Necessary England changes

[>zuzu<]

Get that Gardner off the field before calderwood. He showed a glimpse of effort, it seems that Garder is a catch and fall over type player to score, he showed nothing to suggest he could ad to the team on his own.

Paul Wellons is just to slow. So very poor positionally, 3 tackles will pass before he can turn his fat ass around.

Maybe Smith can play FB? Dont know much about him but wellons is not gonna trouble the aussies in anyway.

Maguire, again what a dud.

The Wranger goes alright, Roby is good and Rob Burrow defending against Falau whilst the dumbesst thing I could have thought and English coach to do is a tough little bugger and did well defensively.

Price......for all the talk has shown not 1 ounce of attacking potency.

Played FB in the Grand Final for the SL this year. Slotted in for an Injured Brent Webb and played superbly. One of the finer games i have seen from a FB. Kicked a 40/20, scored a try and some other creative little moves that earnt him the Harry Sunderland trophy ( our equivalanet of the Clive Churchill medal).

I would have him at FB. Wellens - I actually think he's a good player. But they seemed lost in attack at times GB.

And personally - im not a fan of Pryce. I think he is garbage

 

[nadera78]

When they walked out onto the field to line up against Australia some of the players absoliutely shat themselves. Pryce, Wilkin, Gardner, Wellens, Fa'asavalu were all beaten before they even took to the field.

Team for next week.
Smith (Wellens is so out of it it's untrue)
Gardner (no-one else in the squad)
Gleeson (no-one else in the squad)
Ellis (might be able to pass to his winger for a change)
Caderwood (worked hard, one of the few with real pace)
Rob Purdham (best 13 in the squad, but no-one else to play at 6)
Burrow (only scrum half in the squad)
Peacock (worked hard, as ever)
Higham (Roby needs to be used as impact off the bench. Let Higham do the donkey work)
Graham (worked had, as ever)
Jamie Jones-Buchanan (get some mongrel up front)
Hock (worked hard, need a ball player in there)
Ben Westwood (again, get some mongrel in there)
Subs
Morley (no-one else in the squad)
Roby (best used as an impact player)
Sinfield (to cover a few options, I guess)
Jamie Langley (not a big fan at all, but only one in the squad who can cover prop and 2nd row)

Some of those guys are only there because we have no-one else in the squad, which isn't a glowing endorsement but there you go. Desperate for someone int he halves who can organise and move the team around.

 

[International RL]

For the love of God get rid of Sinfield.

This bloke is a passenger. He tries to play like a half, but can't. Takes a rubbish last tackle option, kicks it away on the 3rd...

I don't remember him taking one hit up. You can't have a lock forward that wants to direct traffic and can't roll up his sleeves. It means someone else has to do his work for him.

Wellens is too slow. He used to get away with it by being positionally sound...but last night he was poor.

Englad need to be smarter tactically. You can't give the field away with knock ons, poor kicks and penalties.

So get rid of Maurie F.

 

[Simo]

Jamie Jones-Buchanan (get some mongrel up front)

Does he happen to play for whatever side plays out of the JJB stadium?

 

[yakstorm]

Have to admit I felt sorry for guys like Peacock, Roby and Graham. They busted their arses and tried so hard to keep England in the game. Unfortunately when Australia is hot like they were last night, you need all 17 players to be playing to 100% of their ability, not just three.

Morley started okay, but then seemed to disappear. Burrow, when he decided to run it, made good meters, but he always seemed to be missing when it came to the 4th and 5th tackle options.

Maurie....well look at his stats:

Made only 39 meters from 6 runs. Had 2 errors, 0 line breaks, 3 missed tackles, and made 23 tackles in his time out there... honestly inefficient, and not worth bringing off the bench.

Compared this to Graham, made 111 meters, from 16 runs, only 1 error, only 1 missed tackle...England need more guys like him.

 

[International RL]

What were Sinfield's stats Yak?

 

[sooperdooper]

was it just me or does graham remind you of ben hannant?

also....gotta laugh at leon pryce! tool

 

[macavity]

is Gardner the guy that plays outside Gidley?

Gidley made Justin Ryder look like a superstar.....

looks like he did the same to that chump.

this is why Gidley is the best (and probably last) classic centre to play the greatest game.

 

[Chook Norris]

Gardner and Gleeson were shocking in defence imo

 

[screeny]

Maybe I'm insane, but after a day and night of reflection I'm still genuinely optimistic of winning the final. As Yakstorm says, in RL you need all 17 to be good players otherwise you'll be cut apart by Australia's scalpel-like precision.

Our forwards were more than a match for Australia's and the big scoreline reflects nothing other than a team mentally giving up as it knew it has a second chance. It's easy to say "they must fight to the end" but that's not the human brain, unfortunately.

Here's my team:

1. Smith. Haven't seen him play FB much, in fact only in the GF, but Wellens has simply got to go. Apologists go on about his positional play but where was it for Slater's opening try? Why was he in the line not behind it to counter the obvious kick?

2. Gardner. Out of position a couple of times but f**k it. No other choices.

3. Gleeson. When it was a contest he was going alright.

4. Ellis. Senior doesn't play like a centre. He never has, at int'l level at least. Leeds fans may defend him but I really have seen him blow so many chances for GB over the years. f**k, it's not like we create many so to remember one player blowing loads of them is frightening.

5. Calderwood. A bright spot. yeah he dropped a critical, un-droppable ball, but he played well thereafter.

6. Pryce. Still class. Total nice person 'tackle' for Inglis's first try. How could he have not fully extended and committed to the tackle? Disgrace. but when he went off our set control went with him. As evidence see our keystone cop attacking set early in second half. Embarrassing.When he was on the field at least we completed sets and ended them (when the ref didn't call knock ons against us that should have been against Australia).

7. Burrow. Good.

8. Morley. When he was on he hit it up strong. I don't understand the criticism.

9. Higham. Use him Smith you twat.

10. Graham. Played well.

11. Hock. Played well. Aggressive. How he didn't score I'll never know. Superb Aussie GL defence.

12. Peacock.

13. Sinfield. Can't believe I wrote that. I have only watched the match once so haven't really studied his performance. His first tackle on Slater was the best tackle I've ever seen him do, and I remember a couple of other clutch tackles.

14. Roby.
15. JJB
16. Purdham.
17. Sykes.

I bet loads of SL coaches are enjoying a cool pint of schadenfreude this morning, at Smith's expense. Winner of two GF's, the best prepared side ever, he apparently had all the answers and now look what's happened.

Does he have the balls to drop GB institutions like Senior and Wellens? I doubt it, but as I said at the top I genuinely believe we need to get our best 17 on the field and we can beat Australia. The scorelines doesn't phase me at all.

 

[bartman]

Screeny, the only way I can see England getting a win in the final is if they come out and put on a stink in the opening 5 minutes. And keep it up all game, rattle the Aussies' cage, put them off their game by bringing back the biff.

I like the idea people had of Smith at fullback when he comes back into the side, I hadn't thought of that.

That allows you to get Pryce out in the centres instead of Senior... but there's very few options for a creative stand-off. Imo Pryce isn't it. If not Maguire I'd even stick Sinfield there in hope, and bring in Purdham to the 13.

JJB and Westwood have to come into the bench to add some starch if England are to go down the stink/biff route.

Roby's an 80 minute starter for mine, always looks like the most dangerous player for England or St Helens.

I guess with the next game against the Kiwis the coach can have a play around with combinations, as it'll be a true dead rubber. May as well give Higham, JJB, Purdham and the rest of the squad a go and see who salutes.

 

[screeny]

I'd definitely stick with Pryce. When he was on, as I said, at least we got to the end of our sets and engineered a few repeat sets. When he went off and Coco the McGuire came on our set management went to pot, all dropped ball and crazy passes without structure.

Christ everyone outside of St Helens agrees with binning Wellens, it's stating the bleeding obvious.

I agree with the fight tactic too. Desperate times....!

 

[bartman]

Yeah, I wouldn't mind seeing a bit of a stink, and seeing how the Aussies handle it.

If Pryce is to stay, then the squad (in the future really needs someone with some skill and flair outside of him to chime in or run off these structured sets that he's apparently responsible. No good having structured sets that go nowhere, with only Senior, Wellens and Gleeson outside of him.

 

[Skram]

1. Smith. Haven't seen him play FB much, in fact only in the GF, but Wellens has simply got to go. Apologists go on about his positional play but where was it for Slater's opening try? Why was he in the line not behind it to counter the obvious kick?

I thought aside from never once looking like any real threat with the ball in hand, this was by far the weakest aspect of Wellen's game. He was constantly up in the line and left England open to all kinds of attack. If positional play is one of his strengths then he is a lost hope.
Bring in Smith at fullback, surely winning the MOM from the grand final justifies not just sticking him back on the wing.

 

[marv]

Its almost as if the next game is a dead rubber so we might as well see what the likes of Ben Westwood can do, as has been said Wilkin is sh*te and too similar to Sinfield.

As for Pryce at FB, I dont know myself I would perhaps have him in the centres with Senior because Gleeson is sh*te, but again Danny Mguire is not gonna be the man playing 6 to lead us to victory.

I wasnt sure about Wellens at the start of the comp but didnt see anyone better and still dont, i mean Paul Sykes, please!

Morley was completly anonymous (13T 10H/U 77M), but for me he is still one of our best and I will never understand why Gareth Hock get in he is competly sh*te FFS Calderwood made more tackles carries and metres

 

[shiznit]

wheres fluffydud???

he been talking this match up for 12 months...

 

[Fairleigh Good!]

There really is no point making changes as the players coming in would be a visible step down in quality anyway. There were no raised eyebrows when that squad or team was announced, that's the best we have full stop.

Wellens is the one who attracts the most obvious criticism. He is a player who is imperious in Super League and has won Man of Steel, man of the match in both the Challenge Cup final and Grand Final before. He's not some reserve grade no mark who is thrown in at the deep end, he's the best we have by a distance and then some.

I think the loss of Sam Burgess has hit England hard. He would have been the star of the world cup had he been fit.

It's the preparation we have as much as the players though. Sure we need to replace the entire backline and bench, but even if we did we would still lose. Australia draw the best players from about 7 or 8 nations, have the NRL where any foreign players suddenly become Australian so they can play Origin. This makes them elligible for the national team. So you have NRL featuring the best Pacific Islanders, Origin (Featuring anyone who's seen a Kangaroo) and the test games against NZ. England have about a 20th of the player pool which comes from a geographical area you could throw a hat over. We then have Super League with each side featuring roughly 6 or 7 eligible players, no origin or equivalent and the only internationals we could possibly play are uncontested games against Wales, Scotland, Ireland or France.

 

[jim_57]

Just a though, maybe England will be alot better for the hit-out. When you consider that they havn't played a full strength Australia or NZ since 2006. I know they play NZ but a poorly coached and understrength NZ.

I expect them to beat NZ twice and be up for a game in the final.

 

[IAmDancingHomer]

Maybe I'm insane, but after a day and night of reflection I'm still genuinely optimistic of winning the final. As Yakstorm says, in RL you need all 17 to be good players otherwise you'll be cut apart by Australia's scalpel-like precision.

Our forwards were more than a match for Australia's and the big scoreline reflects nothing other than a team mentally giving up as it knew it has a second chance. It's easy to say "they must fight to the end" but that's not the human brain, unfortunately.

:crazy::lol:
Did you watch the game? Your forwards were beaten almost to a man. There was not one guy in the forward pack that outplayed his opposite number. Our front row chewed up the meters from you guys at will. Cam Smith had an eternity to pick up runners. Gallen made more metres than any back rower in the game. Laffranchi had only a handfull of metres less than Peacock. Kite, off the bench, had the most metres of all players and ran a total of 6m less than your ENTIRE BACK ROW!!....So please were have they been more than a match for the Aussie forwards because I cannot see it. They were found wanting big time. Go look at the stats, they are damning. The only poor performer in the Aussie pack was Stewart (and he was abysmall).

 

[hellteam]

England or Great Britain or whatever they feel like being called at the time lose to Australia every year when we play them. Then they go away and the Super League commentators talk up their prospects and then they come back..... with basically the same team.

FFS they couldn't beat Australia the first 30 times why would they suddenly beat them this time. Have a punt and get rid of Senior, Gleeson, Wellens and all the rest of the players that have been losing games for England since about 2000. There's surely got to be more players for them to choose from, it's not like they can get much worse then a 52-4 scoreline !

It doesnt matter how good their mental strength is, there's no way that these guys that have been around for so long actually think they can beat Australia.