First 13 in the final 0f 2004 and last night:



2004:[i Wellens, Carney, Gleeson, Senior, Reardon, Harris, Long, Fielden, Newton, Morley, Peacock, Farrell, Sculthorpe.[/i



2011: [iSAM TOMKINS, ryan hall, JACK REED, KIRK YEAMAN, TOM BRISCOE, KEVIN SINFIELD, RANGI CHASE, JAMESGRAHAM, JAMES ROBY, JAMIE PEACOCK, JON WILKIN, GARETH ELLIS, BEN WESTWOOD[/i



Head to head who you would take



Tomkins

hall / carney equal

senior

gleeson

briscoe / reardon equal

sinfield / harris equal

long

newton / roby equal

morley

peacock

farrell

sculthorpe



The 2011 guise only has one clearly better player, Tomkins.



This is an individual not collective thing, and it's very subjective. But I don't think many will disagree on the whole.



You'd definitly take morley and peacock the 2004 versions over the current ones. Farrell and sculthorpe are obviously better than the current incumbents.



All in all 2004 has 7 clearly better individuals with 4 equal. Leaving 2011 with only 1 better player.



This higlights that individual talent has gone backwards, significantly.



Collectively?



Hard to say.

like i said on another thread.. scully and farrel have never been replaced, both were feared by the aussies, we have nobody in out team now who the aussies geuinely fear

Agreed.



The thing is, as team they gave the aussies some tremednous tussles as well, 2004 final apart.



Who can forget the ashes series in 2003, when the games were nip and tuck until the final 5 minutes. Even a man down for the full 80, it took them until the death to snatch a victory.



Now, we sort of give them a good game, until the last 20 minutes if that.



I guess you can put that down to the coaching of david waite.



If england want immediate results, they should bring in a top coach from the NRL full time. Australia may have better structures in their game as a whole with more talent pool, but that shouldnt stop england being able to field 17 players well coached who can beat them.

After calming down after seieng us shoto ourselves in the foot multiple times, think we need to remember are squad is still pretty young. Tomkins, Hall Briscoe, Reed, are all veyr young players. 2004 most of thos eplayers were at their peak, currently most of our players made their debuts two or 3 years ago. I don't tihnk looking at 04 is a good idea, 2008 set us back. We're still rebuilding from that.

1 - Tomkins

2 - Carney

3 - Gleeson

4 - Reed

5 - Hall

6 - Chase

7 - Long

8 - Fielden

9 - Roby

10 - Morley

11 - Ellis

12 - Farell

13 - Sculthorpe

If you think we've gone backwards since 2004 ......... check out our performances and teamsheets in the late 80's and early 90's.



Hanley, Platt, Ward, Goodway, Gregory, Offiah, Lydon, Newlove, Schofield, etc etc.

I've been saying this since the start of the tournament! We've gone backwards and no matter how you dress it up we were a better team in 2003 and 2004 (as were Australia).

The Aussies are a lot better now than 2004 I rekon. Besides we will only beat the Aussies if players play in the correct positions. Take 2006 for example:



6. PRYCE - Recognised stand-off.

7. LONG - Recognised scrum-half

9. NEWTON - Recognised Hooker.

13. O'LOUGHLIN - Recognised Loose-forward.

14. ROBY - Recognised replacement Hooker.





Now for the 2011 Four Nations.



6. SINFIELD - a 13 for Leeds.

7. CHASE - a 6 for Castleford.

9. ROBY - a recognised Hooker.

13. WESTWOOD - a 12 for Warrington.

14. WIDDOP - a 6 for MELBOURNE who were top of the NRL. ONly approx 15mins game time per game.



so we aint going anywhere until we play our best players in their TRUE positions.

I love how people always harp on about the "great GB sides" of the 80s and 90s... We won F all then as well.

Yes I know ........but it doesn't change the fact that the players were better back then (in terms of skill levels, I admit that due to being full time, the modern players are fitter) . We also came a lot closer to winning than nowadays.



Actually, following on from the full-time/fitness point .......... could it be that nowadays we produce athletes not footballers.

Don't think anyone did! Just comparing now and then.

considering u only picked 12 players in the team of your choice i wouldnt hire you as england coach lol



1- tomkins

2- carney

3- gleeson

4- reed

5- hall

6- harris

7- sinfield

8- morley

9- roby

10- peacock

11- westwood

12- farrell

13- scully



but try and come up with a british team of the century that comes anywhere near this australia one



Clive Churchill

Brian Bevan

Reg Gasnier

Mal Meninga

Ken Irvine

Wally Lewis

Andrew Johns

Arthur Beetson

Noel Kelly

Duncan Hall

Norm Provan

Ron Coote

Johnny Raper

Graeme Langlands

Dally Messenger

Bob Fulton

Frank Burge