didn't read the thread just saw the author so instinct tells me

Going to show my bias here...you think Hill wouldn't make the first 17? For me it was between him and Graham for player of the series.

Who cares. A badly depleted England team managed by Mcbannana whohasnt got a clue, managed to beat France by about 200 points recently.



Super league has been so good for the french national team hasnt it



Regards



King james

At the start of this series when I thought about a potential 17 if George Burgess/Walmsley been fit I'd have possibly considering a team without Hill in it. I couldn't have been more wrong!



Literally the first name I'd put on the sheet now. He has been excellent and is constantly racking up the metres. Aside from one poor offload today he's been immense.



What a group of props we have by the way! Hill, Graham, George Burgess, Tom Burgess, Cooper and Walmsley. That's a scary set!!

Silliest comment ever.



You obviously didn't watch the Sydney Roosters in 2015. In the latter half of the season JWH was the outstanding prop in the NRL -- better than either James Graham, Jesse Bromwich or George Burgess.

A lot of players potentially classed as missing for England as well!



I've included McGillvery and Smith because they missed 2 of the 3 Test matches



Tomkins

McGillvery

Reed

Watkins

Hall

Widdop

Smith

Graham

Roby

G Burgess

S Burgess

Whitehead

O'Loughlin



Houghton

Hill

T Burgess

Walmsley

Regarding Graham. It may just be me, but I don't think he's been as good in this series as in previous tournaments. He's looked slower, he passes less at the line, and he runs an odd diagonal angle that reduces his go forward after contact, and takes up the space of the runners outside him.

Based on the evidence so far I don't think the NRL has made him any better than he was.

Jason Taumololo and JWH in his recent form have been inspirational forwards like the two missing Burgess brothers, George and Samuel.



But the actual play making skill level missing from the Kiwis this series, in the form of Kieran Foran and Shaun Johnson is the major factor that has no equivalent among the missing Englishmen.

Jeans is probably right,New Zealand would have won with a full compliment out,but lets be honest England could have won this series 3.0 if things had gone a little bit different in the second test.



Cant help thinking i wish this series was against the aussies cos we'd probably have won 3.0

not sure I agree with that, Sam is a world class player who would start over Hardaker every time for me. Thought he was average at best during this test series Zak

re: Hill - yeah.



Our first four prop are George Burgess, Sam Burgess, James Graham and Alex Walmsley, but if Sam were to play 13 then Hill would be next in for me.

Johnson has been a huge miss but Forsn seems like a total myth to me! I've never seen him produce anything against us and I was far more impressed with Nikorima.



Another player I'm starting to think is an NRL myth is Martin Taupau. He's been about as difficult to handle as Ricky Bibey! Where has his huge rep come from?