When we look at our options for the England squad, the back row is always highlighted as a weak areas in recent years. But, looking forward to the 2017 world cup, will the back row be one of our strongest areas?

The 2014 4 Nations squad contained:
Tomkins (2icon_cool.gif, O'Loughlin (32), Whitehead (25), Ferres (29), Westerman (25), Farrell (24).

Then we have these five youngsters who I'd expect to be in contention for a spot in the squad versus the Kiwi's. All five have really impressed me this year (Greenwood before his injury):
Stevie Ward (21)
Joe Greenwood (22)
Joe Wardle (should he move from Scotland) (23)
Ben Currie (20)
John Bateman (21)

And some other old heads knocking about SL:
Kirmond (29), Ablett (29), Westwood (33), Harrison (27), McCarthy-Scarsbrook (29), Wilkin (31).

I dont really see why it is perceived as a weakness

When fit, a backrow of Tomkins/Ferris, Whitehead & O'Loughlin is very good. throw in some of the other players you mentioned if they are on form and i dont see a problem

Probably a bit of club bias but I think Bateman is turning into a cracking player and will be a regular in the England setup maybe this year but definately next

Probably club bias on my part too, but I would say the same about Stevie Ward.

These 2 plus Greenwood all look to have great futures ahead of them.

It's not terrible but it still is a comparative weakness vs Mannering/Taumalolo/Taylor/Proctor/Harris/Eastwood/Ma'u

Forgot Taupau/Thompson/Glenn/Frank-Paul. Kiwis really do have backrowers coming out of their wazoo.

Bateman is one of those players who stand out in Super League, but would disappear at international level. He's too small to be an international backrower. The same goes for Farrell, but he doesn't even stand out in SL.

Ward, Greenwood and Currie look like the future, although I'm not convinced Currie wouldn't make an international centre.

Bateman has been very impressive when ive seen him this year, got a wicked side step on him and puts in a load of tackles, not surprised the NRL clubs are taking a close look at him

Wardle also coming into his own in the 2nd row now after switching from centre, but hes with Scotland for now with Brough.

And you know this how?









Have you even watched Wigan lately?

I don't need to 'know' it. It's an opinion. You are of course entitled to disagree with it. I have no objection to you being wrong.



No, has he turned into the ginger Hanley over the last month or so?

Ben Currie's played for Ireland before now, not that it makes much of a difference.

Greg Bird isn't the biggest player but makes up for it with heart and passion,two things Bateman has in abundance.

He's stronger than he looks and is awesome in defence,absorbs a lot go forward from much bigger guys than himself when tackling.

Bateman doesn't play with any fear and plays the man not the reputation which is exactly what you want against the Aussies and Kiwis, his battles with Jamie Peacock when he was only 18/19 proves this.

He will play for England and will do a very good job too.

Never mind just play for England, I reckon Bateman could be Captain in a few years.

Westwood and Lockers could well be retired by the time of the 2017 WC.

Conversely there is still time for a youngster or two to emerge

You dont half talk some cobblers

Bateman did a fairly decent job knocking Peacock and Cuthbertson around the park last weekend. In fact i cant remember him being overpowered by anyone in any game i have seen.

Not to mention the lad is nearly 6'2......

Again, you dont half talk some rubbish

I know your just a troll and i am slightly peeved that i was d to reply.

But i tell you one thing

you talk an absolute pile of horse dung mate. I actually cringe when i read some of the guff you have puked onto your keyboard

Bateman the same size as Sean O'Loughlin? He must have eaten a lot of pies.

Bird is not big but he is 102Kg and 1.83 tall.

Sean O'Loughlin is 103Kg and 1.87 tall

John Bateman is 99 Kg and 1.89 tall

I said height, not size and it would appear he is actually taller.....

Bateman has more than enough height to achieve the bulk and muscle that Lockers has.

SL at a similar age was like a racing snake

The only way Bateman is the same height, or taller, than O'L is if he wears 6" stilletto rugby boots.

Bateman: www.wiganwarriors.com/WPlayerP.aspx?id=79 DOB - 30/09/1993 Position - Back Row Place of Birth - - Height - 185 cm Weight - 96 kg SOL www.wiganwarriors.com/WPlayerP.aspx?id=13 DOB - 24/11/1982 Position - Loose Forward Place of Birth - Wigan (England) Height - 187 cm Weight - 98 kg

Bateman: www.wiganwarriors.com/WPlayerP.aspx?id=79 DOB - 30/09/1993 Position - Back Row Place of Birth - - Height - 185 cm Weight - 96 kg SOL www.wiganwarriors.com/WPlayerP.aspx?id=13 DOB - 24/11/1982 Position - Loose Forward Place of Birth - Wigan (England) Height - 187 cm Weight - 98 kg

Don't forget, O'loughlin has a good three inches of perm which can give the illusion that he's taller than he is.

Bateman is about 3" taller than Burrow. The latter is 5'5", according to Wiki, but is no more than 4'8" in reality. I think you pies must all watch the game from Bateman's side of the pitch, swapping at half time. He just gives the illusion of being taller as he is closer to you than O'L.

Bateman certainly doesn't look that tall at games on the TV, he only looks about 5'9. I always thought he was a short.

Bateman is powerpuff. Tiny, wimpy little runt. The kind of kid that would get bullied on his camp site and run away to Bradford. Marmelised by the Saints reserve backrowers and thrown about like he was a rottweiller's play toy by young Savelio.

Saw absolutely nothing of the ginger Hanley either. And people want to unleash those two on the international rugby scene.

Bateman's published stats are a classic example of why most Rugby League fans treat such as being about as truthful as a statement from 10 Downing Street.

At the start of the season he was widely touted as being anywhere between 6'2 and 6'5. Given the viewing angle of most fans (either at the ground or watching on the telly) it's often very difficult to judge.

However, looking at the yardage Bateman has made in heavy traffic this season (not in broken field where his speed and footwork is certainly an asset) I have been mentally chipping away at those figures as each game has passed.

The absolute clincher was the game played at Leigh. With ten minutes to go Bateman walked straight past Joe Burgess on camera. Now, either Joe Burgess has suddenly grown to 6'7 without anyone realising it - or Bateman's stats are a fraud.

Burgess literally towered over Bateman. If the latter is much over 5'10 I'd be surprised.

Bateman is a short , no question