It was the sign of a good attitude , wasn't it?

LOL

And the same SBW who got trampled by Burgess?

Sinfield holds his line, they score out wide kick conversion.

''why didn't sinfield rush out and shut the play down? that was the only option''.

It's not just opinion anymore, it's a vendetta.

No it's not it's idiots like you who cannot see the big picture and just try to obfuscate the issues by focusing on littele things. The big things are the real issues. I had no problem with Sinfield today apart from his kicking.

MY concerns is that England lost this world cup before its started. McNamara was the wrong man, his selections were wrong, his tactics were wrong


Playing Chase for three years instead of Widdop ( or Brough ) was wrong , T Burgess or Mossop ahead of any other half dozen props was wrong eg Carvell , Not playing Widdop most of the tournament and then sticking hinm in at the end was a mistake. He should have played most of the tournament to be ready for his half back partnership. Picking 17 players and only playing 16 was wrong.

I do not blame Sinfield for any of that yet you are still so stupid you cannot answer the points except to create arguments that are not there so as to avoid the real issues.

I don't think anyone has ever complained that a player should have rushed out of the line. It's not something you "should" do.

But if you want to think people would say that, you go ahead!

To say he wouldn't is also conjecture.

Brough hasn't got the bottle to produce on the biggest stage like Sinfield did today.

As opposed to Chase who has been superb for England ever since he made his England debut ??

Broughy does not get on with Sinfield so I have heard. Wonder why?

He doesn't get on with many players, including his Giants team mates, from what I have heard.

That would be relevant, if I was discussing Chase? If you think Chase was Brough's competition, guess again.

That would be relevant, if I was discussing Brough as direct competition with Chase? If you think Chase was Brough's competition, guess again.

A bit cryptic arent you.

This discussion was never just about Brough. England did not lose today because of one selection issue.

I must have missed it not being about Brough, what with the thread title and that!

You're trying to make an argument that Brough should have played, I'm saying that, given his propensity to go missing in the big games, he shouldn't.

All that needs to be said about Brough is in the title of the thread. You may as well wish Cherry-Evans (a far better player) was playing for England. Like Brough he could have, like Brough he chose not to.

NO Brough was told he would be behind all the other halves in the squad and that he had a choice stay with England and not be picked or go and play with Scotland.

HE then decided he wanted to play RL so went back to Scotland.

Very different to Cherry Evans

Have you got proof that was what Brough was told? I very much doubt it.

Brough was quoted as saying he was sick of playing 'second fiddle' well Widdop has also been playing second fiddle but he has a good attitude bided his time and took his chance.

Brough however threw his teddies out and thus again never sued on the big stage.

Brough was unwilling to be in the squad and try to force his way in. That spells LOSER in any language.

You're not familiar with DG's modus operandi? It's up to you to disprove the voices in his head. He doesn't have to prove anything. He's been boring the undercrackers off everybody on here for about 6 or 7 hours now. He's persistent I'll give him that. An absolute loon, but persistent.

Some of the Brough posts from some Leeds fans are as boring and childish as some of the Sinfield ones.

All this nonsense of him going missing in the big games is rubbish. Was the CC quarter final not a big game?

Brough & Widdop would have been a great combination with Sinfield at 13. I believe that combination would have given us that extra edge IMHO

I also don't agree people saying he walked out on England. He wasn't in the squad in July,
he chose Myler & Mcguire ahead of him when he was by far the best half back FFS. It was clear to anyone Mcnamaea was going with. I read an interview with Brough he decided to play for Scotland and I was expecting him to slate Mcnamara.
But it wasn't he said It was Mcnamaras squad and he could choose who he wanted. Scotland asked him if he wanted to represent them and he chose to do that when it was clear he wasn't going to be selected.

The two usually "rent-a-quotes" from Leeds fans here in regards to Brough.

1) He goes missing in big games.
How many big games was he missing in? Really? He had a few poor games, like everyone does. But I'd say the Hudds-Leeds games were big games and he turned up in all of them. Hudds-Saints. Hudds-Wigan.
Basically, he couldn't get the better of Warrington. So people will only remember that.

Out if interest, how many "big games" did Sinfield show up in this year? Because he was fairly anonymous all season and yet none of the Brough detractors have mentioned this...

2) He turned his back on England.
Err, no he didn't. He was called into the squad last year. Ignored. Made a scape goat in a bit-part England team that didn't perform against the Exiles and subsequently dropped. He was BY FAR the form half back of the SL at the start of the season, yet completely ignored by McNamara. A 30-man elite training squad that contains McGuire and Myler over him? Something wrong there.
He was never going to get a look in. When you're playing in the form of your life, Man of Steel winning form, and still don't get in a 30-man squad, well that says it all about your chances.
Naming Sinfield as captain meant no matter how well anyone played, they still wouldn't get a look in. And that's wrong.

Do I think Danny Brough would have made a difference? Personally, yes.
Can I prove it? No.
Can anyone disprove it? No.

If you're pro Sinfield, that's fine. But at least put together a decent argument and not a defensive load of nonsense for anyone that dares question the ability of "Sir Kev".

Brough doesn't go missing in big games because he doesn't play in them



Oh and whoever suggested the 1/4 final of a CC is a. 'Big' game I'm happy to be proven incorrect but didn't they get knocked out in the quarters?

Strange game to bring up to prove a point when it proves my point.

Not only that but they are basing the opinion on one season. One thecking season. Sinfield has been doing it for 10 years in big games. When Brough can even repeat this year in another season, might be the time to star arguing, but we are not even at that yet.

Tbf Sinfield as been in a good team for 10 years plus around mostly the same pivotal players. Broughy as had 4 or 5 different clubs in that time so put him in a side like hes in now permanent i reckon he would be on par without a doubt. They are both very good players imo.

And of course there is a reason that one has been at a top club for many years, and the other a nomodic backpacker with a chip on his shoulder, and not being at the top. So let's see what happens in another year at Huddersfield, before proclaiming Brough as the second coming.

You know him personally do you? was not long ago Leeds fans was wanting him to sign for them.... Chase is the same but its how decent coaches/managers handle them Anderson as done a cracking job on Brough & hes had his best season in SL.