Danny Brough, is a guy I'm sure wouldn't let him self down in the nrl. LeeBriers too.

Its cos most of them are Aussies

It seems McNamara disagrees

I think i need to book myself in at the opticians, i actually thought you had wrote that Michael McIlorum of Wigan would be ready for the NRL in a year or two.

I said perhaps, and i think he is a promising player. Clearly you disagree however the opticians appointment wont be neccessary

This.

The only half back England have produced in the last five or six years who had all the above attributes was Kyle Eastmond, and now he's gone to yawnion. But there seems to be some good players starting to come through club academies now, let's hope we can find another!

Surprised no one has mentioned Tom Burgess.

Quote ="Easty"Watch him brush aside 5 would-be tacklers here About 3.45 in www.youtube.com/SLHighlights#p/u/2/a285PBoLsiE Awesome for a prop.'" I'm not saying he doesn't have potential but that is some of the worst tackling ever seen.

Quote ="Easty"Watch him brush aside 5 would-be tacklers here About 3.45 in www.youtube.com/SLHighlights#p/u/2/a285PBoLsiE Awesome for a prop.'" I'm not saying he doesn't have potential but that is some of the worst tackling ever seen.

It annoys me when people say 'just' a support player. Being a support player is a skill. Every good team needs one just like they need an organiser and a good kicking game!

Its alright creating chances and half breaks but if no one gets on the end of them whats the point?
Danny McGuire was the master of this in his prime and it will be a long time before anybody in SL matches his support play.

The people that say just a support player are probably the ones that say Sinfield is just a kicker or Wellens was only good in defence and never offered anything in attack.

Hall would be a massive hit in NRL, hope he goes

Yes don't we all (Leeds excepted).

I doubt it, Expect him to be nothing more than a good Super League player, I haven't seen anything from him that makes me think he will be a top class player.

if he doesn't go to souths or another nrl i can't see him coming close to hes other brothers luke looks alot better playing over in the Nrl and the same for hes twin. i haven't been impressed with tom this season yes he makes meters but he doesn't do good minutes and hes defence needs ALOT of work but i guess we can see more closely in the next 2 games on sky.

there is a few players what would make it in the NRL no doubt about it and i watch every game so i aint typing crap

Luke Burgess is a perfect example of the bizarre logic that people apply to the NRL. The fact that this 25 looks better in the NRL than he did as an average Super League player is somehow a testimony to how the NRL miraculously improves players rather than the far more obvious conclusion that the league is vastly overrated and many decent Super League players would make the grade over there

or that players do raise there games when they go there. players allways become better when the quality around them is alot higher. too many teams/players coast when they are in superleague as shown with leeds they raise it a hell of a lot when it matters.

That’s a pretty difficult theory to prove. I guess somebody will have to ask Luke why he didn’t raise his game while he was in England – maybe the thought of pushing for international honours or matching the profile of his younger brother didn’t appeal to him?

Or maybe we could stick the really easy answer which is that Luke is just as good a play now as he always has been and the competition he currently plays in is overhyped by many many people

one theory is easy to prove that the NRL as a league is much more competive than superleague and the lower teams in the nrl are alot higher qaulity. i have no doubt that the good players from superleague would do well in the nrl but there are alot which would even get in the toyota cup in aus.

also graham said it before he left he wanted to play against the best and that is in the nrl.

but yeah the NRL isn't full of supermen but no doubt the standard is higher and players go there and become better players for it.

Yep.

Oh I do know that when Warrington played Souths, the Souths officials and staff mentioned the ginger haired welsh named back (I've forgotten which one) as being blistering. So he could play here.

Burgess was pretty decent in his final half season over here imo.

A lot of SL players could have an NRL career. Being 'stars' is another thing entirely, particularly in the backs. The other thing is once you get past the better teams, the number who would get more than the odd game in the NRL shrinks dramatically. Those are the main differences between the NRL and SL - the NRL has more genuine class players and a higher overall standard across the board.

Sadly both these facts add up to Australia generally giving England a kicking - they never have to resort to below average players in any position, have a few absolute stars in the side, and the whole team is used to playing at high intensity for 80 minutes virtually every week. England by contrast have fewer stars, vastly inferior halfbacks (and until recently outside backs as well) and generally have to pick a few players who would genuinely struggle to be regulars in a mid-table NRL side.

In 91 when the seasons were at different times of the year and people could play in both comps. I recall going to games and seeing GB backs playing. Gary Connolly, Jonathan Davies and Martin Offiah are three that instantly spring to mind. There may have been more.

I've always suspected that if the seasons were still at different times, we see more players form blighty than we do now.

Course you would - there was money to be made!

That's also part of the problem - Davies, Offiah and Connolly (young version) would walk into the England side today.