Which is why we should have had Brough in, his partnership with Widdop would have been a mirror of the Cronki-Widdop partnership at Melbourne. That then removes the need to shoe horn Sinfield into the team which means we can run with a bigger more effective pack. The inclusion of Brough would also mean no need to pick Chase and therefore not pi55 lots of fans off.

A better balanced team, a better kicking game especially near the try line and with Heighington at 13 we have a very tough, mobile, fit and defensively sound back row three.

The front row takes care of itself but Carvel MUST come onto the bench.
The three quarters have looked solid and Tomkins, nuff said.

It's so disappointing that we could have put a really well balanced and competitve side out but instead we've tinkered with selections to make room for certain players.

Yep, just set up the first 2 tries and another one later on.

The reason the half backs weren't working together is because unless the play the ball was right on one edge, they were playing with split halves...which is a terrible tactic.

The main reason for Sinfield at 6 was for his organisational skills and generally marshalling of the side just like he does at Leeds.

if its not worked or looking likely to then its got to be Widdop and Chase at 6 and 7 but it leaves us without a top drawer (excuse the pun) kicking game.

An 'inform' Brough would have been the answer, but at the end of the year he was out of form although I would have found room for him in the squad, certainly over McGuire

Sinfield is the organising style of player we need i think. But over the past 2 weeks his play seems to be done slowly without any spark. Widdop or Chase should be playing 6 with Brough at 7 imo.

Get Widdop on!

Chase and Sinfield have been given two games and it hasn't worked so things need to change for the next two games, especially as we have had the stand off for this years NRL minor premiers starting on the bench. I would have Sinfield at 7 to marshall the team and Widdop at 6.

I thought we looked better with Widdop and Sinfield on the pitch together. Chase started brighly but second half he made a lot of bad decisions and made poor plays. Sinfield looked better with him off as well.
Another option would be to lose Wilkin and have Sinfield fill that role, start him at 13 and let him try and work with Widdop, Chase and Roby.

Then again, what do you expect when neither plays together and both play in completely different team structures. At least Leeds fans might be able to see how Chase would fit with Sinny when we swap him for Burrow..

I think we have to stick with what we've got. I think Sinfield had a really good game today.

Sinfield was anonymous, he did hardly anything even his goal kicking was . Chase at least made some things happen even though he made some absolutley terrible decisions at times. Widdop has looked better than both in the little time he has had in the last two games. If Widdop doesnt start vs the Aussies its a disgrace imo.

You've just justified why we should PERSEVERE with the same half-back combination. They've played 2 games together and not had enough competitive games to try out combinations, get used to each other etc.

How many weeks/months does it take to settle new halves together at a club level? I'm pretty sure they're not super dooper together after two games.

If you taped the game watch it again when your sober. Sinfields goal kicking was below his usual standard but his general play was good. He had a hand in several tries and was the better of the two halves by a distance

Wow, did you really watch the game?

What a load of crap!! People just listen to what the commentators say and base all their opinions on that! Chase and Sinfield had a hand in the first 3 tries, kept turning them round with kicks. I can only remember Chase making one poor kick when he should have passed. Davies spent too much time moaning about England played rather than commentating on the game

I would stick with the same team.
Possibly swap Carvell for Wilkin.

maybe swap chase for widdop.
chase could ad some zip from the bench which I think we miss from robinson/burrow

Good point. We have nothing to offer from the bench otherwise. Suggests the coach isn't concerned that we'll ever get behind and need to change things!

I wouldn't argue with this

Personally, I would go with Gareth Widdop @ 6, Rangi Chase @ 7 and Kevin Sinfield @ 13, with an impact playmaker coming off the bench. My choice would have been either Rob Burrow or Luke Robinson, but due to the squad that Steve McNamara has selected, it would have to be Danny McGuire.

Why do people continually suggest players not even in the squad? At this point in time you may as well suggest picking a halfback combination of Andy Gregory and Garry Schofield.

As it is, moving Chase to the bench for Widdopp may make sense. I wouldn't put Sinfield at loose forward - we'll need all the grunt we can muster in the pack. I'd still prefer another prop on the bench as well.

from the squad available I would go for

1. Tomkins
2. Hall
3. Reed
4. Yeaman
5. Briscoe- Although I think he has been poor in the last two games

6- Widdop
7- Sinfield

8- Graham
9- Roby
10- Peacock
11- JJB
12- Ellis
13- Heighton

Subs-

14- Chase
15- Carvell
16- Westwood- he's been excellent in the two previuos games but I think as an impact international player would be immense
17- Moz

Sinfield organises the Leeds team round he used to do this at 13, so keep him there. I am wondering why players such as himself can do it with their eyes shut in the SL but struggle at the international game. Sean Long springs to mind bar one match against OZ he went missing throughout his international career.

i think the results of this poll www.internationalrugbyleague.net/polls.htm are staggering.

i think the results of this poll www.internationalrugbyleague.net/polls.htm are staggering.

General play was good? He didnt create all which was his job. He will get embarrassed playing there on Saturday because he just isnt good enough.

Errmmm - are you sure ?

His distribution was spot on, general kicking game was good, played a big part in several of the tries. Rangi's game didn't really come off, I don't get why the commentators kept banging on about the halves not working together, when it was plainly obvious that Sinfield was playing out wide on the right, and Rangi on the left. It was more about how they brought their outside backs into play, and how they linked up with the very dangerous Tomkins.

I think that is the problem with british RL. When you look at the auzzies and NZ squads. There is lways changes in prsonnel but barring injuries you will always have/had the same half back partnerships. Lockyer/Thurston before Thurston it was Johns. No doubt next year they will struggle as Thurston and who ever setles down. But rest of the squad always changes.

What we need to do is for a couple of years play against teams which we are marginally better than such as the Pacific Islanders. Where they will give us a game but at least we could manage to get a win on a consistant basis. This will also enable to get combinations established and have a settled partnership. Instead every year we have two different players in each role who do not know each other.

I agree with fatbaztod100 in regards to the spine of the team. If you look at the Australian side, Slater, Lockyer, Thurston and Smith, the crucial positions are filled with people that constantly play with each other. We've never had that kind of consistency because the players in the pivot positions are always being chopped and changed.

Watch the tries back and note who gives the crucial pass that makes the space for the try to be scored.Mcnamara may not be everyones idea of a top coach but he picked Sinfield out as Englands top player along with Tomkins. He also got mom for england in the LE.He also finished second highest in the tackle count. I appreciate he played the full 80 mins but for a player defending as a halfback for most of the game thats still some achievement.