.....we are going to have another one! www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2009/ma ... tony-smith

.....we are going to have another one! www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2009/ma ... tony-smith

Good idea in my eyes, will probably be filled with players based on form that Tony Smith has no idea about how good they are because they're not the usual tried and tested crap.

They'd probably smash the actual England team if so.

bring them on

and they'll play really well and still get overlooked for the tried and failed old timers. If you can't tell by watching them play club games every weekend what will you lean from them playing a reserve England team every blue moon?

exactly.

it just gives Smith the excuse to not pick players like Westerman and Shenton for the main team. They will all play against teams like Russia and Wales - rack up cricket scores and everyone can say how wonderful they are, but it doesnt solve any of the problems at the highest level in either the short term or the long term.

Looking at Frances performance they would be better playing them. Throw in PNG and Fiji and yuou've got a decent second tier quad nations! TBH I'd probably prefer watching proud hungry youngsters in the England B team play a fired up PNG!

if they are considered good enough for a '2nd' team who is to say they arent gonna be better than the current crop of 'losers' we insisnt on playing year in year out ?

i would just shove them in the full internationals - if they lose then so what they've not done any worse than the 'big superstars' and can only gain from the experiences

Wasn't this done last year against Wales at Keepmoat?
Second stringers with a few regulars.

Indeed, why bother, play them instead of the usual wasters, at least we might see some effort and pride.

The reason is that there is a large gulf between Superleague and International competition. Paul Sykes is a great example of a player that looks pretty good in Superleague but was hopeless in the World Cup.

Engalnd A were a good team and a lot of the players that played for England A are not in the Engalnd first team. Bringing back this team under a different name is a good idea.

Regardless if you like it or not the players in the World Cup were are best we had at the time and a World Cup is not a time to experiment. Remember 12 months earlier England thrashed our new world champs 3-0 in a test series.

No they werent, not even close.

They were the best we had that had played for England already and also played for a "top 4" club.

Same as always and same as always they lost.

and that touring NZ team was a totally different team to the one that played in the world cup.

Of course they were the best, 15 of them played for two sides that were miles ahead of the rest of the league! The league isn't like some random lottery where the top 4 are the top 4 regardless of ability. If the rest of the league is full of players that are better than those that played for England, why have the top two teams been the same for the last couple of seasons?

Or does your criteria for who is the 'best' not include contributing to your team winning lots of rugby matches?

pick the a team now .here

go on then

show us this team of better quality players who didnt go to aus because they werent selected

isn't there at least another thread on this topic?

[urlhttp://viewtopic.php?t=399683&highlight=[/url

thought so

This was first tbf or so I think.

this started today, t'other yesterday.