Watkins in particular must be very close to getting the shirt. A fine prospects who I'd have at Warrington in a heartbeat. Hardaker much less so but he does have potential.

I love watching international rugby league and I don't like people who dismiss it as a waste of time. However, whilst I appreciate that McNamara is only trying to win, this stuff about selecting Australians and New Zealanders leaves a sour taste and makes it more difficult to be supportive of the international game.

As for Atkins, listen to McNamaras interview on Radio Manchester. He was asked a direct question. He said he wasn't going to comment on individaul players but listed criteria they had to fulfill to be in one of his bonkers squads. If memory served it included 'fitting in with the group'. He placed emphasis on that. Reading between the lines I suspect that's why Atkins hasn't been selected.

I would question his mentality if he refuses to play for his country just because of the coach.

This was what Chase had to say in March last year before the exiles game

[i"Hopefully, I'll end up playing. This game could help me play for New Zealand. That's my goal to wear the black and white of my country.

"It's a dream of mine since I was a little kid. If I play well [in Leeds I might get a crack."[/i

[urlhttp://www.nzherald.co.nz/warriors-league-team/news/article.cfm?c_id=360&objectid=10730389[/url

aren't you contradicting your "want to play for England" post there mate?

No.

If anybody's mentality needs to come into question, it is Steve McNamara's.

It is highly unlikely that Atkins would want to play for England just because McNamara is the coach, no matter how utterly clueless and useless he is.

But you acknowledge that Chase didn't really want to play for England yet use it a as a reason for Atkins omission!

Your argument would hold up if Tony Soprano was the one selecting Chase for England (and the one not selecting Atkins). Otherwise it doesn't really make sense.

If MacNamara thinks Chase wants to play for England and thinks Atkins doesn't, then it doesn't matter what the Rt. Hon. Mr Soprano thinks. He is merely speculating as to the possible reasons behind Atkins' non-inclusion.

I am neither McNamara or Chase and the two circumstances are very different.

Not that I agree with Chase being picked for England.

Why? Chase didn't want to play for England because it didn't suit and Atkins likewise.

Atkins having a bit of a mare so far!

Eddie embarrassing himself referring to us as 'possible champions elect' and I wish Stevo wouldn't keep calling Burrow 'beep beep'. Kn0b!

MISSION: FAILED

Had a shocker tonight, perhaps trying to hard to prove a point.

poor from Ryan tonight....oh well..move on to next week.

he did have a shocker

Seems McBanana isn't only a England coach but he is also a bad motivator of players (even out of the international scene)

Also Atkins is a better than Goulding or Carmont

He'll learn from that tonight. He's still a long way from the finished article, but consider how far he's come in the short time he's been here, he'll be the best centre in the league in a few years time.

Has played better than he did tonight.

Everyone has an off game

Atkins IS a fine player...I don't really care what anyone else thinks....especially the muppet running England.

He got shown up tonight by Watkins. He's not in the same class as Watkins who in my opinion will be world class. Can't see it being too long before union or NRL come sniffing for him.

Atkins is still a very good player, he looked like he was playing under a bit of pressure tonight.

he just had a poor game.... along with everyone else in the team.

its no big deal.

There's some strange substances being smoked/sniffed/injected somewhere tonight, eh fellas.

Atkins was average, like quite a few players, only one of two good ones, e.g. Hill.

Higham was bad.

Carvell was very very BAD tonight.

So, we had a couple of ok players, 13 average, and two poor players, with one decent player going off, and three very influential players in the stand - and we lost by 8, away at the champions. The scenario 4 years ago would of been a 50 point drubbing.....

I don't really see why Watkins in particular seems to have been singled out in comparrison to Atkins. Both are quality centres. I would be more wondering why wellham is in there instead of Atkins, who is miles behind Atkins for me. Watkins is a cracking prospect and deserves to be in there along with atkins

Agreed... watkins is quality..... i dont think anyone is making a direct accusation at watkins..... its obvious there has been a fall out between atkins and mcnamara... first sign of a coach out of his depth.

I suppose it's just because we were playing each other this week that all the media seemed to highlight Watkins and Atkins and neglected others who are worse than both the above. More me at this time they should be the centres for England. I can see the point in including hardaker as I think he will have a big future in the game, and for me both hardaker and bridge would be in front of wellham