we can't demand players be released unless it's a proper test match...ie not against the exiles

So would it make sense to play the French as a mid-season international "test" and put the Exiles game on the back burner so to speak for WC year? If it is at all possible? Just try and get more cohesion between the squad in the build up to it.

I know a lot of fans won't be happy about losing their key players for one game, but I'd be happy if it was for the good of the international team.

We should really be able to call on our overseas players for the Exiles games next year with it being World Cup year.That should have been a stipulation for no series against OZ /NZ this year.It is the only worthwhile hitout we will have before the event starts and 1/3 of our team wont be playing.

It would be 2 years since our whole squad played in a fixture against top opposition,while NZ and Australia get to play each other several times in that period...And we wonder why we get stuffed!!

We should really be able to call on our overseas players for the Exiles games next year with it being World Cup year.That should have been a stipulation for no series against OZ /NZ this year.It is the only worthwhile hitout we will have before the event starts and 1/3 of our team wont be playing.

It would be 2 years since our whole squad played in a fixture against top opposition,while NZ and Australia get to play each other several times in that period...And we wonder why we get stuffed!!

O loughlan is not a better 13 then Sinfield or stand off or better player and certainly not even close to being a better captain than Sinfield and he never has been or never will be any of the above.
Plus I think Danny Washbrook should be in the squad had a great season and rejuvenated his career at wakey. England 13 for me

The Exiles is an Exhibition match though, no NRL Clubs are going to release players mid season for that type of game.

Plays well when the Leeds pack is dominant, but what will he offer for England when we're getting battered by the Australian and New Zealand forwards? Does he have that bit of magic in him to turn a game? Unsure. Definitely got to play 13 if he's in the side for me.

the exiles game is'nt a test so we can't demand anything....


and we could'nt stipulate anything in regards to there being no series against OZ/NZ this year cos it's nothing to do with us...their players union got the players the year off...we just had to sit by and what it happen.

battered by the new zealand forwards???


the kiwis have'nt won in england since 2005......and every time kev has played against them since at home we've won and kev won MoM in a couple of them.......

Yes,i know what you are saying but like a said, with it being World Cup year and our only chance of a real challenge in a 2 year span leading up to it we should have got something in place.It obviously wont happen now though.

I keep hearing our pack is the match of anyones so this should not be an issue should it?

Why play him out of position for the international team? he has been playing stand off for 2 seasons now and has stated that is his position.He is way too light weight for the pack these days.

I hear that a lot too, easily the best pack in the World and have been for a decade is a common remark.
Forwards lay the foundation for a win.

Sinfield is big enough for Hooker or Lock, he is too slow for the halves.
A good Test Stand Off has to have enough pace to either run himself and break down a defence or at least acceleration to get outside his man and launch his outside backs.
If a team knows a players pace can not get around them then he has not sown any doubt in their minds and defensive structure, they adjust and snuff him out.
I do not think Kev has this ability at Test level.
Australia and even NZ love a player like Sinfield played in the Halves, they plan and target his limitations and shut him down and cut off supply to his outside men.
The game is already half way won.
Just my thoughts though.

Apart from when they don't?

England V NZ 2011 28 -6 (MOM Kevin Sinfield)

England V NZ 2009 20 - 12 (MOM Kevin Sinfield)

I don't get this 'no pace' arguement.
He isn't exactly slow.

I can't remember Wally Lewis or Brad Fittler streaking up field leaving clutching tacklers behind them. They made gaps with passes and controlled the game. They bust tackles too. I've seen Sinfield run at the line plenty of times and cause problems.

It doesn't matter whether you play Sinfield at 6,7 or 13. He will play the same game.
You just have to fill the other roles appropriately.

We have given other players the chance to do this now, with more speed and although sometimes looked good, controlling the game is always the part we lose.
When Eastmond and Tompkins played together they looked sparkley and we talked about them being half backs of the future. Problem is they are both strike players and can't get the team rolling.
Sinfield can do that.

If he plays at stand off we need a scrum half who can run, like McGuire or Myler or even Brough to be honest. If he plays at scrum half we need a stand off like Chase or Widdop. If he plays loose forward we have to accept we are losing a back row from Burgess, Ellis, Westwood, etc.

Personally assuming McGuire and Widdop aren't fit I'd have him in the halves. I don't like Chase but if we are picking him we might as well play him and tell him to run the ball. I don't think Myler quite has it but Warrington fans may say different.

That would mean with Roby at hooker we could have 5 monsters in the pack that we can get rolling like we are supposed to do. And a player that will lead them around the pitch.

Fittler and Lewis scored tries from inside their own half frequently when they were younger, they both had body types that filled out as they aged and were more suited at Lock, like many others in the game.
Fittler was initially a centre and was one of the fastest players in the game as he came through the ranks.
If you have a Stand off that can not beat his opposite defender either with pace or strength it hardly leave the defensive team wondering about strategy.

This isn't right - Sinfield has always been completely crap at international level. Never done anything. It's a Well Known Fact.

Not sure why you quoted 2009.

because england won and kev was man of the match

He has always looked pretty average against Australia except for one game where he was either Hooker or came of the bench as Hooker and played really well.

But he played Hooker not Stand Off....

he still ran the game..does'nt matter if he's hooker or stand off he'll still be organizing everything around him.

Oh, Ok.

Only until Roby came on.

Excellent choice of captain: superb leader both on and off the field and will do the role justice.

Now that he is the captain he is guaranteed a starting spot and I wouldn't want to put him into the halves, I'd be more inclined to play him from 13, but the problem with that is selecting the right players around him. As alluded to above, the fact that Sinfield can be the organiser will mean that we could utilise two running halves without having to worry too much about the kicking game and their organisation capabilities.

The fact is that Tomkins has to be moved into the halves, he was isolated in the match against Australia last time out and we really cannot afford for our best player to be ineffectual in a world cup.

1. Hardaker/Ratchford/?
6. Tomkins
7. Myler/McGuire/Widdop/?
9. Roby
13. Sinfield

The outside backs and pack picks themselves.

Sinfield may not have the out and out skills of a Lockyer or a Thurston but he is head and shoulders above anything we have in Super League in the organising half back role.

If our Pack can even match the aussies(and we havn't recently although have done ok against the kiwis) then it gives him a chance to run the game like he has done for Leeds in the big games time and again.Its easy to slate Sinfield for not being good enough in the past against OZ, but lets not forget he has been playing in a team that has been second best and on the back foot from the start.