It wasn't a case of saying that we should drop everyone altogether. I was making a point of the fact that there's no point playing Morley, Peacock, Roby, Tomkins, Westwood, O'Loughlin, Sinfield, Wilkin, Crabtree, and so forth. We've already seen them at this level and we know that for the most, they're OK enough to play.

I know what you're saying, but isn't it best to find out how young players perform alongside those who are likely to be in the full strength team with them? If those established players were removed and the team performed really badly you might end up missing a player who could actually have offered something much better in a full strength side.
If players can develop an understanding at international level and keep their place in the side regularly then it's a good thing and that consistency should be continued. The Aussie have had consistency in some key positions for a long time and that made things so much easier for them at international level. Constantly chopping and changing the players involved can make it much harder to develop an understanding between players in the side and make it harder to perform at their best.

If there are players like Westwood, Tomkins, Sinfield, O'Loughlin etc who are likely to feature in a full strength team then it's better for them to partner some of the younger players to get used to the way they play the game and see which combinations show some promise.

Id agree with that, but considering what you have said surely suggesting McIlorum is biased because there is simply not any chance in hell he can be suggested to replace Roby which is the only position he could realistically take?

Id say the exact opposite, McIlorum is the better 80miute player, Burrow and Robinson the better impact. Burrow is much more suited to what we would need, a spell of impact.

BJB should be nowhere near the England squad

The person who mentioned it was agreeing with others who said that Roby only seemed to be playing well right now behind a dominant pack. I'm not sure whether I agree with that or not but it's something others had suggested, not just a Wigan fan. He also said McIlorum and Houghton were two he'd look at, rather than saying McIlorum should replace Roby.

I'd say on balance he was just giving his opinion. Roby has been poor on both occasions against Wigan this year so it's possible for Wigan fans to be less than impressed with him.

One thing that pleases me is the increased competition for places in the team at the moment. There seems to be more debate about who should be involved and more candidates being mentioned for different positions. I hope that it's because there are more talented players performing well at the moment as opposed to there being lots of reasonably talented players but few that stand out.

St's have been poor against Wigan this year. And lets be honest any hooker behind a struggling pack struggles to impress. Similarly when in front of a dominant pack they look good. Whether you are Roby, Smith, Farah, Buderus, Robinson whoever.

What i would say is one of the best things in Roby's favour is even behind a beaten pack he usually does the basics well. His distribution from the floor is good, he makes good metres, he is dynamic around the ruck and he tackles very well. Roby owns that shirt. We might as well give him the shirt and preprint the team sheets with Roby 9 on for the next 5 years at least. McIlorum, if on form, is fighting to step in when Roby is injured.

I can see the point in giving games to some fringe players, but you need a core. For the world cup we should be putting our core in place. We should have our 1, 6,7,9 in place now. I think we do, i think Tomkins, Widdop, Sinfield, Roby should be given their shirts now and we build a team around them.

Yeah we can try out some centre/wing combinations and some prop rotations, but lets get the 1,6,7,9 in place and work from there. Id want to see if we can play 4 props and 4 2nd rowers in the team. Lets see 20mins with Sinfield moving to hooker and Tomkins to S-O, whether we play Lynch or Crabtree in the pack when we do that isnt going to be the barometer of whether it works.

I like that combination, i think it offers us great flexibility. It gives us an organising stand off who can cover hooker. A scrum half who can cover FB, and an FB who can play stand off and a hooker who can play loose. That core allows us play around. You could put Burrow on the bench, he can step in to hooker and rest Roby, he could step in to half back, move Sinfield to Hooker and Tomkins to Stand off and Widdop can take a step back to FB. You could against a tiring pack of forwards play both Roby and Burrow at hooker. Can you imagine the impact of bringing on a player like Crabtree and Hock and Westwood, Sinfield directing us around the field, Widdop running it, Burrow and Roby both buzzing around the PTB, with Tomkins injecting himself when he sees fit? Yeah it would take a big effort to defend with that many playmakers but bloody hell there are tries there!

You could go with a big big bench. 2 props and 2nd rowers. Ellis and Ablett interchanging with Burgess and Westwood. Graham and Crabtree interchanging with Hock and Bailey? huge pack. Go without a centre and play 6 forwards for 20 minutes. In fact play 6 forwards and give Roby a rest. Move Watkins to FB, Tomkins to Stand off and Sinfield to hooker. Sinfield plays it safe, good pass selection, quick and accurate from the floor, yeah he isnt making breaks or causing the damage Roby would but in 20 minutes you will have a fresh Roby + 3 rested forwards to come on against a side which have had to tackle monsters for 20minutes with Tomkins buzzing around any offloads. You could play the third 20 mins of that match
Graham Sinfield Burgess
Ablett Ellis
Bailey
which is a massive pack

then interchange for for the last quarter
Crabtree Roby Hock
Westwood Ellis
O'loughlin

With all of them fresh bar Ellis.

I think right now yeah we can try Ablett, Lynch, Patrick, Crabtree, Burrow, Robinson, Burrow etc, but we need to put the core in place for next year, this year imo.

Bailey, although he does a decent job for Leeds there are much better English forwards than him, especially as you seem to have him down at LF?

Sinfield is an excellent halfback and LF, there are better hooker than him in SL.

That wasnt a starting pack, just a rotation option if we were to play 2 props and 2 back rowers on the bench. Yeah there are better hookers in SL but we couldnt pick any of them if Roby starts and we play 2 props and 2 back rowers on the bench.

Sorry, I stopped reading when you appeared to be seriously suggesting Bailey be anywhere near an England shirt...

Wow, you got pretty far then! Seems a little idiotic to get so far but not complete it. Ill be a bit more concise for you. After Bailey it says that would be a big pack and then gives a suggestion for a pack with good impact.

I cant see Bailey or Ablett figuring for the England Squad, while they are decent players, there are better players for their positions.

Add that to the way Bailey can behave sometimes the risk isnt worth it either.

the risk of riling the opposition isn't worth it?

I think the Aussies are more likely to laugh at him to be honest.

Are we talking about Bailey or the majority of the England team?

Manly players certainly didn't laugh at Bailey at WCC

Manly aint particularly good this year. As for Bailey, I'd have him in the squad, but wouldn't make my 17.

If I was picking Leeds' 17 and everyone was fit, I don't think Bailey would be in there! He's not an international prop in a million years.

I dont think he would be that effective in riling up the Aussies or NZ, I think he would annoy them slightly to the point they would just put a bit more venom in their tackles on him.

They just arent daft enough to get wound up by someone they know they can outplay, thats how they would get their own back on him if you get my meaning, by seeing him on a losing side.

Wind up merchants and dirty players with not Test standard games have been selected for England before, they have had no impact whatsoever.
Does anyone really believe a player like Bailey will worry or intimidate anyone at Test level?
Good players are intimidated by an opposing players ability to beat them at their impact on a game, nothing more or else.
If anyone thinks Bailey is going to intimidate the likes of Gallen and Hargreaves they are dreaming, its all been done and seen in the NRL for decades and does not work against Test level Pros.

Yeah I'm sure players like Gallen, Leroy-Lahrs, Scott, Shillington, Matulino and JWH are going to be intimidated by Bailey



We have a really good pack, not on par with Australias but that's not expected imo and for Bailey to be considered to play for England when we have players like Mossop, Graham, Burgess, Lynch, LMS, Patrick, Crabtree, Mason and even Morley and Peacock still. For Bailey to be even considered is laughable really.

I know Leeds fans like him because he winds the opposition fans up due to him been a thug. But I honestly don't know what he offers Leeds Rhinos on the field.

He offers a lot, Bailey is a good, hard working prop, with good defence and good ball retention. He does the simple things very very well. He controls the tackle better than any other player in the Leeds side, he does a lot of the less tangible things well.

The fact is, some fans dont like Bailey, and neither do some players. He does the role of A lightning rod for the Leeds pack extremely well. He isn’t a dirty player, I have seen dirty players. Barrie Mac is thought of as some lovable rogue yet did things far far worse than what Bailey has ever done. Lee Radford is apparently feared by the nightclub doorman of Hull and looked upon in wonder by the Hull folk. He is much dirtier player than Bailey.

Luke O’donnell is the most banned player in the history of the NRL, comes storming into a fracas started by Kev Brown, gets put down and all of sudden this is all Baileys fault.

Bailey is an angel compared to the likes of Skerret, McDermott, Sironen, O’conner, Morley, Tallis.

As for the Aussies not being affected by a bit of biff. When was our last victory against the Aussies and what was the defining image of that game? A true cheap shot merchant, an actual dirty player in Willie Mason swinging at Fielden and Peacock putting him in his place. Sean Long being caught high and late by Mason with another cheap shot, being hit that bit harder by every GB player and proceeding to spend the rest of the game hiding in the centres and dropping the ball when in space with the line at his mercy.

Gallen is a grub, he is a dirtier player than Bailey (ask Anthony Laffranchi or Josh Graham) and can be affected by players getting under his skin (ask Mickey Paea)

Leeds fan in woefully inaccurate defence of Bailey shocker.

Leeds fans, along with Brian Noble, Brian Mclennan, Tony Smith, Darryl Powell, Steve Macnamara, Brian Mcdermott. Thats 4 grand final winning coaches and 4 international coaches, who see Baileys value. Unfortunately he hasnt beaten up enough doormen in Hull to be respected by some.

I'm no fan of Lee Radford. That doesn't make Bailey any better than average, however.