Why does everyone have the sh*ts about him. I think he is a talented forward with a big strong go forward.

Warrington fan by any chance?

Dont you know who I am? I thought everyone does!

Leeds BTW. When it comes to the international game though I see it as it is without a bias look towards things.

Hence why I havent picked Sinfield or O'Loughlin.

One GB player that's performed consistantly well at International level! No bias there then eh?



Incidentally, also the subject of this thread where the England manager said we missed him badly last time out....

In defence I agree we missed him but the pack I have chosen is very good defensivly. It also has more going forward with Burgess at 13 than it does with Sinfield or O'Loughlin. Do you realise we are the only country in the world that sees it fit to have a play maker at loose forward? With Tompkins/Myler/McGuire/Eastmond in the team we have skill there not to need a 3rd playmaker.

Ryan Hoffman isnt a playmaker but he's a damn good loose forward.

O'Loughlins not just a playmaker, he puts some big hits on people, makes decent yards forward and gets a couple of breaks a game. He's twice the player sinfield is imo just without the kicking, I will admit that KS's kicking both out of hand and g/k is one of the best in the league, but you can't just put him in the team for that.

Trust me I'm not looking for an O'loughlin/Sinfield p**sing match but that's just ridiculous.

Whoever Smith picks that's fine by me.

You see this is why I seldom post about RL anymore on here. People think because im from Leeds im putting the Leeds players in. I have explained that I MISS Sinfield out ASWELL!

Yes, O'Loughlin is a good solid player but the person I have ahead of him is Burgess, a player who has in the past played for the Bulls regular in the 13 position. This isnt a slur on O'Loughlins abilities but more a point that if we want to compete in the 4N then we need to pick our best pack for making metres forward. Burgess isnt just a solid player, he can be outstanding. And while I have never seen O'Loughlin have a bad game for GB I have also never seen him have an outstanding game either.

Also there are at least 3 games to go at so im sure O'Loughlin will get game time in there, be it 2nd row, or at loose.

My point was originally that the pack I picked is the biggest, strongest pack we have in the squad, and to compete due to the lack of strength in the threequarter line we need the biggest, strongest pack possible.

man of the match in the last Internnational he played!

Was that against the worst ever Kiwi touring team ever to visit these shores?

Anyway, as I said, its not about O'Loughlin performances in the past which have been solid if not spectacular. Its about Burgess being better.

Il post my backs too (im sure this'll get the sh*ts up you too in some way shape or form

)

Briscoe
Smith
Bridge
Shenton
Hall
Tompkins (McGuire)
McGuire (Myler)

Eastmond

Brackets indicate 2nd choice.

That's the thing i don't think i would put in anybody ahead of him. I'd also go with Shenton and Ellis, lockers at 2nd row. It's sad though that we're looking at a potential best option at centre of a 2nd rower (I know he's played centre earlier in his career) - we seem to have an alarming tendancy as a RL nation to turn and decent size kid who's playing centre into a 2nd rower, are we putting something in the water or is it we've not got the coaching skills to develop them at centre so it's easier to put them in 2nd row? I dunno really.

If I wasn't going to put Ellis in centre, i'd have to go with Smith or Bridge though i'm really really loath to do that for essentially a '1 off'

I really hope Wigan don't do that with Ian Thorley.

I spoke to a guy involved with Acadamy team coaching (not Wigan's) and he thinks Thornley will make a great second rower. He doesn't think he has the handling skills of a quality centre.

Does make you wonder what the heck is going on though, teams seem to be having second rowers hanging from the rafters, but we're all struggling to produce centres. I suspect that whatever the issue is, it's going to take changes at the early age brackets in coaching and we're going to have to wait quite a while for it to filter through.

I'm a bit out of touch with what changes were made at grass roots level in the past, but it seems like a decision was made along the lines of 'we're struggling for second rowers at the top level, so lets turn anybody with a bit of size in the the centres into second rows.

But that's exactly the point! The person you have ahead of O'Loughlin isn't Burgess but Westwood!!



Please apply your own logic to that selection and explain exactly how Westwood has been better than O'Loughlin at International level. He hasn't even been better at club level. Ever.

Another interesting anomoly in your argument in bold. O'Loughlin has consistently been at the top of the tackles made list for SL throughout his career. Peter Sterling said the last time out against the Aussies that he was , and I quote: "a workoholic", that he "reminded him of Nathan Hindmarsh (sic)" and "was one of the few GB players who would be a success in the NRL". Exactly the type of player Aus/NZ put at loose forward and exactly what you are advocating in bold. Explain?

OBSESSED

I said that on another thread. Smith played Sinfield at hooker alot when Diskin used to go off, I think he may start at hooker.

Ben Westwood



Locky has always shone for GB, he should start be it in back row or 13.

[size=150STALKER![/size

Both statements are true - a lot of teams don't have a playmaker at 13, feeling it's more important to have a tackling machine with great positional and organisational awareness, e.g. DJ

And you're right Lockers is a great defensive workhorse as well as somebody who's got a bit of 'playing' skill - he's a good choice at 13, i'm just tempted to put him in the 2nd row and have sinfield for his kicking.

And yes you're damn right we shouldn't be in that position of needing to include him for his kicking game, but sadly I think we still are at the moment with the current halves.

Maybe in a year or two, a Tomkins/Eastmond (if he stays in RL) type partnership once they develop their games a little more might mean we're not needing a 13 who can kick well.

Exactly right. It would be even more esential to have a tough tackling, organisational LF who can read a game if we're to play the youngsters in the halves.

But the others see fit by having their extra playmaker at fullback, whereas we don't have a single fullback who can do that bar Pryce if he took on the position possibly, and he isn't in the squad, so I think we need to try and keep some skill in the squad and no just go into matches thinking we can just steamroller teams when in fact our pack can only just equal that of Aus/NZ, and then they just run around us

. We need the skill and defence from the forwards as well as raw power and MoiMoi smashers