Jump to content


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

Steve McNamara please read this.


  • Please log in to reply
108 replies to this topic

#81 Southstander13

Southstander13
  • Coach
  • 1,275 posts

Posted 02 April 2013 - 11:54 AM

Sinfield/Widdop for me.

Think Myler has been great for Wire this year too. Chase should not get picked, he is not playing well enough.

I think Sinfields kicking game is more consistent than Broughs, although on occasions Brough can destroy a team on his own!

George Burgess, if he carries on the full season like he's started, should be in with a shout of a bench spot.

#82 giwildgo

giwildgo
  • Coach
  • 4,048 posts

Posted 02 April 2013 - 05:47 PM

Jonny Lomax isn't even in the squad so obviously McNamara doesn't think much of him, in an international context.

Says it all about McNamara for me...Lomax would be a shoo-in for full back if Tomkins wasn't around and should be getting experience at international level to step into the breach as required.

#83 Saintslass

Saintslass
  • Coach
  • 4,503 posts

Posted 02 April 2013 - 05:57 PM

Chase was absolutely pi$$ poor yesterday bar 1 pass that created a try.
On current form he shouldn't even be picked for an underperforming Cas side let alone for England !

I agree. He was all attitude wasn't he? But attitude of the wrong kind: the 'I can't be bothered' kind. All he did was pass the ball on until, as you say, he threw a good one having drawn in one of our poorest edge defenders.

#84 Saintslass

Saintslass
  • Coach
  • 4,503 posts

Posted 02 April 2013 - 06:02 PM

Says it all about McNamara for me...Lomax would be a shoo-in for full back if Tomkins wasn't around and should be getting experience at international level to step into the breach as required.

McBanana is the complete opposite of Tony Smith as an international coach. Smith took risks - remember that glorious moment in Leeds when Tomkins and Eastmond were giving the runaround to Australia at Leeds (until Shenton went off injured and the pre-programmed 'I surrender' vibe hit the England team)? I thought as I watched that from a cold and wet seat in that awful soccer stadium that we had found the England halfback pairing for years to come. Alas. But McBanana is stubborn and conservative and won't risk a thing. But I do agree with you that Lomax should be in the train on squad, playing as fullback. Even if Tomkins is fit, it would do us good to mix and match it in those positions where we have options so that the Aussies don't get a handle on us (or at least not a solid handle anyway!).

I'd also go for a Sinfield/Widdop combo at halfback. Widdop is a runner, not an organiser, and although he clearly benefits from running with Cronk, I think there is enough about him in skill and consistency to cope with Sinfield, who we need as an organiser even though he has never really hit the heights at international level. Until clubs start bringing up their own halfbacks to give England options - and where Saints are concerned I aint holding my breath, alas - Sinfield is the best chance we have of a decent kicking game, organisation and a rugby brain. While he did look very good at hooker under Smith, we don't have the luxury of options at halfback whereas we do at hooker.

#85 South Wakefield Sharks

South Wakefield Sharks
  • Coach
  • 2,202 posts

Posted 02 April 2013 - 07:36 PM

McBanana is the complete opposite of Tony Smith as an international coach. Smith took risks - remember that glorious moment in Leeds when Tomkins and Eastmond were giving the runaround to Australia at Leeds (until Shenton went off injured and the pre-programmed 'I surrender' vibe hit the England team)? I thought as I watched that from a cold and wet seat in that awful soccer stadium that we had found the England halfback pairing for years to come. Alas. But McBanana is stubborn and conservative and won't risk a thing. But I do agree with you that Lomax should be in the train on squad, playing as fullback. Even if Tomkins is fit, it would do us good to mix and match it in those positions where we have options so that the Aussies don't get a handle on us (or at least not a solid handle anyway!).

I'd also go for a Sinfield/Widdop combo at halfback. Widdop is a runner, not an organiser, and although he clearly benefits from running with Cronk, I think there is enough about him in skill and consistency to cope with Sinfield, who we need as an organiser even though he has never really hit the heights at international level. Until clubs start bringing up their own halfbacks to give England options - and where Saints are concerned I aint holding my breath, alas - Sinfield is the best chance we have of a decent kicking game, organisation and a rugby brain. While he did look very good at hooker under Smith, we don't have the luxury of options at halfback whereas we do at hooker.


Have to agree with this. I'd go Sinfield & Widdop. Sinfield is the organiser and Widdop can play off him, as he does with Cooper Cronk. It might not be the greatest half back pairing in the world, but it's the best of what we've got and doesn't rely on players like Brough and Chase deciding on the day whether they fancy it or not.

And for those wanting Burgess to play at 13?? Heaven's sake. We need two quality starting props and another two on the bench, so when we make the substitutions we keep the intensity up.

#86 RSN

RSN
  • Coach
  • 4,114 posts

Posted 02 April 2013 - 07:49 PM

I don't get your point about Burgess. We have enough quality props for him to play 13. Burgess can play 80 minutes so why not have him play that seeing as he's our best forward. Interchanging Graham, Crabtree, G Burgess and Mossop/Hill/Luke Burgess will be good enough at prop.


#87 tonyXIII

tonyXIII
  • Coach
  • 4,985 posts

Posted 02 April 2013 - 07:49 PM

Have to agree with this. I'd go Sinfield & Widdop. Sinfield is the organiser and Widdop can play off him, as he does with Cooper Cronk. It might not be the greatest half back pairing in the world, but it's the best of what we've got and doesn't rely on players like Brough and Chase deciding on the day whether they fancy it or not.

And for those wanting Burgess to play at 13?? Heaven's sake. We need two quality starting props and another two on the bench, so when we make the substitutions we keep the intensity up.


I think this is the crux of the matter. McNamara must select the best team he can, regardless of past reputation; and that selection has to be, above all, reliable.

Rethymno Rugby League Appreciation Society
Founder (and, so far, only) member.


#88 Saintslass

Saintslass
  • Coach
  • 4,503 posts

Posted 02 April 2013 - 08:33 PM

I don't get your point about Burgess. We have enough quality props for him to play 13. Burgess can play 80 minutes so why not have him play that seeing as he's our best forward. Interchanging Graham, Crabtree, G Burgess and Mossop/Hill/Luke Burgess will be good enough at prop.

Personally I don't think we can ever have enough quality props at international level and I've yet to be convinced that Crabtree is international standard. He may be big, can offload and run, but he isn't aggressive and we need aggressive.

#89 RSN

RSN
  • Coach
  • 4,114 posts

Posted 02 April 2013 - 08:48 PM

See Crabtrees performances against Aus previously. He was quality and didn't lack any aggression, I remember him running over Cameron smith a great watch.

#90 The Big Gun

The Big Gun
  • Coach
  • 392 posts

Posted 02 April 2013 - 09:06 PM

Have to agree with this. I'd go Sinfield & Widdop. Sinfield is the organiser and Widdop can play off him, as he does with Cooper Cronk. It might not be the greatest half back pairing in the world, but it's the best of what we've got and doesn't rely on players like Brough and Chase deciding on the day whether they fancy it or not.

And for those wanting Burgess to play at 13?? Heaven's sake. We need two quality starting props and another two on the bench, so when we make the substitutions we keep the intensity up.

I suggested Sam Burgess at 13 because his brother is currently one of the form props in the NRL and if he were to keep it up would certainly qualify as "quality". Why not have Graham, and both Burgesses on the field at the same time? That would cause the Aussies massive problems in all likelihood.

#91 South Wakefield Sharks

South Wakefield Sharks
  • Coach
  • 2,202 posts

Posted 02 April 2013 - 10:03 PM

Neither Sam Burgess nor James Graham is likely to play 80 mins against the Aussies. When they take a break, we need their replacement to be as effective. If (and it's a big ask) George Burgess keeps his form all season, then he would be good for a bench spot. Finding two bench players who can keep us at the same level as Burgess & Graham isn't going to be easy.

Our ability to keep playing at the highest level for the whole 80 mins will be crucial, so our interchanges need to be of the highest quality.

#92 Ant

Ant
  • Coach
  • 3,162 posts

Posted 02 April 2013 - 10:32 PM

Four props v the Aussies

Graham, Hill, Burgess, Crabtree
All bring something different to the party, but all have big engines and will smash it into the Aussies all game

#93 Wellsy4HullFC

Wellsy4HullFC
  • Coach
  • 9,865 posts

Posted 03 April 2013 - 02:00 AM

So back row then? Who we thinking? Westwood starting, Hock on bench, whose the other? Farrell? Ellis (if he returns well after injury)?
Posted Image

#94 walter sobchak

walter sobchak
  • Coach
  • 1,864 posts

Posted 03 April 2013 - 03:39 AM

So back row then? Who we thinking? Westwood starting, Hock on bench, whose the other? Farrell? Ellis (if he returns well after injury)?

James graham
James Roby
Erol Crabtree
Liam Farrell
Ben Westwood
Sam burgess
Bench
Rob burrow
George burgess
Gareth hock
Gareth Ellis/Sean o' loughlin


#95 Ant

Ant
  • Coach
  • 3,162 posts

Posted 03 April 2013 - 07:24 AM

Can we not leave Hock at home?
The mans a liability and his obvious talents don't make up for them

We are awash with top quality second rows (not JJB And Ablet however)

#96 walter sobchak

walter sobchak
  • Coach
  • 1,864 posts

Posted 03 April 2013 - 02:35 PM

Can we not leave Hock at home?
The mans a liability and his obvious talents don't make up for them

We are awash with top quality second rows (not JJB And Ablet however)

I know what you mean but that's the gamble you sometimes have to take, he always seems to perform against the Aussies and that's pips it for me.

#97 South Wakefield Sharks

South Wakefield Sharks
  • Coach
  • 2,202 posts

Posted 03 April 2013 - 05:08 PM

I think we've probably seen the last of Hock for England. Guess we'll go with Westwood and Ellis with one of Farrell, Wilkin or JJB on the bench.

#98 RSN

RSN
  • Coach
  • 4,114 posts

Posted 03 April 2013 - 06:06 PM

If Wilkin is on the bench or JJB that will be awful. Play Hock for the first game against Aus, if he messes up then he doesnt play again.

Westwood and Ellis to start for me. As they won't miss any tackles, then again neither will Farrell based on form. I keep thinking that starting with Ellis and Westwood, Burgess x 2 Graham and Roby will keep the game tight. Then bring Hock, Burrow, Crabtree and G Burgess on to change the game for 10 minutes before half time. Could have all four of them standing on the sideline waiting to come on and a massive drive from Crabtree or Hock could get the crowd raised.

Potential people for the back row who should be considered for the back row who arnt regulars are; Kirmond, Hughes, Farrell, Bateman, Whitehead, Westerman.

#99 terrywebbisgod

terrywebbisgod
  • Coach
  • 8,333 posts

Posted 03 April 2013 - 06:48 PM

Westerman? another player who doesn't look interested most of the time.
Got 1500 bass drum lugging,bug eyed monkeys!

#100 RSN

RSN
  • Coach
  • 4,114 posts

Posted 03 April 2013 - 09:50 PM

I rate him personally I think he has a heck of a lot of ability for a back rower. He does look disinterested at times but then again who doesn't at Hull fc?




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users