I would think that after today's game it would most definitely be Jack Reed and Daniel Sarginson.

3 match test against the Kiwis has been arranged I believe.

For next game sargenson should retain his place, had a really good game, and has been impressive all year. I have always thought Farrell was a little over rated but don't think he has done anything wrong so far in the series and deserves to retain his place. Joel Tomkins for me should drop out of the team for whitehead.
Not been that impressed with our half backs. Been ok but the much rated widdop has hasn't been great at all. I personally would drop him, put Sam Tomkins there and hardaker to full back

Brough whilst a very good player would not have the great impact in the England side as people seem to make out, its almost as if he's the reverse scapegoat. Brough has got a tendency to go missing/throw his toys out when the going gets tough (probably a reason none of his sides have ever won anything, aside from a CC 9 years ago.)

The halves for England are doing a very good job.

They're certainly a big step forward from our halves for the World Cup!

Dissagree about Brough going missing, there's no evidence for it at all, LLS winners
MoS winner, Albert Goldthorpe winner twice in 3 years

He'd have a huge and positive impact on the structure of the England team and would pose a major threat to the Aus and NZ line

I cant see Smith being dropped now. He seems to fit the tactic that McNamara wants to play - slow and steady, play out the sets and get a kick in at the end i.e. the tactics that we played the 2nd half with yesterday that didnt work.

When we moved the ball around and got a quick play the ball we got on top. Tomkins at half back with Hardaker at full back would be far more effective against the Aussies in particular.

I thought the halves against NZ in the semi last year were the best we've had in a long while. Now Sinfield has retired I think Smith is the nest best thing and he is proving that.

All the things you mention borough winning are for over the season performances, when it came to the big games in all of those seasons his side lost, and Brough failed dot shine.

Anyway its all totally irrelevant and as I say I think its an easy and safe thing for people to say Brough is the saviour has everyone knows this will never be proved wrong or right.

I vividly remember him going to Headingley at least twice during the LLS season and comprehensively outplaying all of Leeds halfbacks including Sinfield, McGuire and Burrow. He was close to being voted Lance Todd winner for Hull FC just pipped by Cookes match winning try. He destroyed Leeds at Belle a Vue when playing for Wakefield including running down a breakaway Rob a Burrow over 60 metres.

Urban myth, this Brough can't pkay in big games line

We lost that Semi Final on the back of two terrible decisions by one of the halfbacks you think we're the best we've had in a long while

Look you're kind of proving my point, Brough has never stood up when its counted, he's won a CC medal 9 years ago. Show me another big one off game where he's come out on top?

Oh and on that you might want to check who won the Lance Todd Trophy in that game, I think you've got a little muddled up



I think Brough is a fabulous player and I wouldn't have any qualms with him being in the England set up, but it's not going to happen for whatever reason (and Brough is just as much to blame as McNamara IMO!) neither do I think he would make as big of an impact as people like to think.

Aside from a CC final 9 years ago when has Brough played well when it's really mattered? He's hardly ever been involved in a play off win, and almost every club he's ever played for has got shut of him after a couple of years... But, to me the fact that he threw his toys out of the pram and effectivly turned his back on England when he was told he'd have to fight for his place in the team says all I need to know about the guy.

So any player who never won a major trophy was a choker!

Brough chose to leave Castleford

Brough chose to leave Wakefield

He's been at Huddersfield for 4 years and signed a new 5 year contract last season so hardly matches your delusion of him being kicked out of every club he's played for.

He's that poor that his consistency has won him more individual awards over the last 5 years than any other player in the country. He's done that while setting new points in a game and points in a season records for Huddersfield, leading them to the LLS and the play offs.

He left the England camp after McNamara (that paragon of man management) attempted to humiliate him by not naming him in the 30 strong elite training camp, this during a season in which Brough won MoS and the Albert Goldthorpe medal.

He was told that Chase and Sinfield would be the England half backs no matter what he did on the field of play or at training.

I can't blame him for that..

Brough just played a big part in getting scotland through to the 4 nations in 2016

No, a player who has never done very well or gone missing in an important game/games is a choker.

Oh and Brough has played for England on his home ground. They lost.

I agree 100%, players of Hock's ability are few and far between. I've been watching the game 25 years and I'm struggling to think of a more destructive British 2nd row in that time. He's always going to be a risk but on the field is he any more a liability than Moz/Barrie Mc etc were at times? It's his off field antics that are more dubious but tbf, ref-gate aside he was great at Salford last year before he spat his dummy after the ban. Ask any Aussie player on that pitch yesterday if they'd rather face Ferres, Tomkins or Hock and they'd be lying through their teeth if they said the latter.

Btw, whoever said we need to move on because he's 31 is crazy. If we had a younger 2R version of Hock I'd be inclined to agree, but as it stands we don't. Players like him are like rocking horse and need to be managed. I just don't think McNamara has the ability to deal with the more "maverick" players.

Hock can do what ever he wants off the field
its what he does on the field that counts

agree with the mcnamara comments on mavericks
I wonder if Tony smith or nobby would have being able to get hock playing? I think maybe they would

Not in a team sport when on tour, what you do off the field is very important.

At 31 he's not going to change now, he's had God knows how many chances to prove himself and each time he lets himself down.
If he plays well and stays injury free then of course he should be considered for selection but after 10 years of Garth Hock meltdowns, and brain farts I can't help but feel a significant amount of cinicism regards Hock.

Oh, I'd take a young Morley, Jamie Peacock or Sam Burgess over Gareth Hock any day.

exactly. This is not 3 games in isolation. It is a 7 week tour, with lots of down time and time for players to occupy themselves. On past experience, Hock is not the type of player that you would want in those circumstances.

Decent Tv viewing in UK considering the KO time England Rugby League ‏@England_RL 336,000 early birds tuned in to BBC2 for our game v Australia. Audience for highlights show at 5pm was 757,000. Thanks for your support! https://twitter.com/England_RL/statu...47987902734337

Decent Tv viewing in UK considering the KO time England Rugby League ‏@England_RL 336,000 early birds tuned in to BBC2 for our game v Australia. Audience for highlights show at 5pm was 757,000. Thanks for your support! https://twitter.com/England_RL/statu...47987902734337

Quote ="JB Down Under"Decent Tv viewing in UK considering the KO time England Rugby League ‏@England_RL 336,000 early birds tuned in to BBC2 for our game v Australia. Audience for highlights show at 5pm was 757,000. Thanks for your support! https://twitter.com/England_RL/statu...47987902734337'" 498k in Aussie and another 74k in NZ. [urlhttp://www.tvtonight.com.au/2014/11/sunday-2-november-2014.html[/url [urlhttp://www.throng.co.nz/2014/11/tv-ratings-2-november-2014/[/url

Quote ="JB Down Under"Decent Tv viewing in UK considering the KO time England Rugby League ‏@England_RL 336,000 early birds tuned in to BBC2 for our game v Australia. Audience for highlights show at 5pm was 757,000. Thanks for your support! https://twitter.com/England_RL/statu...47987902734337'" 498k in Aussie and another 74k in NZ. [urlhttp://www.tvtonight.com.au/2014/11/sunday-2-november-2014.html[/url [urlhttp://www.throng.co.nz/2014/11/tv-ratings-2-november-2014/[/url

Am I right in thinking that shows no viewers whatsoever for Melbourne, Adelaide and Perth? Surely that can't be correct?

Won't be many when they publish the adjusted figures later in the month.......NRL and even origin struggles in SA and WA......Victoria might have a few but not many.

Agreed hock would be the sort of player you wouldn't want around on a tour

So all that development money and virtually zero interest in the sport in Victoria?

The Melbourne Storm is your blueprint for London!!

I said "virtually zero interest in Victoria" where exactly? I said "not too many".......
They delivered 15% of the State of Origin III Viewing figures in 2014.....that's up from less than 4% just 10 years ago. Melbourne's sporting public are "warming" to league.....10 years ago they averaged 9k at best, now it's 15k...they rank 8th of the 16 NRL teams in attendances.

Yep.
Planting a team full of journeymen aussies transplanted into the top tier, sticking posts in the ground and announcing a KO off time is what the RFL thought would work...as did owners from Branson to Hughes.......the safety of franchises enabled hughes to spend cash on development, but the reality is, whilst he was prepared to plough over 2 million a year into the club, the SL/RFL should have matched him......marketing ANYTHING in London costs a heap more money and a lot more resource.....but we were given the same cash as clubs with a 100+ year head start and heritage......And believe me, with the best will in the world, not having a top tier RL club for kids to aspire to in London is going to decimate any chances of developing future stars of the game from the capital.