barely does anything until he is the opponents half or sometimes even the opponents 20.
I think if you play for england you have to contribute more in general play, not just attacking the line, especially in the kicking game
Thats why England did better last year with Smith than Williams

Also, imo Gale should have got man of steel and was easily the best half in the league last year so the question is between Williams and Widdop for me

I think that's a bit harsh; Williams is a decent defender too (although so is Widdop, to be fair).

This is where Luke is a bit frail imo, certainly not a bad defender but he drops off tackles quite a lot, and you can't do that when playing Australia or the Kiwi's. Tough call at the end of the day one i wouldn't like to make. I'm just glad both Gale and Williams are in the squad over Matty Smith.

Im glad hes gone for John over Farrell, John will ruffle more feathers. To be fair you know you will get a solid game from Farrell 40 tackles and some good hit ups just think John has that extra toughness needed to compensate against bigger opponents

same old England, in close matches you need your best squad on the park and yet again we have a few who just shouldn't be in, and that makes all the difference in close matches , lomax did ok but lacks the spark imo, Watkins average,whitehead average, cooper widdop likewise,

Effort was good, just silly mistakes again.

Personnel wise, I'm not a Watkins fan, I just don't see why he's raved about. Sarge needs to pass the ball, the left foot step is too predictable. Lomax needs to make that tackle, at the top level you just can't miss them and expect to not be slated for it. Sam had a good game apart from the two off loads.

All that said there is still plenty of improvement and we do have a chance against the Aussies if we complete our sets and not gift them possession.

Replace Sarginson with Percival and England would have won that game

that should have been the case anyway

Why is Watkins getting so much criticism? I agree he was pretty average but I don't he he really got opportunities to shine (same for Whitehead). Sarginson got far more good ball and squandered most of it, and also made a poor defensive read for their first try, yet he is barely being criticised at all.

Lomax was good for most of the game but really let himself down with a poor 1 on 1 tackle attempt.
Despite what I said earlier about Batemans aggression I thought he did look a little small out there today.

Bateman weren't his usual self, Sarginson went into headless chicken mode where he forgets his job is to put his winger away, the halves were none existent, Hodgeson gave his passes slightly late time and time again, we allowed the kiwis to lie all over us.

When we were handsing the ball out we had no inside runners so the Kiwis just slid across and we didn't utilise the offloads as scoots which would work well against a tiring Kiwi team especially when we had a hooker on the bench.

Next week I'd change Sarginson for Percival, Bateman for Farrell, Gale for Williams. We will put a decent score on Scotland but will give the team to gel ready for the Australia game.

Positives - McGilvary and the pack.

We've seen this year what Sarginsons best position is and it isn't at centre. He was really poor today and should lose his place to Percival next week. His Centre partner is lucky there are any other viable options because Watkins continues to be more hype then substance. Where his huge rep has come from I'm not too sure at all (Sinfield described as second to only Inglis as the worlds best centre pre match which nearly made me fall of my chair).

Both halves were poor with Gale especially struggling in both attack and in defence (I've not see a guy get bumped off as many tackles in a long while). I was really dissapointed with the bench as well. I thought the Burgess twins and Daryl Clark really struggled and we need far more from them.

I'd make a couple of changes for next week (Percival for Sarginson, Williams for Gale and Farrell for T Burgess) and line up-

Lomax
McGillvary Watkins Percival Hall
Widdop Williams
Hill Hodgson Graham
Farrell Whitehead S Burgess

G Burgess Cooper Bateman Clark

Hodgson didn't really stamp his authority on the game for me, especially when he came on for that second spell. Just didn't get it in his hands enough. Widdop and Gale just too pedestrian for me, a far cry from and Edwards and Gregory combo. Just far too predictable near their line and neither a game-changer.Thought Cooper did well when he came on. If we'd had a Newlove or Senior out there at centre I'd feel much more confident of us doing something.