A team full of 30+ year old Aussies and Kiwis (with the odd exception) beat England. Is this further proof that we need less overseas players playing in SL?

average age of the exiles was 29...with 200 caps between them...proof,if we needed it, that the exiles we're deservedly favourites for the game

Behave

So you think because the Exiles v England match has never been played before that means the supporters are in some way scared to generate any atmosphere?

Wilkin was one of the best players on the pitch

Regularly playing against the Aussies and Kiwis doesn't appear to have made England/GB better of late. Given that, why does anyone seem to think that playing a side comprised of mainly over the hill pension fillers be any better?



What is needed is cutting edge coaching & training techniques and infrastructure to develop players to the highest level.



It's a common misconception that SOO is the reason for Aussie dominance, but it began in 1980 which is just two years before the Invincibles destroyed GB.



That 1082 Kangaroo squad came from fitness and coaching systems put in place following the 1970 Lions tour and that have been built on ever since.



The answer is behind the scenes, not in a gimmick game.

Its also about the quality of athletes available. The differences are less marked in the forwards, but the best we have are a bunch of either lightweight or slow (or in some cases both) outside backs.



The game showed up England's problems entirely. The Exiles played a structured game with simply executed plays. There weren't any flashes of genius on their part, but England at times looked as they do against Australia, completely at sea, particularly when the ball is shifted wide.



I see real value in our players being exposed to that sort of attack, because if we can't defend against the Exiles, we've no chance at all when we face NZ/Australia.



Even though the Exiles may have had a bit more time together, the other issue is that all their team knew what their role was. Bluey wouldn't have had to sit down with them to discuss the most basic defensive patterns/attacking moves - they've all been doing that for their whole career. Compare to England, who when we lose a playmaker/move one player look as though the whole gameplan falls to bits.

In a futile attempt to make our game 'bigger' we have made it weaker and turned it in to a joke.



We had GB who at least competed and turned that in to England, Wales, Scotland, Ireland, meaning certain players swapped countries like football stickers.



We then thought here's a good idea, France are crap let's play a team of imports who come over here for a last pay day, players who used to play internationally for Australia and the odd player who still gets a game for New Zealand, Tonga and PNG.



We then get beat, a whole nation versus a dads army of mercenaries who should give us a game but not enough to win, beat folks.



Folks back home in Oz and NZ watch that game and rub their hands thinking well if they can do it, we'll have no problem.



When this was first announced i was angry, i thought it would cost my team 2 points, it did.

I came around, i thought well at least it's good for our game, we then get beat and our own fans boo our player.



It's embarrassing and for me the death of rugby league internationally.

Bit dramatic? I thought the concept worked well. It was a far tougher and more relevant challenge than beating up France by 60. The Exiles were very entertaining and their commitment certainly put to bed any thoughts of them not trying. I really enjoyed the game and with a crowd of 13,000 on, it looks a success to me. Make it a 3 game series next year, drop Wakefield and Quins from SL and only promote Widnes. Play the games on Challenge Cup weekends and give teams with more than 3 playing International Origin a bye. International Origin will never reach the heights of the NRL's showpiece competition but it could IMO grow to three 20,000 crowds and become a firm fixture in the calendar.



You are just in a mard because your precious team lost. Warrington fans have been banging on about how strong and nigh on unbeatable your squad is, but you proved that wrong by relying on the Origin players backing up.

Check my posts before we got beat, yes i have been a bit of a mard booty, i've been moaning way before we lost.

What it ought to do is concentrate England on why exactly they struggle to beat an ordinary side of overseas players.



As for GB vs England, name apart there is absolutely no difference. Name one genuine 'Welsh' player (let alone Irish or Scottish) who would make a GB side. Danny Brough is as Scottish as I am. Which isn't very much.

Isn't it better to make mistakes in this game rather than in the 4 nations?



For me, it can only benefit England. Don't know what your English are so worried about.