Hardaker
Briscoe Cudjoe Watkins Hall
Tomkins Burrow
Hill McM Mossop
Faz Ferres
Graham
----------------------------------
Roby Lockers T Burgess Abblet

There's an interesting one. Has Graham ever played loose?

Lockers straight in at thirteen and when S Burgess is back id move him into second row at the expense of Westwood who is a penalty machine and is prone to brain farts which at the very top level costs us.

Sam
Charnley
Watkins
Cudjoe
Hall
Widdop
Sinfield
Graham
Mcilorum
G Burgess
Ferres
Farrell
Lockers

Hill
Roby
T Burgess
Westwood

You know a team selection is daft if Grimmy is questioning it.

Why have two people named a side with McIlorum in it when he isn't in the 19 man squad?

I'm surprised McNamara dropped Mossop and kept Tom Burgess in there; he looked out of his depth v Australia.

My bad, didnt read the squad. Mossop looked out of his depth so i wiuld personally drop in place of Graham and keep the rest. If S Burgess was available Id also drop Westwood with Lockers coming at 13 moving Sam to second row. Westwood plays hard but is all too often a liability discipline wise at this level.

I'd keep him in over Ablett. I'd also have Liam Farrell over Ablett too.

Chase and Ablett to miss out for me too. There is no question Farrell is a better player then Ablett but I did understand him being picked against Australia before Faz to cover second row and centre.

If needs must Saturday Faz could shift in to centre.

Just thought I'd mix it up to be honest. Trying Hardaker at 1 and Sam at 6 also. Don't honestly know if I'd genuinely go for this team from the squad, but it would be a line up I'd be excited to see.

With regards of Graham at 13, he would't be a 'ball playing 13' but basically a 3rd prop, like Sammy B, Gallen, Eastwood etc. He's got a good engine, could easily play 60 mins, especially with two other props on the field. This would give us excellent strike winning the forward battle/arm wrestle.

Personally I don't see how Lockers could be match fit, he's hardly played for months. I think 80mins might be a big ask, I'd like to see him come off the bench after 20, meaning he plays 20, has a rest at half time, then comes back on for another 20-30 to see how he feels.

This would mean Lockers would replace one of the starting props, push Graham into to 8 or 10 role with Lockers coming on as a ball playing loose. This would undoubtedly add another dimension to the attack after the half graft has been established in the first 20.

I agree with LSoW in that there seems to be a growing trend to play props at 13.
When Lockers was out for the play offs Wane played Flower at 13.
Sam Burgess plays prop and loose at Souths.
Gallen the same as S Burgess.
In the Knights match Purtil selected Dom Crosby at 13. I've never seen him play loose at Wigan.
None of them are ball players but provide additional massive power into the pack.
Flower at Huddersfield in the play offs was immense and it was the Wigan pack's relentless 80 mins on full power which overpowered the Giants forwards.
Perhaps there's a new position on the field, Loose Prop Forward!
I've suspected ever since he signed that Sam Hopkins will be Lockers' replacement.
A big powerful man who will provide real go forward as well as being a ball player.
Against Ireland though he could pick anyone at 13 at they'll win.
This weekend could provide the first blow out scores with Eng v Ire and Aus v Fiji.
Hope I'm wrong!

When you look at the 13 position in the line it's 'loose' as it has no set position as such, if more power and grind is needed use 3 props, this will take the weight off the two 'front rowers' and add so much grunt when finding the platform, which is massive in the first 20.

For me Lockers is so good and rated so highly as he has it all, can tackle as well as anyone with an amazing work rate, and run the ball like a SR and can pass like a half back. He can be used to fulfil many needs of the team. He can do the hard yards and the silky stuff.

I've also seen a 13 used a tackle machine, were he'll line up in different positions on the pitch to 'sure up' defensive weaknesses, this being his primary job as well as run drives. Best example of this was Dallas Johnson. Used to make a high amount of tackles per game all over the pitch.

Another possible option/point of discussion for the role would to be play someone like Micky Mac at 13.

To explain, he's a good dummy half runner, excellent tackler, can pass and really get through the hard work. He's an enforcer and not slow for a forward.

With this you could start Micky at 13 with another 9 at dummy half, someone different in style. Have 3 props on the bench after 20-25 mins take off the 9, move Micky to dummy half bringing a prop on, at the same time interchange one of the front rowers, so you're bringing on 2 fresh props, you have a fresh dummy half and you still have a fresh prop on the bench.

Thinking out of the box, looking at what a player can offer, can often lead to changes in the game and adjustments to positions.

Yes , when he first broke through at Saints Anderson picked him there couple of times iirc . An aussie 'Gallen' style loose obviously rather than a traditional ball player. If McBannana is going that way as he did in the first match with Burgess then it might not be that weird a selection

Man of the match Hall. I mean he scored 3 tries. Three tries I would have backed my great grandson to have scored and he plays for an under seven team. Apart from that what else did he do? Nothing much that I could recall. The idiots that make these decisions know less about our game than the neighbour's cat.

Regularly, loose tongue that is. He was at it again today and was warned for it.

Would anybody swap Ablett for Farrell, Briscoe for Charnley or Sinfield for Smith? The answer to each is fairly simple for me.

Just on the way home from the game. I commented during the match that I can't believe how Ablett is keeping Farrell out of the side, it's ridiculous.

Ablett is not the problem, its the coach. Sinfield and Chase are just an awful, awful halfback pairing. Probably the worst 'English' Halfback pairing I have ever seen. Yet McNamara is making changes on the wings and in the forwards - WHY? Why not for this match at least try a new halfback pairing for 80 minutes? How come literally everybody else can see this except him? No doubt if anyone questioned this he would storm out.

I agree. It certainly looks as though he has his mind made up for most positions and there is nothing anyone can do or say to change his mind.

sinfield shouldnt be in the 13

T Burgess looks awful, Chase ain't good enough and Ablett isn't a patch on Faz. I did think Briscoe played well though so Charnley will be lucky to get back in.

Briscoe - Solid winger. Charnley - potential match winner. If we are to stand any chance of winning the world cup, which I've already written off after seeing New Zealand's halfbacks yesterday and ours today, we need match winners.

We have such an opportunity here to really put a stamp down for our sport in this country but McNamara is incapable of the job it'll all end quietly for England and get brushed under the carpet and never be spoken about again.

Tom Burgess' selection is looking more and more baffling. He's an error machine and is in the squad purely on the back of his 2 brother's reputations. How anyone can only be selected for 9 domestic games can then be considered for international selection is beyond me, especially in a position where we have plenty of depth.

The halves are definitely the main problem, however. McNamara hasn't got the minerals to go back on his decisions, he's made Sinfield captain and he's selected chase through eligibility rules, so they are his starting half backs. Widdop gets a 20 minute cameo and the 2 dream team half backs from 2013 don't get a look in. Wev got a 7 with weights round his ankles and a headless chicken instead.

Worse than Danny McGuire and Richard Horne?

easily