I haven't seen that much of Bradford, but he's often had Orford at fullback - so used that ball playing fullback I mentioned, and a runner at loose. Of course that could just be down to the personnel he has available rather than a preferred playing style.

Best player in SL?!?! I like Purdham, really rate him as a player but to say he's the best player in super league is crazy. Sinfield and O'loughlin are better than him and thats just from the english loose forwards!!

He leaves it to Matt Orford.

When?????




I don't think Sinfield at Loose would be something we'll see under McNamara. O'Loughlin would be my bet.

My mistake, meant your other Aussie halfback, Kearney.

Play Sinfield!!

LOSE!!!

I would like to see a creative full back and Burgess at LF. Unfortunately we don't have the former, in fact, who was our last - Davis?

Tomkins and Eastmond, Roby/Lunt rotating at hooker with O'Loughlin at loose for me.

I rate Sinfield as a player, he's been a thorn in our sides for the past three years in a certain final with his kicking, but he isn't a hooker and that's where his best performances for England/GB have been. Lunt has been one to watch the past two seasons and Roby is finally adapting his game and becoming a more all round player.

I think Sinfield has to play, for his leadership as well as his ability
The position he plays is up for debate an ddepends on the style we want to play, this should take int account the available players
Id like to think we could use our own skills without trying to copy the Aussies

Sinfield as Utility Bench for me, come on at 6 (if needed), 9 or 13 and obviously is one of the better English players.

That's probably because Kearney IS now playing fullback - the position he played in first-grade NRL.

Yes.


As Adey says, that is the poistion he has played in most of his career.

During this year it's been pretty much get Orford involved as much as possible, and make him the first reciever on most 4th or 5th tackle plays. The stand off has been used more as a runner and simple passes, but given the Bulls line up all coaches would want Orford to be the pivot with nearly everything running off him in that side.

Sinfield should be Captain, where he plays Im not so sure, probably hooker as he is well suited to that position in the international game.

I agree he isn't the best player in SL.....but he is far better then the 2 you mention at 13........

Interesting. What I've liked about Purdham when I've seen him is that he's a grafter, but he also seems to have a lot of strings to his bow. I don't seem to see as much as him as I do of others.
I do like O'Loughlin, though, I like his physicality in defence and he'd probably be my choice for England's 13. Do you think Purdham is capable of imposing himself physically in a game against the Aussie/Kiwis? Langley is also a very big guy who has apparently hit some impressive form. If I were the England coach, I think a big pack would be my priority - Jon Wilkin, for instance, great for my club, but I wouldn't pick him for international duty.

When he's played for England in the past, I've not been dissapointed, but England's results need improving, so I'm not sure if I'd go with him.

Going on what I know combined with what I'm reading from other teams speccies on here, I think I'd like a back row of Burgess, Langley and O'Loughlin, with some one like Tomkins on the bench.

The last time Purdham played for England he wasn't very impressive IIRC - maybe just went into his shell and was a bit over-awed by the opposition.

I don't think Sinfield is essential for the team, especially at 13, but concede he is a useful player to have in the squad.

At the moment Langley and maybe O'Brother-in-law would be my first choices.

Throw Gareth Ellis into the mix and back row seems fairly strong for England IMO.

Would deffo have O'Loughlin at 13 on current form.

Forgot all about him - poor mite




What about Ratchford of Salford? The Reds fans hold him in very high regard and he covers many positions through the backs. A bit early, maybe?

O'Loughlin would get my vote as well, when he stays injury free and gains timing and confidence he's by far the most effective 13 in both attack and defence that we have.

Ellis and Burgess in the 2nd row with Lockers at Loose would be a pretty formidable back three.

The only chance England have ever had of beating Australia is to make Australia play Englands game, we will never beat an Aussie side playing the Aussie way. They are better than us at it.

It is an English tradition that we use the loose as an extra back, and an Aussie tradition to use them as an extra forward. We should use this as an advantage, use it to close the massive gulf in quality in the backs, by having an extra player there.

Our forwards can hold their own, no doubt about it. Our backs are completely outclassed.

Use Sinfield to give us help in the backs, and get our forwards to front up.

Tomkins was terrible in the final, if Mcguire had played like that he would still be being crucified on here, he was god awful. We dont have the strength not to play an extra back at loose, we do have the strength to not play an extra forward in the pack.

Besides, players like Langley and O'loughlin can offer what they offer from the second row, its just they may not be good enough to get in the 17 that people clamour for them to play at 13

Pryce or McGuire for full-back?

If you werent going for Sinfield at Loose, I would be tempted to go for Pryce who is a great runner with no little creativity

I just hope Macnamara resists the urge to play people out of position, It would also be nice that he picked on form not reputation.