Took the ball right up to the line, played the conditions well, kicked relatively well, took charge of organising and did everything with a calm, controlled air of comfort. Basically everything Williams failed to do last week.

I thought that Matty Smith had a very good game yesterday, he certainly brought the controlled direction to our side that we have sadly lacked in the first two tests

I'm not sure how yesterdays performance from Matty Smith warrants him as SL's best half back though, unless your opinions are based on one game rather than the whole season?

He kicked good yesterday, but they were helped by the dithering that RTS did when collection them.

Good to see Hardaker has the kick off duties too at International level. We got a drop out straight away from the start of the game thanks to one NZ couldn't deal with and they struggled with others too.

I agree. Smith has had a mixed season, but yesterday he did the job his coach and team needed. We commented at the game that it was very much a "Sinfield" type performance. That's a good accolade btw.

With regards to it being a Sinfield type performance Rogues
Matty Smith certainly played the game and what was in front of him yesterday and that performance from him certainly helped us win the game and the series

Has there ever been a better game management player than Sinfield?
IMO he is the best of all time in controlling a game and making sure that his side wins the big games when they count

I've always rated Sinfield for his game management. If you look back at my posts over the years I said that for England /GB his most effective position was at #9, where he could control a game without having to be a running halfback. The problem with a lot of many RL fans is that see a Rangi Chase type player as a solution rather than a problem.

He is not the best imo, but is up there which is probably an indictment of the lack of quality HB's in SL.It is the one area now likely to hold us back.Matty Smith had a good solid game on Saturday so fair play to him, but he needs to have a much better year for Wigan in 2016 to be considered again, he was a lucky boy to even get that opportunity at the weekend.

Smith and McGillvary both had great games - massive improvement in their respective positions over those they replaced.

So why did the England coaches not go with them earlier in the series?

Bes they won the first game. They weren't going to change that for the second game.

Nearly everyone to a man wouldn't have even had Smith in the squad let alone the starting 13 so I don't think you can't criticise them for only playing him in the 3rd test when again I think most of us wanted Gale in.

As for wing, I did think we should've gone for McGilivery over Burgess because of the type of physical impact he showed on Saturday carrying the ball. However it was hardly a shocking call to opt for Burgess instead originally.

Smith had a very good game, but in response to the original question, a big fat NO. Gale and our own Danny are ahead of him in terms of ability.

Smith just did what you would expect a half to do. Good short passing and a decent kicking game. Widdop concentrated on his defence and worked his socks off, thankfully only kicking the ball a couple of times.
Glad McGillvary got a chance. The way we played all three tests didn't suit Burgess, wingers sole use was to smash the ball up out of defence. Hall did it brilliantly the first two games then McGillvary did it on Saturday. He's a cracking player. We have a lot of good wingers around at the moment.

Poor mans Danny Mags. We'd have thrashed the Kiwis with Mags in the Halves.

I think McGuire can count himself very unlucky not to have made the England squad, best half in SL by a mile in 2015, and by no means 'just a support player' as I sometimes see him labelled.

Smith played really well on Saturday and does seem to have that knack of raising his performance for the bigger games.

Widdop & Williams weren't completely awful, but the first two tests did lack that element of control and game management that we saw from Smith.

2 very good kicks, a few reasonable/average kicks, a few poor kicks. He knows his limitations, didn't try anything other than passing along the line. If that's the best we have to offer we are sadly lacking. Fortunately there are better, but not much. Can you imagine Aus/NZ picking a HB just because they are an 'organiser'?
It does seem churlish appearing critical after a good victory, I even jumped out of my seat twice on Saturday for the first time in this series, but the question was asked.

Best half back is still the petulant little boy at Huddersfield Giants, I'm afraid.

Sadly lacking enough to beat NZ in a series and be better than their halfbacks Tigs.

Blummin miseryguts.

I'd back you to be more effective than Hiku was Sam

When we have won an ashes series I will die a happy man, until then I aspire for us to be the best. Paul Deacon could still do what Smith did on Saturday (albeit with more abuse from me).

No ashes series on the horizon so does that mean you'll be in this mood for the foreseeable?

Andy give me a velcro belt and some tags and Shaun Johnson would struggle against me.

Still Morris Dancing then Sam?

You could call it that but a bunch of has beens chasing each other around in the mud is probably less appealing than morris dancing.

You don't HAVE to watch the Bulls.

I said has beens not never gonna be's.

Apart from Adam O'Brien of course...

Yes, look forward to seeing him at HQ next season...