Please don't confuse this Exiles match with international RL.

Simple facts:

SOO has replaced international competition in Australia - although I don't believe that was the initial concept. They used to be just as fired up to play GB and the games were just as intense. Origin is now the only representative competition the Aussies take seriously (even though Queensland win the bloody thing every year).

Club rugby is seen by fans as being more important than international rugby in this country because hardly any of them were born the last time we beat the Aussies in a series or a WC. That's it. Also, the synchronisation of seasons when we switched to summer rugby saw the death of tours. Tours were what it was all about and playing the Austrlians 3 times and playing club games. I saw the Kangaroos play Leeds in '82, it was a massive event, it generated huge interest in the internationals.

It's a circular problem - club rugby priority and the use of vast numbers of imports for success reduces our chances of winning against the Aussies, and not being able to beat the Aussies means we focus on the club game and lose interest in developing an international side.

As for the concept of playing "exiles" - I don't see a problem with it, the Exiles team on paper looked just as good as the England team. The problem is that England are so awful at the moment that you knew it was going to be rubbish to watch. Which it was, truly, completely dismal in every possible way - far too many to go through here, I can't be bothered.

we can't put one decent england team out, let alone two teams for lancs against yorks

The green and gold was once the pinnacle but sadly it seems origin is now the pinnacle for players. Remember that money plays a huge part in this.

The tours are long gone. Australia don't want them although I don't know why England didnt tour nz this year. New Zealand were happy to do it!

If fans up north don't give a toss then why not play both games down south where there are decent oz/kiwi communities. At least it might generate a bit of rivalry/atmosphere. Just a thought.

Found it flat, doesn't help that Bananaman is in charge picking a side that just doesn't stir the soul.

Lancs v Yorks thats right lets go back to the M62. That should keep Skys viewers in the other 95% of the country interested

Have you not noticed that players from outside of the "corridor" are now playing the game!

I think RL here has too much of a habit of trying to chase desirable, but unrealistic outcomes, instead of looking right in front of their noses at the things that work and building on that. In our case, it's the passion for club rugby.

People will always find it hard to get excited about a game with a contrived team, and the exiles concept guarantees a contrived team. It's nothing at all like SOO. Kids grow up wanting to play SOO and represent their state. Who grows up dreaming of playing for the exiles?

The only sensible idea I've heard from the RFL recently is the desire to expand the WCC into something like the Champions league. It's a shame we gave up on this after the debacle at the start of Super League. It doesn't have to be too hard. Two groups of four, two aus, two Europe in each, coming from top four from each league, so that we don't have the super league dross anywhere near it to embarrass us ( not that we can guarantee our top teams won't get hammered either, but hey ). Travel is kept simple by each team going over for their two away games in one trip.

Needs a big sponsor with a big prize on day one otherwise Aussies won't do it.

Getting some good competition going between clubs, passionately supported, will hopefully also reinvigorate the desire to see GB vs Aus.

Successive England coaches have bellyached about the lack of time they get with the squad, hence the introduction of the mid-season game, first against Australia (too embarrasing), then France (too easy) and the ETS squad sessions throughout the year. The made up concept of the Exiles is the RFL's attempt at a 'Goldilocks' solution - not too easy, not too hard, and keeps the England coach from bleating. It's a match of convenience, but one they haven't managed to sell to anyone but themselves.

Lets have 3 games east v west and the winners ofthe 2 games to take on the exiles

I don't think it was a success as it was just like a training exercise?
I was only hoping none of my teams players got injured and that other teams did (sic i know) but thats all i felt about this game as it means nothing?
England should have been playing France

It was embarrassing.

It makes a mockery of it when everyone in the England camp knows full well that, come any serious games, the 5 or 6 NRL based lads will breeze back into the side. So, it cannot be deemed to be a true 'selection decider' nor is it any great use as a warm up game for the players, when it isn't the full side on show. There is little point gelling a team on the pitch, when it isn't actually your starting 13. I'd like to see the NRL based lads involved in games like this, for the above reasons, but it'll never happen and, therefore, great concept or not, games like last night are neither use nor ornament.

From England's perspective, what was the point of the game last night? My understanding is that we are supposed to be building for the RLWC in 2013, however the team selection, style of play and everything else about it, pointed otherwise.

Picking the some old failed journeymen - Sinfield, Peacock, JJB, Carvell, Wilkin, Chase - who we know are not good enough to beat the Aussies is not going to excite the fans to go and support the "concept".

If Sinfield is our first choice no.6 for 2013, then we are in a worse state that I feared.

What is the point of playing guys such as Ratchford, Farrell, Lomax, LMS in the Knights in a walk over against Ireland (or not at all). If those guys were in the first team, it would create a bit of buzz around the Exiles game, fans would feel a bit of excitement for the future and support the team.

The game was played at a really low intensity, which makes it hard for fans to get into it.

My solution would be to revert back to Great Britain for end of season tournaments/series, and replace the exiles game with England vs Rest of UK. This way the majority of players who play for GB would get a game for England, but then the likes of Brough, Mcilorum who have pledged allegiance to other nations in the past because they weren't good enough for England get to stick with that allegiance, yet can still play in the mid season games as a GB trial match. The 'rest of UK' team would effectively be full of players who qualify for GB, but have a point to prove that they are actually worthy of a GB spot over their England counterpart.

I want it to be a success so it gives the English side a decent run out but it just doesn't seem right.

The marketing and intensity all seem a bit flat, admittedly affected by the weather but after watching SOO last week it's like watching an amateur event in comparison.

If this is the basis of next years WC squad then the likes of Peacock as Captain never mind playing makes no sense. Same goes for Sinfield and Ablett. Nothing against Leeds players, as I would have Burrow on the bench just for surprise factor.

RL should take a leaf out of UK athletics book, they brought in that Dutch chap Van Commerce (sp) who is no nonsense, if you are not good enough or not the future or not likely to be competitive, then you don't make the squad. We have Steve Mac, enough said.

So we revived Yorkshire vs. Lancashire a decade ago, most people crapped on it so they scrapped it, and now we want it back again? It's a typical RL mentality of try something for a year or two, say it's failed and then moan that we said it'd fail before it started.

so true... start with the youngsters and build over a period of time...

People saying it was meaningless for the Exiles players, well they don't have to accept the call-up so obviously they ALL wanted to play, ergo it did meant something to them. It was a poor game played in poor conditions but just because of one bad game people think it should be scrapped? I'm sure SOO has had a least a couple disappointing games in the past too as well. Its funny how before the match the usual moaners on here were saying the Exiles would win because the English team looked rubbish, then after England won the same lot turn around and say the Exiles team is poor and can't win because they look like a bunch of strangers (didn't stop them last year btw).

I do think a 2 match series is 1 too many and i said this several weeks ago, i'd prefer to see 1 England v Exiles and 1 Yorkshire v Lancashire game instead. If a return for the latter game did occur then i hope its just built as what it is, best of Yorkshire vs best of Lancashire and not billed as it was before as some sort of England selection match because no matter who plays 1 & 9 for Yorkshire even if they outplay Tomkins and Roby on the day they aren't going to get picked ahead of them come England time.

However i fear a lot of the people who are now calling for a return of the Roses clash will claim it to be a rubbish idea once/if it returns, because some RL fans on here just seem to refuse to enjoy anything except complaining and belittling everything (unless its Australian of course). What i find poorest and most disrespectful of all is 'fans' who are knocking the physical efforts of the players on show and also the efforts of the RFL to try and do something different that they hope will help the game, whilst said 'fan' is disgusted by what he sees as he has had to go to the much tougher effort of switching on the tv.

I thought that is what we were supposed to be doing but it would seem not.

I went to the match and it was dull. Crowds can only react to what is on the pitch. Had there been intensity, skill, a team we could get behind then there would have been atmosphere, bad weather or not. But it was dull and very few actually believed in the England team.

Lancashire.

Couldn't agree more. It was pointless, and a complete waste of time and money.

I bought tickets before the team was announced, which is just as well or there would have been 6 less there.

Did you get wet?*


*[size=85Any form of sexual reference or tone is purely coincidental as this is simply a cladding issue[/size

I think we need to give it time. What choice do we have? Scrap it and smash France 60+ points?

I think it was a very poor game, but i think it was an awful selection by Anderson. Where was Moon (the form cente in the comp) Lulia, Robertson? Why did he choose an out of form stand off to play hooker?

The Exiles came out completely unmotiated, whereas last year they looked up for it, so Anderson has to take some flack for this.

I think we should revert it back to one game and give it time to develop. Yesterday we an awful game and i think we desperately need changes in the England squad. Unfortunately, all yesterday has done has given Mcnamara belief that the likes of Sinfield, JJB can win the WC.

The Aussies are happy with what they’ve got at home, S.O.O, Anzac Test & the Indigenous All stars.

All of these games are competitive, ok, the Indigenous game doesn’t have the same intensity as the S.O.O, but it’s so much better than what was served up last night.

I don’t have the answer to the International conundrum, but the current route appears to be on the same track as the last forty years.

To be honest, the only way I can see an English / G.B team ever winning a series against the Aussies is, if 90% of the squad actually play in the NRL.