Ok one agree with me so far,any1 else?

Funnily enough some people, such as myself, actually want to see Ireland play. I'm sure there are Welsh people out there who want to see Wales play. Maybe the odd Scotsman too who wants to see Scotland. England's problems in rugby league aren't the be all and end all of the sport.

Not many Scots/Irish/Welsh would find themsleves in the great Britain team anyway. So why should other countries be deprived by a return to GB which would do little, if nothing at all to improve results against AUS/NZ.

Brian Carney? now he was good on the wing.He should come out of retirement.

It's a no brainer really, if it was Great Britain not home nations then we would be more competitive.
lee Briers and Danny Brough would be eligible for starters and that would have made a difference seen as how poor we were at halfback and it would end the nonsence of English players wanting to play for Scotland/Wales and Ireland just to play international rugby in the short term and England missing out in the long term.
Ireland/Wales/Scotland will never be competitive against the top two and nobody watches them anyway atleast Great Britain have more of a chance.

Where's roughy?

exempt Welsh, Scottish or Irish RU players from the salary cap and lets bolster our ranks like we did in the 90's!

did i read on here that we had to revert back to england in order to secure the millions from sport england ?

Yes. We have to compete as "England" to be funding from Sport England. Makes it a no-brainer really, considering the millions they put into development.

keep believing the conspiracy theory about sport england....

the simple fact is sport england said they would continue to fund GB,had we stayed as GB,because,ultimately,it was england national team...

sport england funded RL whether we are england or GB...


anyways..theres a sport wales & and sport scotland if those nations what a handout

you mean the danny brough that wanted to switch to england but was deemed not good enough so swithced back to scotland.....

IF HE AIN'T GOODENOUGH FOR ENGLAND HOW THE HELL IS HE GOING TO BE GOOD ENOUGH FOR GB...

Wouldn't the RFL lose all the Sport "England" money if they reverted back to GB?


Edit...just seen the posts above saying the same thing

Roughyedspud oh so the genius coach Mcnamara say's he's not good enough so you think he's not good enough?

you honestly think Brown/Robinson and Loughlin are better halfbacks than Briers and Brough?
Have you been watching England?
You are talking to someone here who actually knows something about this game.

You need a triangle of creativity around the play the ball so you can creat doubt in the minds of the opposition, that job belongs to the hooker and the two halfbacks, running at the opposition while holding ball in both hands and then giving a drop of pass to a forward or throwing a dummy.
This will give our forwards more one on one opportunities so they can gain more yards, offload or get quick play the balls.
Only Roby did this for England while Brown and Robinson just stand deep.
more often than not it was just one out football where NZ and Aus could send 3 defenders at one forward and dominate the collisions, even then on occasion our forwards were able to get hands free and look to pass to a halfback but nobody was there.

Robinson and Brown don't have the organisation or creativity to play at international level, never mind the kicking game or pace to support and finish off a long range break.At Huddersfield they have a team full of footballers who share that creative roll.

Now watch NZ in comparison where their hooker and halfbacks are always involved creating doubt in the opposition enabling them to make good yards and be pro-active while Englands defence switches to being re-active.

Now put Lee Briers or Danny Brough in a side and they are always thinking and wanting the ball, but people don't like Brough because he has a mouth on him, which is exactly what you want in a halfback.
You let Danny Brough or Lee Briers take over and they can turn a game on it's head.

Originally Great Britain was scraped to secure more funding for the world cup, i remember reading about it at the time, which is another of many examples of commercial sense overriding common sense.
If that's no longer the case then we are better off as Great Britain anyway, Wales, Ireland, Scotland can still play internationals in some lower tier competiton.

difficult to disagree with anything you have said - regarding the tactical side of your argument do you think you could try to explain all this to McBanana ? then maybe we (England) could get somewhere !

Quote ="mrpurfect"Roughyedspud oh so the genius coach Mcnamara say's he's not good enough so you think he's not good enough? you honestly think Brown/Robinson and Loughlin are better halfbacks than Briers and Brough? Have you been watching England? You are talking to someone here who actually knows something about this game. '" alright wind ya neck in mary..... actually,given our injury situation at halfback prior to this 4nations,i believe we should have picked brough....he could have done a job for us... but all that actually mean is that brough is 4th or 5th pick for england......hardly warrants bringing back GB to accommodate a 4th or 5th ranked player... Quote ="mrpurfect" Originally Great Britain was scraped to secure more funding for the world cup, i remember reading about it at the time, which is another of many examples of commercial sense overriding common sense. If that's no longer the case then we are better off as Great Britain anyway, Wales, Ireland, Scotland can still play internationals in some lower tier competiton.'" how about you read what richard lewis said instead of something you picked up off a messageboard www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2005/de ... leagueteam Quote "It will bring consistency," Lewis explained. "What I am passionate about is the international game being consistent. To me, it has always been illogical that we play as Great Britain for three or four years, and when the World Cup comes along, suddenly we become England. In the major competitions, which will be most years, we will play as England. That will also allow Ireland, Scotland and Wales to develop.'"

Quote ="mrpurfect"Roughyedspud oh so the genius coach Mcnamara say's he's not good enough so you think he's not good enough? you honestly think Brown/Robinson and Loughlin are better halfbacks than Briers and Brough? Have you been watching England? You are talking to someone here who actually knows something about this game. '" alright wind ya neck in mary..... actually,given our injury situation at halfback prior to this 4nations,i believe we should have picked brough....he could have done a job for us... but all that actually mean is that brough is 4th or 5th pick for england......hardly warrants bringing back GB to accommodate a 4th or 5th ranked player... Quote ="mrpurfect" Originally Great Britain was scraped to secure more funding for the world cup, i remember reading about it at the time, which is another of many examples of commercial sense overriding common sense. If that's no longer the case then we are better off as Great Britain anyway, Wales, Ireland, Scotland can still play internationals in some lower tier competiton.'" how about you read what richard lewis said instead of something you picked up off a messageboard www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2005/de ... leagueteam Quote "It will bring consistency," Lewis explained. "What I am passionate about is the international game being consistent. To me, it has always been illogical that we play as Great Britain for three or four years, and when the World Cup comes along, suddenly we become England. In the major competitions, which will be most years, we will play as England. That will also allow Ireland, Scotland and Wales to develop.'"

For me we should play as GB when we play down under for the four nations, & as England at home(alowwing France/Wales or who ever to make up the fourth spot)& the world cup. the home nations should play a tournament each year the players qualifiying for GB selection This would also prevent the stupid situation of Welsh born lads opting for England & allow the Scots & Irish qualified players to not exclude themselfs from the top games down under. A better idea is to play as the British isles so as not to push out any Irish players I want to see us inclusive not devisive.

but when GB are down under,assuming theres some welsh & scottish players good enough to make the GB squad,would'nt this then put wales and scotland at a disadvantage when trying to qualify for the 4 nations when its up here cos their best players would be down under on GB duty....


like i keep saying...its pointless GB playing when theres 24 englishmen in the squad

But how do you give non English players a pathway to the top without Great Britain? Let's play the long game for a change!

they have a pathway....as wales have found out this past month...by winning the european cup and qualifying to play australia,NZ and england in the 4 nations next year....just like PNG won the pacific cup last year....


and playing the european and pacific cups is the long game......the likes of wales,scotland,ireland,france,png,tonga,samoa,fiji and the cook islands are all developing as a result of the european/pacific cup & 4 nations structure....

but in true RL fashion thats not good enough cos we are'nt seeing immediate results...some what to go back to GB thus virtually stopping development of the home nations....and some what to introduce a pacific islands team....again knocking all development in the pacific on its head..

2 steps forward.....5 back....will we ever learn??

IMO we should keep it as England.

We should do what union does and do tours every 4 years as GB.

Agreed.
2013 RLWC (I would run a plate comp for those teams who don't get out of their groups)
2014 Australia Tour Britain to play test against ENGLAND. Euro and pacific nations comp......both featuring England, Aus and Kiwi "fringe players"
2015 GB Tour Down Under playing both Nations in a tri nations comp
2016 NZ tour GB to play test against ENGLAND. Euro and pacific nations comp...both featuring England, Aus and Kiwi "fringe players"
2017 RLWC (I would run a plate comp for those teams who don't get out of their groups)


The Kiwis keep playing the crims in ther Anzac test and maybe again as a warm up to their tours in 2014/2016.......England stop hammering the French mid season and I would re-introduce the roses as a 3 game origin series.....bin magic weekend if need be. The Roses/Origin would be used by the England/GB coaching teams as "trials"....and clubs would be forced to release players.....

What he said.

I'm not sure reading this board recently wether our Australian friends are all on a wind up or they are genuinely a bit stupid?

If we played in this years 4 nations as GB, we would have had a different name and jersey and that's about it, on the down side Wales wouldn't have been able to qualify for next years 4 Nations as they wouldn't have played.

We (England) also had quite a few players out, now I am not making excuses as we are currently not good enough but it's not all doom and gloom. We made the final last year which our Australian friends seem really quick to forget.

There are some pretty illogical posts on this topic. Mainly from the OP and dally.

GB should revert back to England because we were more competitive then? Now to me, the only logic I can see here is that (somehow) changing our name back to GB will magically make is better just because the name has changed. Since Brian Carney retired, there isn't one player outside of England that has made the GB team, and there isn't one player now that wouldn't qualify now. So basically, the OP thinks that the only thing we need to do is change our name.

It's nice to think that combining 4 nation's strengths together will make us stronger, but the reality is it won't. The other 3 nations are much weaker and offer us (at this moment in time) nothing. Danny Brough is a shocking attempt to prove a point. [urlhttp://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/rugby_league/article5679199.ece[/url. He basically wasn't picked, so went back to Scotland. Briers is English and could play for England is he wanted. He only got picked for GB once, and the only reason he'd get picked for England now is because of injuries. If we picked Pat Richards, everyone would complain that he's an Aussie. So there is no-one. And Gareth Thomas?! You're having a laugh aren't you?

So, unless you can explain to us how JUST changing a name will make our team better, I suggest you leave this one. I don't see how anyone would want to go back to GB (thus destroying the successful European Cup) for reasons other than heritage (and we were England before we were GB anyway).

It's like saying New Zealand should merge with Samoa, Tonga and Fiji to form the Pacific Isles XIII. It would be exactly the same team with a different name and shirt. It would be absolutely no different.

Briers for me has been the stand out 6 in SL for 2010 but it would seem i'm biased.
Him and only him would have gone to Aus if it had been GB.
Would it have made a difference ?

Yes, we would have probably been 4 points closer to Australia and maybe 2 closer to NZ and probably beat PNG by an extra 8 points, but still lost 2 won 1.

Why bother and just except we simple aren't as good for a multitude of reasons. Even if we played as the whole of europe Oz and NZ would still have beat us

True on this occasion, but there have been past touring teams which have benefited from having Welsh and Scottish players, as there will be in future. It makes little sense to divide Great Britain when Wales would struggle to put a decent squad together (at the moment) and Scotland would have no chance. It just weakens all three countries.

It doesn't weaken all three countries at all. 99% of the time we have not needed players outside England, so why weaken the international game as a whole for that 1% (which never makes a difference anyway)? If you want to make sense of it, look at the European Cup and look at the interest in Wales now that they have a Welsh national team playing in a major tournament.