Joined: Sep 01 2006 Posts: 5139 Location: Wall Street
The Hollywood Frasier wrote:Think thats harsh on Higham as thought he was our best today and its no coincidence that once he got took off we started loosing the ruck due to Sinfield and Burrow taking it in turns as dummy half.
Would agree with that. It is also no coincidence that the Kiwis played their better rugby when Lulu went off.
Motto of the week -
It is the way of the weak to secretly bleat to those in authority rather than fight their own battles.
Joined: Oct 19 2003 Posts: 17898 Location: Packed like sardines, in a tin
Come on PNG!
I can't believe how arrogant Sky and Tony Smith are being. The game next week has already been advertised as NZ v England. Even the BBC are saying we "meet again next week". OK it will probably happen but they're discussing it as if it is already agreed and set up. Tony Smith says he'll look at the tape of the match tomorrow, but he might be packing his bags for the journey home and watching the semi final from England next Saturday. Monday morning's video might be the inflight movie.
We were shockingly poor in the second half (although the Warrington players did OK eh, Mr Cullen?). I can't honestly see any of the missing players (if we go through) improving us. Sliding defence was awful and contributed to the massive overlap for Vatuvei. My mum might have scored those tries. And moving Burrow etc round was tactically stupid. If it ain't broke don't fix it.
Joined: Sep 23 2008 Posts: 1881 Location: Top of the East Stand
A unknown superstar wrote:Hardly, when were carrying players like Sykes, Westwood, Higham and Langley. Even players like Sinfield, Wellens and Senior arn't International class and are only in the team because there is no one else upto a good enough standard. Although Calderwood has played fairly well. England has only one world class winger, and that is Raynor.
Yet we still led 24 - 8! Who would you take then? The team from yesteryear that was arguably no better? Smith took a gamble by not taking players based on their reputation, but took players who had never played for England before. If it had payed off, everyone would have been singing his praises. It hasn't so far, so people start shooting down the Coach. We in England are so far behind in development standards compared to the NRL, but slowly, we are starting to see a difference. The new rules introduced by the RFL re: the number of 'homegrown' players that have to be in the 20/18/17 each game will also make a difference to the future of International standards within England, and other countries as well.
Faithful One wrote:The new rules introduced by the RFL re: the number of 'homegrown' players that have to be in the 20/18/17 each game will also make a difference to the future of International standards within England, and other countries as well.
Joined: Sep 23 2008 Posts: 1881 Location: Top of the East Stand
The Hollywood Frasier wrote:Yeah it will make them lower.
How?
Surely, if the rules were kept the same, we would have a worse situation than we have now as all the 'heros' and 'senior/must have' players within Super League would have retired. The RFL are trying to help the International team by having a higher concentration of homegrown players training full time within their clubs, rather than crocked Aussies and older British players looking to increase their earnings before they retire.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
