didn't read the thread just saw the author so instinct tells me

Going to show my bias here...you think Hill wouldn't make the first 17? For me it was between him and Graham for player of the series.

Who cares. A badly depleted England team managed by Mcbannana whohasnt got a clue, managed to beat France by about 200 points recently.

Super league has been so good for the french national team hasnt it

Regards

King james

At the start of this series when I thought about a potential 17 if George Burgess/Walmsley been fit I'd have possibly considering a team without Hill in it. I couldn't have been more wrong!

Literally the first name I'd put on the sheet now. He has been excellent and is constantly racking up the metres. Aside from one poor offload today he's been immense.

What a group of props we have by the way! Hill, Graham, George Burgess, Tom Burgess, Cooper and Walmsley. That's a scary set!!

Silliest comment ever.

You obviously didn't watch the Sydney Roosters in 2015. In the latter half of the season JWH was the outstanding prop in the NRL -- better than either James Graham, Jesse Bromwich or George Burgess.

A lot of players potentially classed as missing for England as well!

I've included McGillvery and Smith because they missed 2 of the 3 Test matches

Tomkins
McGillvery
Reed
Watkins
Hall
Widdop
Smith
Graham
Roby
G Burgess
S Burgess
Whitehead
O'Loughlin

Houghton
Hill
T Burgess
Walmsley

Regarding Graham. It may just be me, but I don't think he's been as good in this series as in previous tournaments. He's looked slower, he passes less at the line, and he runs an odd diagonal angle that reduces his go forward after contact, and takes up the space of the runners outside him.
Based on the evidence so far I don't think the NRL has made him any better than he was.

Jason Taumololo and JWH in his recent form have been inspirational forwards like the two missing Burgess brothers, George and Samuel.

But the actual play making skill level missing from the Kiwis this series, in the form of Kieran Foran and Shaun Johnson is the major factor that has no equivalent among the missing Englishmen.

Jeans is probably right,New Zealand would have won with a full compliment out,but lets be honest England could have won this series 3.0 if things had gone a little bit different in the second test.

Cant help thinking i wish this series was against the aussies cos we'd probably have won 3.0

not sure I agree with that, Sam is a world class player who would start over Hardaker every time for me. Thought he was average at best during this test series Zak

re: Hill - yeah.

Our first four prop are George Burgess, Sam Burgess, James Graham and Alex Walmsley, but if Sam were to play 13 then Hill would be next in for me.

Johnson has been a huge miss but Forsn seems like a total myth to me! I've never seen him produce anything against us and I was far more impressed with Nikorima.

Another player I'm starting to think is an NRL myth is Martin Taupau. He's been about as difficult to handle as Ricky Bibey! Where has his huge rep come from?

do you really believe this?

I got no problem with you having a view that Hardaker is a better FB then tomkins but to say he is a different class is way OTT.

Like I have said before, tomkins injury free at his best is a better support player then Hardaker and offers more attacking threat. I think you are forgetting how good Tomkins was when he was previously in Super League.

This is what us Wires have been saying every year when it comes to Man of Steel nominations. Hill is this good (quality in these three games for England) in every game but seems to go under the radar a bit (as do many forwards to be hornet, it's all the flair speedster try scorers or try assist men who keep winning MOS these days). Last season he was fourth in metres made, third in tackles made, fifth in carries; he was the only player in Super League in the top 5 in each of those three categories. He's got really good footwork, is a good passer of the ball for a big man - some big men are just bowling balls, head down, run in (and are effective at that, granted) - he dominates tackles/the ruck. All round fantastic player.

As for the other props we have, I'd argue this is the best set of props in rugby league history. With Sam Burgess coming back too. It's a frightening set of props.

Where I worry about England is in the halves. We do not have good halves. Thurston and Cronk, Johnson and Foran (with players in reserve three and four deep who would walk into our 6 and 7 shirts) make our lads look like a joke.

The problem England are going to have with Sam Burgess is where to play him.

In previous years, you might have wanted him in at loose forward, so he can still play in the middle unit but isn't stealing minutes off the likes of Hill, Graham and his brothers.

But with O'Loughlin seemingly a fixture in the side, that isn't going to happen.

Might an option be to play him in the second row? Neither Whitehead nor Farrell were particularly impressive over these three games, and Burgess would certainly provide a stronger ball-carrying option running into half-backs and centres rather than smashing down the middle against the big guys.

I hear he's been playing quite a bit at centre in the past few months

O'Laughlin will be 34 come the next World Cup. He played well in the first and third tests in this series but was poor in the second test. Plus whatever position Sam Burgess plays, he will be first choice.

I'm delighted for us all at the mo, players and fans alike because its being tough for us all this last few years or 20!

This win has being coming for a while now, yes the kiwis had a few players out but so did we,
Put Sam Burgess in for Farrel and Reed who is a genuine left centre, add in form Sam Tompkins and and we will beat the Aussies,

This isn't a false dawn for us

Well done ENGLAND!

Agreed - it wasn't perfect but we were better over the three games. Let's hope we've got a full squad for the 4 nations and the world cup.

Was wondering today if Sean O'Loughlin may step down from England duty thus year

Tomkins' attacking prowess couldn't be disputed. Quite how well he'll go on his return is a big unknown though. Pace played a big part in his game and how much he'll retain is far from clear at the mo.

Yes but Tomkins shouldn't be picked next year based on what he did for Wigan back in 2012 or 2013, it's got to be because of what he does in 2016 that should determine whether he gets a shirt.

Tomkins in a England or NZ Warriors shirt hasn't come close to matching what he did for Wigan, which was a couple of years ago now.

He's had an injury hit 12 months but in his first season with the NZ Warriors he had a similar amount of trys/assists combined as Greg Inglis and Billy Slater managed. It was also a similar amount to that which superleagues man of steel racked up this season (in a comp that people openly admit is easier to score points in).

There seems to be a few people (not labelling this at you) who want Sam Tomkins to fail but I can't stress how important I think he is to this England side going forward. If people think he's world class or not he's still by a distance the best creative back we've produced in years and we'll need him fit and firing going forward. The other options in the fullback/halfback positions (Hardaker, Widdop, Smith, Williams, Gale etc) just aren't in that class. All good players but they're not Sam Tomkins.

Tomkins is vital to England going forward IMO. He's one of the very few players who can create space and make tries. None of the halfbacks we've played in this series have shown that capability.

The issue with Sam T is where he plays. I'd love him to move permanently into the halfs. If anyone should be dropped from this series it would be Widdopp - Smith did more in that game than Widdopp has done in three, and Smith's not exactly the most dynamic halfback around.

As for forwards, our pack looks immeasurably stronger with S Burgess, regardless of where he plays. I'd go for 13 and let him have a roaming role just wide of the props. Hopefully Whitehead will improve at the Raiders, as we need more quality in the second row.

Agreed and i think HB will always be a problem as coaches don't have the bottle to play young HB's. Either because they don't think their physically big enough, or they never trust them. Coaches will always play a loose forward, second-rower, full back or centre at HB ahead of a young inexperienced HB.

I know Wigan and Shaun Wane get some stick on here, but i think they/he deserves huge credit for sticking with George Williams when they were struggling earlier in the season. Easy cop out for coaches is to blame the young HB and just play Sean O'loughlin there. Wane stuck with Williams, and allowed him to make mistakes and develop.

I actually quite like the idea of a Smith/Tomkins HB pairing, IF Tomkins plays in the halves and plays well - which may be unlikely given Wigan's existing Smith/Williams pairing. I think Smith is an excellent scrum half who controls the game very well. Okay he's not particularly flair, but as we saw on Saturday he is capable of controlling a game, moving a side around the park and has a good kicking game. Pair him with a more exciting, creative player of Tomkins' ilk, and we could be getting somewhere.