Supporters everywhere have been trying to determine why the test team is not performing strongly, and looked at the overseas quota, the ability/skills of the current test team, the young alent coming into SL. However, IMO the overseas quota is not the biggest factor affecting English RL, nor is the question of whether current players are good enough (IMO individually they are). English test players:
* play too many games in a season
* play more games than Australian and NZ players
* get barely a 2 month offseason (2007 being an exception) compared to Aussies/NZers getting a 3 month offseason.

Prominent figures in both codes of Rugby like South African sports scientist Professor Tim Noakes, NZ Warriors/Kiwis Dr Simon Mayhew, and high performance managers from ARU & NZRU suggest a player should not play more than 30 first class games in a season. Before RLWC started, on average, England's RLWC squad members had played 30 first class games per season, yet the Aussies and Kiwis played on average 24 games. Before facing PNG, these were some match totals for 2008:
37 games - Burrow, Senior, Sinfield
36 - Higham
35 - Peacock
34 - Ellis, Gardner, Roby

For Australia, only the young centre Israel Folau had come anywhere close with 30. For New Zealand, besides the SL based Leuluai playing 38 games, the next closest were the Storm forwards Adam Blair and Jeremy Smith playing 30 games.

Every year for the last 5 years, England's test stars have played more games than Australia, and Englan has consistently lost against Australia. If the RFL and SL clubs reduced the excessive workload of England's current test players, let them rest and focus on skill development, this English team could improve its performance and stand a stronger chance of winning.

Trying to compare Super League game totals to NRL games totals is ridiculous.

Especially when you have left out the Test matches and Origin games.



Try again...

and trial matches

And, as Matthew Johns noted when asked about this very thing, SL players play St Helens one week, and then Castleford or Wakefield (in all due respect) the next week, while in the NRL the games are of high intensity every week. There are far less runaway games in the NRL from memory.

OT but I had a read of From the Sheds in a bookshop this week - good reading, especially his - very complimentarybits on English players (Hanley, Davies, Robinson). Section on Mal Reilly was very funny.

bullpoop

there is nobody in the English game as good as Slater, Inglis, Folau, J Monaghan, Lockyer, Thurston etc

In England all the skilled players go to RU.

All the fit players go to RL.

England RU aren't especially skilled, they are just fit and have a strong pack and a good kicking game. Their outside backs, even in 2003, were nothing special apart from one world beater in Robinson.

Corrcet, the totals do not include trial matches for NRL players and some SL players. They are correct up until the beginning of RLWC, and include Origin the May test and pre RLWC internationa warm up games.

Yeah, they dont get 40 - 0 drubbings in big games in the NRL do they, oh hang on......



in all seriousness, Mathhew Johns is correct, unfortunately it cant just be fixed with a click of a finger like some of the Aussies seem to think.

Edited to make some kind of sense.

some of the nrl clubs are back at training now

for next year