Jump to content


Rugby League World - Grand Finals Issue

RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD - THE GRAND FINALS ISSUE - OUT 17 OCT OR DOWNLOAD IT NOW!
Try our Fantastic 4-Issue Bundle Offer:
For just £14, a saving of 10% on the regular cover price, you’ll get:

The Grand Finals Issue (out 17 Oct) – Grand Final drama from both hemispheres plus Four Nations preview
The Four Nations Issue (out 21 Nov) – Fantastic coverage of the Four Nations tournament down under
The Golden Boot Issue (out 19 Dec) – A look back at the 2014 season plus the big reveal of the winner of the Golden Boot
The 2015 Season Preview Issue (out 23 Jan) – How will your team perform in 2015? We preview every club.


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

England's 4nations fullback

No longer tomkins

  • Please log in to reply
39 replies to this topic

#21 Father Ted

Father Ted
  • Coach
  • 1,625 posts

Posted 25 August 2014 - 07:00 PM

I don't know whether Hardaker will be selected for the squad, in the same way Hock won't be considered.
Agree that Hardaker is having an excellent season and I haven't seen Tomkins since last year's WC so I can't comment.
Both should be in the squad IMO but who McNamara will chose at 1 is another matter altogether.
I do think he'll go with Tomkins at full back.
That doesn't bother me half as much as Sinfield in the squad. Mcnamara may well include him and make him captain.
Until McNamara goes does it make any difference who plays where?

#22 Mushy

Mushy
  • Coach
  • 299 posts

Posted 26 August 2014 - 06:41 AM

I think Sam looks the best ball-playing fullback in the NRL but also looks one of the worst defensively - more Mathers than Slater at the moment. Sam has had negligible off season training for years and a few niggles so I suspect he will be much better when he is conditioned to NRL standards next year. A summer of proper speed training and power training in Auckland will do him the world of good - he is a natural sprinter but hasn't worked on it for a while I reckon which has deadened his devastating running game.

I would still have him as England's #1 with Zak in the squad too. In due course Sam could easily shift into the halves like Lockyer did but he shouldn't do it internationally when he's not playing there at club level in my opinion.

Edited by Mushy, 26 August 2014 - 06:43 AM.


#23 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 15,101 posts

Posted 26 August 2014 - 07:46 AM

Im a big fan of Tomkins, but he hasnt been a world beater for a year or two. Not sure if this is injury related, but his World Cupp was pretty low key considering he was our star player, and he was certainly less effective at Wigan.

All that said, he is extremely talented, and plenty of NRL players have struggled in SL in year 1 and gone on to have very good careers here Matt King anyone?

#24 zorquif

zorquif
  • Coach
  • 1,575 posts

Posted 26 August 2014 - 07:59 AM

I am sure Tomkins had his reasons and money was a big one of those reasons in choosing the Warriors but I think it was a mistake.

 

If he could have gone to a big Sydney based Club he may have been better Coached and blended into a more consistent team than what the Warriors are.

 

By all accounts the Warriors were torn a new one today by the Roosters,  they would have to be the most inconsistent underachievers in the NRL since they were admitted into the competition with the cattle they have and the support of a nation behind them.

 

Tomkins is a reasonable attacking player but not Test quality in defense, in reading the attack, tackling technique or taking the high ball consistently, IMO.

 

Maybe he didn't have the choice but wanted a do in the NRL. And I think I'd rather be an inconsistent underacheiver than one that underacheives consistently...

 

Tomkins is according to NRL stats

Not in the top 20 Try scorers

15th  in Try assists

Not in the top 20 line breaks.

9th in line break assists

 

Out of interest, how does that line up against other full backs?



#25 EastLondonMike

EastLondonMike
  • Coach
  • 4,223 posts

Posted 26 August 2014 - 08:05 AM

Also a big fan of Sam Tomkins, but don't buy into this about him not being good enough/not doing well in the NRL.. He's had a few games where he hasn't been great, but none where he's really struggled. And in every game i've seen where he's had a few 'moments' the rest of the Warriors have generally all had just as many themselves.. It takes time to bed into a new competition, especially one like the NRL. As has been mentioned by other posters, Pat Richards was awful in his first season at Wigan, as was Matt King.. Joel Monaghan took time to settle also.. the same can be said of many other players that have come over to SL that have struggled initially and then excelled. Tomkins isn't struggling though, he might not be doing the flashy stuff he did in his time over here, but then anybody with any knowledge on the game knew he wouldn't be able to do that in the NRL.

His lack of blistering pace i'd put down to not having had a pukka pre-season for a couple of years, which will probably continue as he'll be playing 4 nations at the end of the year (bar injury).

I like Hardaker as a full back also, he's strong and quick, but personally think he'll be much less effective against an Aussie or Kiwi defence than Tomkins will be, due to Tomkins better passing ability with the ball. That being said i'd be happy to see Tomkins and Widdop in the halves, with Hardaker at full back.


Newham Dockers - Champions 2013. Rugby League For East London. 100% Cockney Rugby League!

Twitter: @NewhamDockersRL - Get following!

www.newhamdockers.co.uk


#26 Viking Warrior

Viking Warrior
  • Coach
  • 5,184 posts

Posted 26 August 2014 - 09:49 AM

zak hardaker at present is the best english full back bar none


"Why is Napoleon crying ?" said one sailor to the other, "poor ###### thinks he's being exiled to st helens" came the reply.



https://scontent-a-l...276002364_n.jpg

#27 RSN

RSN
  • Coach
  • 4,200 posts

Posted 26 August 2014 - 11:27 AM

I think people need to realise that Tomkins game has completely changed since 2011.

 

He has lost half a yard of pace due to an injury which I am not sure he will get back. He is very quick but he is no longer Slater in his prime quick. He has enough pace to break the line but no longer has the pace to run the length of the field. He has had to adapt his game because of this and it has made him a better player because of it.

 

I think Tomkins' style of play is very beneficial to the Warriors. They have big strike weapons out wide which he brings into the game. He has the best ball handling game out of any full back which is rarely argued. He creates space and puts people through gaps which is hugely beneficial. He also is a very good decision maker in 3 on 3 or 3 on 2 situations.

 

He is no longer a try scoring machine but you don't have to be. People say he had a poor world cup because he didn't score but he was 4th on try assists behind Foran and 2 Aussies (can't remember who) which is impressive as England didn't really rack up any massive victories against any sides whilst the Aussies and Kiwis were racking up 60 points against some sides.

 

His form in the Warriors side has been solid. Poor first 5 or 6 games but since then he has rarely had a bad game. Around May time the southern hemisphere journalists were reporting he was living up to his pedigree and justifying the amount spent on him. The main problem with the Warriors side in their inconsistent forwards. They are either red hot or very cold. Against the Roosters Tomkins was extremely exposed. He's no Brett Stewart or Anthony Minnechello in defence but I really don't think you can argue he is any worse than Anthony Milford or Ben Barba who are of a similar build. Under the high ball he has much improved especially with the added pressure in the NRL. Most full backs will drop the ball with 3 players contesting it against you, the odds are against you for a start as the opposition has a running start. The Aussie national team are the masters of shielding Slater - it makes the full backs job so much easier. The Warriors didn't do it and hence he was dropping the ball.

 

Hardaker is a very good back up but I think Englands team is better with Tomkins. He provides structure and space for his three quarters and we should have plenty of pace come the end of the year which is our biggest asset. One thing you can't question about Tomkins is his attitude and maturity in the last couple of years which can't be said for Hardaker, although we gave Tomkins a chance to grow up we should do the same for Zak.



#28 Tonka

Tonka
  • Coach
  • 699 posts

Posted 26 August 2014 - 11:42 AM

I like the idea of Hardaker at 1 and Tomkins at 6 but where are the games to try out this combination? In their wisdom, the planners have not put in a warm-up game and England cannot mess about experimenting with Samoa as last year's friendly with Italy showed.

 

Hardaker looks very assured at full-back and has that direct kick return game. Tomkins is playing more of a half-back role now anyway. I would go Hardaker 1, Tomkins 6, Widdop 7, O'Loughlin 12 and Sinfield 13. Let's face it, Sinfield will be played if he is selected for the tour by McNamara

 

I'd go Hardaker at 1 and Widdop at 6.  Don't like playing people out of position just to accomodate, so Sam would miss out for mine at present.  Would have him on the bench to cover for those two or possibly to come on for impact.



#29 boxhead

boxhead
  • Coach
  • 3,091 posts

Posted 26 August 2014 - 12:07 PM

I think people need to realise that Tomkins game has completely changed since 2011.

 

He has lost half a yard of pace due to an injury which I am not sure he will get back. He is very quick but he is no longer Slater in his prime quick. He has enough pace to break the line but no longer has the pace to run the length of the field. He has had to adapt his game because of this and it has made him a better player because of it.

 

I think Tomkins' style of play is very beneficial to the Warriors. They have big strike weapons out wide which he brings into the game. He has the best ball handling game out of any full back which is rarely argued. He creates space and puts people through gaps which is hugely beneficial. He also is a very good decision maker in 3 on 3 or 3 on 2 situations.

 

He is no longer a try scoring machine but you don't have to be. People say he had a poor world cup because he didn't score but he was 4th on try assists behind Foran and 2 Aussies (can't remember who) which is impressive as England didn't really rack up any massive victories against any sides whilst the Aussies and Kiwis were racking up 60 points against some sides.

 

His form in the Warriors side has been solid. Poor first 5 or 6 games but since then he has rarely had a bad game. Around May time the southern hemisphere journalists were reporting he was living up to his pedigree and justifying the amount spent on him. The main problem with the Warriors side in their inconsistent forwards. They are either red hot or very cold. Against the Roosters Tomkins was extremely exposed. He's no Brett Stewart or Anthony Minnechello in defence but I really don't think you can argue he is any worse than Anthony Milford or Ben Barba who are of a similar build. Under the high ball he has much improved especially with the added pressure in the NRL. Most full backs will drop the ball with 3 players contesting it against you, the odds are against you for a start as the opposition has a running start. The Aussie national team are the masters of shielding Slater - it makes the full backs job so much easier. The Warriors didn't do it and hence he was dropping the ball.

 

Hardaker is a very good back up but I think Englands team is better with Tomkins. He provides structure and space for his three quarters and we should have plenty of pace come the end of the year which is our biggest asset. One thing you can't question about Tomkins is his attitude and maturity in the last couple of years which can't be said for Hardaker, although we gave Tomkins a chance to grow up we should do the same for Zak.

 

 

I believe Jarryd Hayne has better ball handling and general skills.



#30 scotchy

scotchy
  • Coach
  • 654 posts

Posted 26 August 2014 - 12:25 PM

Id like to see us play with Tomkins at 1, Sinfield 6, Widdop at 7, and Hardaker at 5. 

 

There is no reason that Hardaker can't come in and take some of the kick returns or bombs defensively, no reason we can't push Tomkins a bit further forward. I think an outside line of Ablett, Watkins, Hardaker, with Tomkins chiming in gives us fantastic options. I think its a really tough one to defend against. It basically gives us two full backs in a line which contains a 2nd rower who can play centre and a centre who can play wing. It would give us so many options it would have to put the defence in two minds and three great runners of the ball, 2 outstanding offloaders, 2 big strong physical players, 2 speedsters. I think that is a really dangerous attacking line. 



#31 Teessidewire

Teessidewire
  • Coach
  • 166 posts

Posted 26 August 2014 - 12:35 PM

Id like to see us play with Tomkins at 1, Sinfield 6, Widdop at 7, and Hardaker at 5. 

 

There is no reason that Hardaker can't come in and take some of the kick returns or bombs defensively, no reason we can't push Tomkins a bit further forward. I think an outside line of Ablett, Watkins, Hardaker, with Tomkins chiming in gives us fantastic options. I think its a really tough one to defend against. It basically gives us two full backs in a line which contains a 2nd rower who can play centre and a centre who can play wing. It would give us so many options it would have to put the defence in two minds and three great runners of the ball, 2 outstanding offloaders, 2 big strong physical players, 2 speedsters. I think that is a really dangerous attacking line. 

So let's get this right. You want to play a fullback on the wing and a second row in the centre? Terrible idea.



#32 Ant

Ant
  • Coach
  • 3,175 posts

Posted 26 August 2014 - 12:45 PM

It was a good post till you mentioned Ablett

That's comedy gold

#33 scotchy

scotchy
  • Coach
  • 654 posts

Posted 26 August 2014 - 12:58 PM

So let's get this right. You want to play a fullback on the wing and a second row in the centre? Terrible idea.

No, i want to play a full back on the wing, a centre in the centre, and a second row in the 2nd row. They just happen to be a centre who can play wing and 2nd row who can play centre, meaning that we can give more freedom to our winger, getting him more involved than simply being the finisher on the line. Australia will likely line up with 4 of their back 5 being (at least nominally) fullbacks, Slater, Boyd, Inglis and Hayne. 

 

Ablett has been Leeds second best forward to Peacock for probably 4 years or so now, he is, in my opinion, comfortably the best ball handling back rower in the country. I wouldnt swap him for any british back rower, and that includes the now 33 year old Westwood. 



#34 Joe Whitley

Joe Whitley
  • Admin
  • 310 posts

Posted 26 August 2014 - 01:12 PM

This thread has inspired me to set up another England team selection poll. Let us know who would start against Samoa at the Four Nations if you were Steve McNamara: http://www.totalrl.c...e-four-nations/


TotalRL.com Editor
Email: joe.whitley@totalrl.com
Direct line: +44 (0) 1484 404 921

#35 boxhead

boxhead
  • Coach
  • 3,091 posts

Posted 26 August 2014 - 01:12 PM

No, i want to play a full back on the wing, a centre in the centre, and a second row in the 2nd row. They just happen to be a centre who can play wing and 2nd row who can play centre, meaning that we can give more freedom to our winger, getting him more involved than simply being the finisher on the line. Australia will likely line up with 4 of their back 5 being (at least nominally) fullbacks, Slater, Boyd, Inglis and Hayne. 

 

Ablett has been Leeds second best forward to Peacock for probably 4 years or so now, he is, in my opinion, comfortably the best ball handling back rower in the country. I wouldnt swap him for any british back rower, and that includes the now 33 year old Westwood. 

I really doubt that Boyd will be anywhere near the Australian Test Team.



#36 Just Browny

Just Browny
  • Coach
  • 11,789 posts

Posted 26 August 2014 - 01:26 PM

Joel Monaghan took time to settle also..

 

With 26 tries in his first season? Think you mean Michael, who did take a while to bed down (due to the classic Warrington trait of signing hookers to play scrum-half...).


I can confirm 30+ less sales for Scotland vs Italy at Workington, after this afternoons test purchase for the Tonga match, £7.50 is extremely reasonable, however a £2.50 'delivery' fee for a walk in purchase is beyond taking the mickey, good luck with that, it's cheaper on the telly.


#37 RSN

RSN
  • Coach
  • 4,200 posts

Posted 26 August 2014 - 01:35 PM

I believe Jarryd Hayne has better ball handling and general skills.

 

General skills yes ball handling skills no.

 

Hayne is very flashy and it looks good but Tomkins can do what Hayne can do just make it look simpler. I recall Hayne doing a tip on pass the other week and everyone went absolutely mental, Tomkins did it against West Tigers twice and no one made half as much fuss.



#38 ChrisGS

ChrisGS
  • Coach
  • 359 posts

Posted 26 August 2014 - 06:33 PM

General skills yes ball handling skills no.

 

Hayne is very flashy and it looks good but Tomkins can do what Hayne can do just make it look simpler. I recall Hayne doing a tip on pass the other week and everyone went absolutely mental, Tomkins did it against West Tigers twice and no one made half as much fuss.

 

I don't think that's fair. Tomkins two touches against the Tigers were applauded by most pundits and fans from memory. Sterlo and Fittler wouldn't shut up about it. If anything I'd say Sam got more applause than Hayne.



#39 RSN

RSN
  • Coach
  • 4,200 posts

Posted 26 August 2014 - 06:49 PM

I don't think that's fair. Tomkins two touches against the Tigers were applauded by most pundits and fans from memory. Sterlo and Fittler wouldn't shut up about it. If anything I'd say Sam got more applause than Hayne.


Off general reading of forums ect I thought Hayne got a lot more praise than Tomkins. Maybe I just read a small sample which didn't give off the amount of praise he got from the Aussie media.

#40 boxhead

boxhead
  • Coach
  • 3,091 posts

Posted 27 August 2014 - 12:35 AM

General skills yes ball handling skills no.

 

Hayne is very flashy and it looks good but Tomkins can do what Hayne can do just make it look simpler. I recall Hayne doing a tip on pass the other week and everyone went absolutely mental, Tomkins did it against West Tigers twice and no one made half as much fuss.

 

 

Tomkins is a fine player in attack.

But tipping the ball on is only a small part of the game.

Hayne has a superb passing game, a solid all round kicking game and is also the leading try scorer.

 

I think the Warriors and their fans imagined that Tomkins would be devastating in running from the deep in broken play more than a link man.