Widdop
McGillvary
Watkins
Percival
Hall
Williams
Gale
G Burgess
Hodgson
Graham
Whitehead
S Burgess
Cooper

Clark
Bateman
Hill
T Burgess

1. Sarginson
2. McGillivery
3. Watkins
4. Percival
5. Hall
6. Widdop
7. Williams
8. Graham
9. Clarke
10. G Burgess
11. S Burgess
12. Whitehead
13. Cooper

14. Hodgeson
15. Farrell
16. Hill
17. Taylor

Deleted

Australia look too mobile for us. They have brought some big guys into their lack to counteract ours but they are much more mobile, unless there is a need for Anfield tickets sales I fear the worst.

I said last night I'd quite fancy seeing Widdop at fullback to allow us to keep Williams and Gake together for a second game rather then changing our halfback pairing again.

I'd go-

Widdop
McGillvary Watkins Percival Hall
Williams Gale
Graham Hodgson G Burgess
Farrell Whitehead S Burgess

Subs
Hill T Burgess Bateman Clark

I'd go with that BT. Our second row is seriously lacking in size so going with Surgess there is a good shout. To me Cooper is very dependable and would do a solid job at 13. Splitting up the Burgess twins is a good idea as well - they're not mobile enough to have them on at the same time IMO. Doesn't really matter what halves combination we go with though as we're still miles behind Aus in that area, and whoever it will be will have to have the game of their lives, particular with regards to kicking as field position will be oh so important.

Not far off mine. I've thought about starting Clarke as hooker as well. I personally don't think Hodgson as showed his NRL form yet in the games he's played, although you can say that about others also. Before the 4 Nations started, I really did think he'd be one of England's better players as well. I think when Clarke has come on he's looked just the better of the 2 so far.
Like was said after the NZ game, the twins need splitting up (you've gone for Taylor which isn't a bad shout) and Graham and George is the way I'd go as well, but I'd have Tom with Hill on the bench. That way you've always got a mobile Prop on the pitch at all times. Sam into the 2nd row and Cooper at lock is also a good move, it brings a bit more size into our staring 13. Williams and Widdop in the halves and I'll have to think a bit more about FB.

I'd go for this, maybe put Ratchford or Brown on the bench instead of Hodgeson.

If only we had an 80 minute hooker, with a kicking game who could make 50+ tackles then we could do this Ha

He didn't pick Roby though.

there is no way that any of the NRL players will not be playing this game.

I agree Hodgson has been a little disappointing, but as he's arguably the only world-class player in our squad, talk of not even having him in the 17 seems crazy.

I thought Hodgeson starting 9 and moving to 13 with Clarke at 9 worked well and is the way to go forward.

I'm a big Liam Farrell fan but he didn't seem to involved enough in the Scotland game - the game plan of keeping it up the middle doesn't suit his strengths so I think we go for Adding Graham to the pack to replace Faz.

I thought Gale was v poor 1st half and would have been subbed if we had a replacement, but improved in 2nd. Toss up between him and Widdop.

Lomax had slightly better 2nd half and more involved - would have liked to see Ratchford get some time, but unlikely to happen now.

Sarge is best at Fb but I'm concerned he would get targeted with high bombs and come up with errors.

I agree. Hand on heart, I think I'd trust Ratchford under the high ball more than Sarge.

I agree, we could put any 17 out there on Sunday and the Aussies will win the game.
If we keep it close (under 12 points) then many will be satisfied. We just don't compare with the Green and Gold.
Our only chance is if the Aussies want a final with some atmosphere. They are basically selecting their final opposition.

It does feel that way with how things have gone so far.

I really hope we see some fire and passion at the weekend though, really get stuck into them and try knock them off their game. The problem is, Bennett is trying to get us playing the safety first grind style play that the Aussies do and we are are a far inferior version of that and will lose to them playing it every day of the week. I think we have to be bold and chance our arm a bit, chances are we still lose but it would give us our best hope of the win.

I agree we have to get up and smash em. We have to get them riled up. Also, Thurston appeared to be playing with an injury v NZ. We should get up and hit him every time he passes or kicks.

Whilst we need more direction and linking from the halfbacks, we also need more energy and aggression.

Having sat through England's torpid displays so far and having seen Australia's second gear display against NZ, I would say that it really doesn't matter who England pick as they have no chance.

Bennett has not been able to motivate the team to perform in either game yet. My strong suspicion is that like most Australians who come over to Britain looking for easy money, he will bail when the going gets tough.

Get a British coach, who can motivate players, in the job for the World Cup before this freeloader does any more damage to our game.

agree about the halves, a few more wide running angles from the back rowers would help and options to try and open up the possibility of a bit of space out wide, they haven't had a great deal to work from so far to be fair. we have to look to find our centres more as we know Hall and McGillvary can finish. I just don't think it really fits in with Bennetts game plan to play a bit more off the cuff, but is our only outside chance of getting the points we will need to win imo.

The fact that Bennett got the gig suggests he was the best candidate for the job.
Nobody really rated McNamara but, he was doing just as well as Bennett and he was a fair bit better with the media but, who do you think would be up to or wanting the job.
Looking at the top of SL (which should be where the better coaches are), we have Wane, Smith (who is unlikely to take the job again), Radford & Cunningham (neither are anywhere near ready and are just finding their way as SL coaches or Powell.
So realistically Wane or Powell and do either of them want the job ??
Outside them you have Betts or Harris and they wouldn't be an improvement.

So, please tell us which British coach we should appoint.

I'd have left it with McNamara. Failing that give it to Kevin Sinfield or Paul Sculthorpe or someone recently retired. It's only a part time job and they could have Brian Noble there to help out. Professional sportsmen at the top of their profession don't need a lot of coaching. Keep them fit and happy, organise them and let them play.

Coaching at International level is a Bobby's job. The reason we don't beat Aussie isn't down to coaching. It is down to the fact that they are better. Bennett might be a legend in Aussie but he will be a failure here. The only chances we have is if they play poorly, couldn't care less or if we get some dodgy decisions. None of which Bennett can influence.

I agree regards McNamara, he did a decent job and can count himself unlucky not to still be in charge. For me, the England job is absolutely a role that could be taken up by a British SL head coach like a Wane or Powell part time. It's what Bennett is doing now.

If we stuck with McNamara we would've lost to Scotland.

It's all about the mental side at senior level. We need to be mentally better than them on the day, as they are more skillful. Same in most sports.

You'd give the job to a someone with no first grade coaching experience as opposed to Bennett, wow.