I agree France need to be playing the top 3 teams more often to improve. A second super league team would also make them a lot stronger. I think we should remember in the 4 nations we only won 34-12 with France winning at half time, so they can be competitive.

The question shouldnt be, should we play an all golds/all stars team instead of the french, but should we play them as well as the game against france. Where is this option in the poll.

given the higher calibre of imports we've brought over to SL in recent season a exiles/allgolds...team would be a very serious challenge indeed...off the top of my head heres a 13

1. brent webb
2. scott donald
3. matt king
4. sia soliola
5. amos roberts
6. thomas leuluai or michael monaghan?
7. matt orford
8. mitchell sargent (i'm struggling for a another prop tbh)
9. danny buderus
10. mark o'meley
11. craig fitzgibbon
12. david fa'alongo
13. dallas johnson


very good side that imo

I'd rather see us continue to play France. The fact that you get a five figure crowd in Donny for such a game suggests its not such a bad idea.

If we're going to play an invented 'exiles' team, can we at least do it properly and follow the lead of lashings, i zingari, or duchess of norfolk's teams in cricket, harlem globetrotters in basketball (or barbarians in rugby union). I.e form a 'club' with some famous ex-players on the committee, get a "tradition" going and have this club send teams to play the odd game annually in France, Serbia, Malta, Lebanon or wherever (with weaker squad, of course). England v Barbarians in union somehow has a better ring to it than England vs a scratch squad of foreigners.

Bring back the Yorkshire v Lancashire comp (but marketed properly and make it clear that like the SOO in Aus its a big factor for international selection at the end of the year) and play England v France at the same time. The "top" players would be playing in Yorkshire v Lancashire and the "2nd tier" England players or youngsters would be playing against France.

Would be more chance of a competitive game v France, would give young future England players good exposure to internationals, and (if done properly) the Yorkshire v Lancashire comp would give us a stepping stone in between regular SL games and internationals, as many players seem to struggle with the step up at the moment.

France have got 4 teams through to the last 32 of the Challenge Cup

Thats just over 10 %

Perhaps one thing most people don't know is that Thomas Castagne, France RU outsdie half (and Saracens RU) played rugby league in France but had to turn to Union as there weren't any RL sides playing at a high enough standard for his talents in France.

Today, he would be in the Catalans side and boy would have he been good in League - another Stacey Jones.

If the idea of a one-off test is to give England time together, build combinations, prepare them as a unit for games in October and November, why is a game in June better than a game in October? A June test is 4 months away from the Four Nations series.

Staging a warm up game in the Southern Hemisphere two weeks after the GF could provide better preparation for England. The Grand Finalists would get a week for rest, recovery and travel to the SH to acclimatise and recover from jet lag. The non GF players would get vital match practice. They could play the Maori or a Pacific Island nation there. That would improve the preparation of the team.