Re: Who justified their selection? : Tue Nov 15, 2016 10:22 pm  

Brenio wrote:

Not being too sensitive at all. there were 17 players with England shirts on who were not good enough and the only one you could single out and name call was Brown. Grow up

Its been 37 years since Widnes beat Wakefield at Wembley, time to move on and let it go.

37 years!!! is it that long - went as a 'trinity' fan with my then girlfriend who is now my wife.
At that time and her being new to watching RL she could never understand why I disliked Leeds so much. Now I have matured and become a more balanced individual I can appreciate and applaud the qualities of the recent (great) Rhinos team. However my Mrs just hates em!
Strange how things turn out.

Re: Who justified their selection? : Wed Nov 16, 2016 8:56 am  

Lomax - some nice touches, bad defence for the Kiwi try. Got some competition for his World Cup place.

McGillvary/Hall - happy with both, would expect one of the Wigan wingers to join them in the squad next year.

Watkins - his 'days' are so few and far between, extremely frustrating when we've seen what he's capable of. Looks more of a flat-track bully I'm afraid.

Percival - two poor handling errors on the rare occasion he got some good ball against the Aussies. Centre not a great position for us though, hopefully Shenton can come back to his best.

Sarginson - makes the wrong decision time and again, with and without the ball. Hall could have had 4 tries against NZ if Sarginson had any idea about centre play. Be interesting to see how he goes next year - providing he gets an opportunity in the NRL I'd expect him to improve ten-fold.

Brown - yesterday's man, kicking game was terrible.

Gale - poor, but could still have a role to play given the lack of talent in this position. Thought Hodgson ran him out of the game on numerous occasions.

Widdop - as above, some decent aspects to his game without really standing out.

Williams - I'd like to see a bit more faith shown in him from now on, very talented player who should be our 6 for the next decade.

Graham/Hill - both did well, we know what to expect from these two.

George/Tom - a notch below the other two but have a big role to play in the future. Taylor & Cooper belongs in this category aswell and there are a number of alternatives not in the squad, prop is a very strong position for us.

Hodgson - was very disappointed personally, he's been far better than that in the NRL. Needed to be more direct - he 'crabbed' all around the ruck constantly, running across the halfback and ruining plays. Gale was visibly frustrated with him on numerous occasions.

Clark - criminally under-used and inexplicably dropped - he can cause havoc around the ruck and with the forward-oriented game Bennett wanted us to play it makes no sense not to have him in the team. Will have a big part to play moving forward.

Whitehead - another I expected more from. Currie and Ferres both far better for me and would expect them both to be involved in future.

Bateman - did pretty well and he's another with his best years ahead of him.

Farrell - telling that he wasn't picked for the two most important games and I agree with the call - size matters at the highest level and he'll never have it, talented though he is.

Sam Burgess - for someone of such obvious ability and character he doesn't half make some stupid errors and decisions. We need far better from our captain in the future and I'm sure he knows it.

Wayne Bennett - There hasn't noticeable improvement in the team from last year under McNamara IMO, but that's to be expected given the chopping and changing he's made to the halfbacks. Hopefully he's a decent idea of his best partnership now. I'm glad he's taken steps to improve his access to the squad for next year with the Samoa Test and January camp. We need to prioritise the national team over the club game if we are to make any kind of improvement.

Re: Who justified their selection? : Wed Nov 16, 2016 9:18 am  

^^^^^^^^^

Can't really argue with most of that. As ever, we still have major question marks in the halves and centres.

Re: Who justified their selection? : Wed Nov 16, 2016 12:30 pm  

I'd like to see Gale in his strongest position before writing him off. In game one I don't think he got a lot of service and I think a lot of pressure was put on him from the off based on his storming season. A bit unfair for someone had only played 60 mins of international footy previously (v France).

The biggest areas for concern were hooker (lack of distribution), forwards (no one really showed any aggression or punched holes in defences for quick PTBs), halves (sticking with average players or putting round pegs in square holes (i.e. Gale on his weakest side), centres (lack of depth or size to punch holes out wide).

I would have included full-back as I don't think Lomax really showed great attacking intent that a full-back should in the first few games but I actually think he was one of the standout players in the Australia game. Would like to see Shaul given a run next time.

I don't think our tactics suited a lot of players (we looked flat and boring) with some players underused who shouldn't have been (Clark).

Like many, I'm struggling to name stand out performers. Lots of average performances but no consistency. Just all round bland. George Williams is probably the pick out and I would build a team around him for definite

I think we missed people like Roby who does a lot of defensive work and is very good in making attacking decisions too.

Future spine: Shaul, Gale, Williams, Roby

Re: Who justified their selection? : Wed Nov 16, 2016 12:47 pm  

Fully wrote:

Future spine: Shaul, Gale, Lomax, Roby

Roby is done at international level..Still a good club man but over 30 now and we have younger guys like Hodgson and Clark who are ahead of him -

Shaul - the jury is still out, he is young and improving and may well figure by next year.

Gale - did nothing wrong without being too convincing. If he can have another big year with Cas and lead them to silverware then perhaps he will get another go but i don't think Bennett is convinced by him after leaving him out in the last match.

Lomax - did nothing wrong really (apart from a one on one miss against the kiwis), also created a good try for McGillvary. He is the safe option but seems more like he is keeping the seat warm until someone better comes along (Shaul) or Hardaker or Tomkins find form than a long tem answer to me.

Re: Who justified their selection? : Wed Nov 16, 2016 1:39 pm  

Let's not crucify Percival for failing to hang onto a couple of hard-to-take balls in his first Test. He and Shenton look out best bet in the centres next season. Although Shenton is 30+, isn't he? At least, we have a few second rowers-cum-centres who can fill in there (Bateman, Currie, etc).

I'm also in agree with giving Gale another shot. In the first game he hardly got as sniff with Widdop at first receiver, he did a bit better in the second game with the ball in his hands a bit more.

Sarginson a possible left-field option at full-back (but never centre!).

Re: Who justified their selection? : Wed Nov 16, 2016 5:20 pm  

Biff Tannen wrote:

Roby is done at international level..Still a good club man but over 30 now and we have younger guys like Hodgson and Clark who are ahead of him -

Shaul - the jury is still out, he is young and improving and may well figure by next year.

Gale - did nothing wrong without being too convincing. If he can have another big year with Cas and lead them to silverware then perhaps he will get another go but i don't think Bennett is convinced by him after leaving him out in the last match.

Lomax - did nothing wrong really (apart from a one on one miss against the kiwis), also created a good try for McGillvary. He is the safe option but seems more like he is keeping the seat warm until someone better comes along (Shaul) or Hardaker or Tomkins find form than a long tem answer to me.

Apologies, I meant Williams rather than Lomax. I must have Lomax on the brain.

As said, Williams should be our starting scrum half and Gale should play on the left as the stand-off (as he does at Cas). Would give us much more balance and Williams excelled on both left side and right side.

Re: Who justified their selection? : Wed Nov 16, 2016 5:23 pm  

moto748 wrote:

Let's not crucify Percival for failing to hang onto a couple of hard-to-take balls in his first Test. He and Shenton look out best bet in the centres next season. Although Shenton is 30+, isn't he? At least, we have a few second rowers-cum-centres who can fill in there (Bateman, Currie, etc).

I'm also in agree with giving Gale another shot. In the first game he hardly got as sniff with Widdop at first receiver, he did a bit better in the second game with the ball in his hands a bit more.

Sarginson a possible left-field option at full-back (but never centre!).

Shenton was 30 this year. Still got a few years left in him yet.

If we're going for ones to watch, Minikin at Cas is another name to throw out there. Jake Connor, Josh Griffin, Leroy Cudjoe, Joe Wardle (if he can be persuaded to switch from Scotland),

Re: Who justified their selection? : Wed Nov 16, 2016 5:27 pm  

I think if Watkins gets grief for not taking JM's pass against NZ, then Percival can't escape a tiny bit of criticism.
I also think Bennett would probably argue we didn't look flat. I think Bennett just wanted us to complete our sets and get in good position to execute some moves. If we'd chucked the ball around we'd have made loads of errors and probably been carved up. Australia compete sets, dominate field position/opposition forwards and then they get license to show off their skills.
The basic aim for England was to get into scoring positions (which we did) and execute (which we didn't). It's quite simple. More composure against NZ for example and we'd all be looking forward to the final.
Bennett has quite rightly but also quite subtly heaped the pressure on his players. Even if SL's standard is low, they need to rise above it and show their quality week in, week out and show they deserve to be in the team. He's challenged them, let's hope they respond.

Re: Who justified their selection? : Wed Nov 16, 2016 5:33 pm  

I still maintain that although not everyone's choice, and not the biggest, strongest,most skilful or fastest centre we have, if we play McGillvary then i feel we have to pick Cudjoe too, they have both come up through the ranks together and through the first team together and work very well, although the fact that they both play for Huddersfield would probably automatically rule this out.
I just feel if you have a good partnership at club level then use it at international level, let's be honest we aren't exactly blessed with exceptional backs are we?