Jump to content

England Squad Announced

Yakkers

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 103
  • Created
  • Last Reply
snapski

snapski

Posted
Posted
Just now, Chrispmartha said:

Is it just me that thinks George Williams is incredibly lucky to be anywhere near that squad? Ive not seen anything at both Wigan or England that tells me he's up to the job?

Obviously not picked on form or no Wigan players would be in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chrispmartha

Chrispmartha

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, snapski said:

Obviously not picked on form or no Wigan players would be in.

I don’t mind not picking on form some players are international quality despite form, take Hall doesn’t matter how well hes playing for Leeds i don’t the nk hes had a bad game for England, Williams has never shown anything in an England jersey IMO

Link to comment
Share on other sites
marklaspalmas

marklaspalmas

Posted
Posted

Jonny Lomax (St Helens)

Jermaine McGillvary (Huddersfield)

Jake Connor (Hull FC)

Mark Percival (St Helens)

Tommy Makinson (St Helens)

George Williams (Wigan)

Gareth Widdop (St George)

Chris Hill (Warrington)

James Roby (St Helens)

James Graham (St George)

John Bateman (Wigan)

Sam Burgess (South Sydney)

Sean O’Loughlin (Wigan)

 

Stefan Ratchford (Warrington)

Elliott Whitehead (Canberra)

George Burgess (South Sydney)

Thomas Burgess (South Sydney)

 

Ryan Hall (Leeds)

Luke Thompson (St Helens)

https://www.fevarchive.co.uk/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DavidM

DavidM

Posted
Posted

He’s been loyal there to what’s been picked before . I think there’s a few who are quite fortunate he’s stuck a fair bit by that policy but pleased for Connor Makinson and Thompson that they’re added 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lowdesert

Lowdesert

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, snapski said:

Obviously not picked on form or no Wigan players would be in.

Maybe a bit harsh, but I agree that GW hasn't shown too much this year imo and its not as though Wigan have been a losing team. I am amazed at O'Loughins place though.  I think its time for him now and Chris Hill, but I'd be happy to be proved wrong.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jim Prendle

Jim Prendle

Posted
Posted

Pleased for Makinson as he has been deserving of a call up for a long time now. As I said previously, I am unconvinced that Connor is ready for the step up, but I guess we will now see if he is indeed ready.

Another one I can never quite understand is Whitehead. For me he is no better than some of the other guys such as McMeeken and Milner, and the only reason he gets in the team is because he plays in the NRL, and they don't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
slowdive

slowdive

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Jim Prendle said:

Pleased for Makinson as he has been deserving of a call up for a long time now. As I said previously, I am unconvinced that Connor is ready for the step up, but I guess we will now see if he is indeed ready.

Another one I can never quite understand is Whitehead. For me he is no better than some of the other guys such as McMeeken and Milner, and the only reason he gets in the team is because he plays in the NRL, and they don't.

Watching Whitehead the other day, I thought he had really good game.  Defensively he was a rock and he popped up with a really good try by making a very clever run .

"At times to be silent is to lie. You will win because you have enough brute force. But you will not convince. For to convince you need to persuade. And in order to persuade you would need what you lack: Reason and Right."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dave T

Dave T

Posted
Posted

Seems a decent squad, some fair points about balance, but then this is a one off game where he will name 17 players, so think Mark's team above looks ok to me.

From my own club's point of view, I think Clark is unlucky, but maybe not enough versatility. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wollo Wollo Wayoo

Wollo Wollo Wayoo

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Jim Prendle said:

Another one I can never quite understand is Whitehead. For me he is no better than some of the other guys such as McMeeken and Milner, and the only reason he gets in the team is because he plays in the NRL, and they don't.

Rubbish.  EW is one of very few in that squad who can hold his own at international  level.  Cracking player before he went to Oz. Head and shoulders above McMeeken.

 

This world was never meant for one as beautiful as me.
 
 
Wakefield Trinity RLFC
2012 - 2014 "The wasted years"

2013, 2014 & 2015 Official Magic Weekend "Whipping Boys"

2017 - The year the dream disappeared under Grix's left foot.

2018 - The FinniChezz Bromance 

2019 - The Return of the Prodigal Son

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Markos

Markos

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, marklaspalmas said:

Odd squad again. Three wingers and one hooker in the 19.

That's the first thing that jumped out to me. I feel Bennett picks his squad around versatility as opposed to the best in each position, though that's something England/Great Britain have been guilty of going back a long time

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AB Knight

AB Knight

Posted
Posted

I thought Josh Charnley had done more than enough to earn a place. Danny Richardson over George Williams any day of the week. Would've been nice to see Adam Milner get a place though his discipline let's him down. McMeekan on his day is a very good player but has struggled with consistency at times this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
marklaspalmas

marklaspalmas

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Markos said:

That's the first thing that jumped out to me. I feel Bennett picks his squad around versatility as opposed to the best in each position, though that's something England/Great Britain have been guilty of going back a long time

I get that but none of the 3 wingers can play anywhere else but wing. So that's one of the 2 out of the 17 already.

I see why players like Ratchford get the call. Even Connor and lomax offer options of covering more tahn one slot.

But surely a 2nd hooker should be there?

https://www.fevarchive.co.uk/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RP London

RP London

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Markos said:

That's the first thing that jumped out to me. I feel Bennett picks his squad around versatility as opposed to the best in each position, though that's something England/Great Britain have been guilty of going back a long time

i think it tells us he knows his best hooker is Roby and can do 80. Maybe he is unsure of McGilvary's fitness hence 3 wingers, but unless he is planning on playing Bateman out of position again he is set on his centres too.. 

Halfbacks & Fullback I guess he wants to look at combinations.. hence its 3 from 4 really

pack he may be unsure hence taking a lot of them.. 

There are a lot of unfortunates but maybe the fact he already knows his backs does point to the fact we are very light on quality backs at the moment..

on a personal note:

I would question if its the strongest set of backs

Charnley is unfortunate especially if McGilvary is not fully fit

Gildart and Conner I recon would have been a close call.. 

Richardson is very unfortunate when you look at the fact Williams has not looked up to standard in either an england shirt in the past or a wigan shirt this year and Richardson has looked very very good IMHO

Clarke maybe can count himself unlucky too but you can only take 19

There are loads of forwards who could have gone but are they unlucky? not sure, I think this is the best set of forwards you could put out..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MZH

MZH

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, Lowdesert said:

It good that discussions are around the 'unfortunates'. For the WC we more or less named the team.

Taylor, Clark, McGeeken, Milner all form players unlucky to miss out.  

Taylor has been nursing his shoulder for a month or two now. Missed a couple of games because of it and being playing jabbed up. Reckon that is as much a reason for his absense as anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dave T

Dave T

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, marklaspalmas said:

I get that but none of the 3 wingers can play anywhere else but wing. So that's one of the 2 out of the 17 already.

I see why players like Ratchford get the call. Even Connor and lomax offer options of covering more tahn one slot.

But surely a 2nd hooker should be there?

Yeah, I wonder whether he feels that the wing positions are ones where we just cannot have a utility player covering the spot, maybe he feels it would expose us too much. To an extent I can agree with that.

I think Williams will be his reserve 9, or play a game where Ratchford or Lomax will slot in there. I'm not a fan of Roby playing 80 and killing himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.