Well, I don't have much to say but New Zealand are way overpriced again this time IMO at $3.15 on centrebet / $3.00 on the TAB. Get on the Kiwi's!

They should get around 8.5pts start so that might be a good cover bet for $1.90 odds aswell.

Cricket or Rugby

If its rugby, then I never bet on these test matches. If Australia tried hard then they would win by 50 points every time. They are that much better (despite some blatant selection problems). These days Club Games are the only time the players give 100%.

$1.37 is great value if the Kangaroos actually turn up, but i doubt it. the only think working in their favour is the 6 broncos

The team should be picked on form, not reputation. If i had my turn, the team would look something like this:

1 Matt Bowen
2 Timana Tahu
3 Matt Cooper
4 Justin Hodges
5 Matt King
6 Darren Lockyer
7 Jonathon Thurston
8 Luke Bailey
9 Cameron Smith
10 Willie Mason
11 Nathan Hindmarsh
12 Ryan Hoffman
13 Greg Bird

14 Petero Civoniceva
15 Mark O'Meley
16 Mark Minichiello
17 Billy Slater

plenty of risks, but why not give them a go if you don't care anyway


As for the cricket, its hard to see Australia being beaten from the way they are going so far (yes a very late call i know)

oops! Don't know why I put cricket hehe.

I know they don't give it their all, that's why I always back the kiwi's! This weeks side is full of all the old over rated players that have passed their peak.

Your team looks better but I definately wouldn't have Timana Tahu in there. I think I'd move Billy Slater there and bring Steve Price into the lineup, he's still one of the best; if not the best prop going around.

NZ have a great side, I really wouldn't be suprised if they win by 13+. Or maybe I'm being a little too ambitious

Yeah to be honest I would also have Billy Slater over Tahu, but i thought Sportz might claimed I was biased Would love to find a place for Brett White or Antonio Kaufusi or Dallas Johnson as well

Diggo,

can you be more specific and name these"old overrated players?"

As for OZ not trying hard enough,that's total ****.

Love or hate Ricky Stuart,the bloke hates losing.

As far as "form"goes,hoe many times has it been evidenced that players "out of form"at club level seem to grow an extra leg when playing for their country?

The selectors realise this fact,otherwise how would 6 Broncos get in?

As for K retaining the fullback position,the bloke has done nothing wrong and remained loyal to OZ when he would have been a shoe in to play for NZ.

I'm a big fan of Matty Bowen,but it,s getting a bit tedious hearing all the whinging about him not getting the nod because he is the form fullback.

IMO Billy Slater is in better form than Matty,yet there is no "push" for him.

Mate if you think these players give 100% in test matches and origin then you are very wrong. The NRL premiership is the only thing they really give their all.

Karmichael may have not done anything wrong, its just that Slater and Bowen and probably even Stewart and Mackinnon are playing far better

"Old overrated players": Brent Tate, Jamie Lyon, Andrew Ryan, Steve Simpson etc,

You have got to be kidding,either that or you know very little about Rugby League.

Every club player aspires to play SOO and Test matches.

SOO is played at full intensity for the full 80 minutes,and ANY player who doesn't give 100% is soon flicked.

The underlying hate between the 2 States virtually assures that,or don't you watch the same games I do?

Take your blinkers off and watch the forwards on Friday night trying to smash each other from the word go,then tell me they are not trying or giving 100%.

As for the statement"If Australia tried harder they would win by 50 points every time" that's so silly it's laughable.

As for Matty he had his chance and couldn't cement the spot with some indifferent performances.

K has done nothing wrong and is in good form in a losing side(Broncos).

Bowen,Slater and co. are a bit stiff that there is an abundance of good in form fullbacks around at the moment.

Tate is out of form,IMO because the Broncos are playing poorly and he is not getting a chance.

He can be a game breaker when on song,and in this side he will get his chance to prove that.

Interesting to note that Big Mal came out in his defence when his selection was queried.

IMO the only certain selections would have been Lockyer,Thurston and Petero.

You can argue a case for just about every other position.

Kiwis have definitely narrowed the gap,but still think we will beat them by 10+

Look for a big game by Lockie running inside Thurston,and K chiming into the backline.

Having said all that,if their forwards win the early battle we'll be in for a torrid night.

representative football has turned into a joke, don't be so naive.

Look at the teams (despite some obvious selection problems). I might not think that K or tate or lyon should be there, but even those guys would absolutely dominate their counterparts Inu, Soiola and Vatuvei. Lockyer and Thurston against (out of sorts) Marshall and Roberts, please!!! SBW and Asotasi are the only players from the NZ side that would maker the aussie side. Everything about the two sides is well in aus' favour, they would kill them if they were bothered - don't talk up this non-existent hype that these blokes would feel

IMO the certainties for the kangaroos are Locky, Thurston, Mason & Hindmarsh.

BTW a mate gave me 4-1 about Hoffman being in the team this week, and I see he has been called up as an 18th man, i wonder if he'll give me my $20 back?

Chuck And Diggo,

What great knowledge you have between you about rugby league.

Probablly fit it on a postage stamp.

So much for your old"overrated"players.

\So much for your knocking the selection of K.

So much for your canning Tate.

As I stated,OZ by 10+.

Big value bet kiwis eh?

Hah hah.

So I'm naive?

Rep footy is a joke?

No 100% effort?

OZ don't put in?

Get a grip.

Did you actually watch the game?

Comments please.

Don't really expect to hear from you.

Unless you have some more "pearls of wisdom"that I can use.