Tomkins

[JJ]

Plenty of water to go under the bridge yet. Generally when big name or big potential spine players move to a new team it takes a while to settle. Can't think of too many who have made such a move or have been elite within 12-13 games. Some exceptions though of course.

Hayne and Inglis both moved to fullback and were immediately astonishingly good... (same team, but moving positions). And you seriously think that if Slater, Hayne, Smith, Farah, etc shifted teams they'd suddenly have glaring errors in their game for half a season?

Regardless, don't see this debate heading anywhere - two views on him, one that he's a decent fullback, and another that suggests he's brilliant, but needs more than 12-13 games to get settled... then perhaps he improve under the high ball, and stop doing dumb things?

But, as before, he gets attention because of salary and expectation (much like Johnson) - what I struggle to understand is why guys like Friend and Lilyman take heat for doing a consistently very good job... Nielsen to an extent too, everyone knew what sort of player he was, now he's bagged mercilessly for being exactly what we signed... but as for Tomkins easily being in top 5 performing Warriors this year, in no order I'd suggest Mannering, Lillyman, Hurrell, Johnson, and Matulino - then Bukuya, Friend and Laumape have all been consistently good, at least as good as Tomkins...

Cue the lols

 

[JJ]

Oz cut through the bullshit in the other thread - think we're longing for footy

must be bye week,,,

 

[Izz]

Dugan? Sure, the guy can be a devastating runner, but he regularly butchers overlaps like no other fullback in the game, and for all his ability, still hasn't learned how to draw and pass. Will be interesting to see him go around at center for the Blues this week.

For your lols, JJ, here's where i'd currently rank Tomkins, based primarily on this year's form:

Hayne
Inglis
Stewart (when he's not injured)
Slater/Tomkins (imo, Slater is beginning to decline, and will soon be in the Minichello category of fb)
the rest

#

Barba? Have you seen him this season? Most of the time it looks like he doesn't know which direction he should be facing on the field.

Milford? Great with ball in hand, but deadset one of the worst defenders i've ever seen. Makes Dane Gagai look like a defensive superstar.

Boyd? Club level peaheart.

Tedesco? Half-dozen games, injured most of the time. If he stops being made of glass, he could be quite good. Maybe.

 

[JJ]

For your lols, JJ, here's where i'd currently rank Tomkins, based primarily on this year's form:

Hayne
Inglis
Stewart (when he's not injured)
Slater/Tomkins (imo, Slater is beginning to decline, and will soon be in the Minichello category of fb)
the rest

#

.

As Oz points out, slow week...

But not sure many non Warriors fans nor non Poms would rank Tomkins that highly...

No, I don't watch every game every week, so hard to be definitive - but Sam Perrett has done ok too, seems to avoid the f**k ups that plague Tomkins- but all (bar Hayne, Inglis, Slater and Stewart) have obvious and significant weaknesses...

 

[jaseg]

As Oz points out, slow week...

But not sure many non Warriors fans nor non Poms would rank Tomkins that highly...

No, I don't watch every game every week, so hard to be definitive - but Sam Perrett has done ok too, seems to avoid the f**k ups that plague Tomkins- but all (bar Hayne, Inglis, Slater and Stewart) have obvious and significant weaknesses...

Can't be bothered continuing to argue for Tomkins, if you can't see his full value yet I really don't care. Buuuut...

Slater doesn't have obvious/significant weaknesses? Sure he does. He always did. I'd almost say he becomes a target every time the Warriors or Kiwis come up against him. Just because the Aussies are too busy circle jerking over the 'future immortal' to take advantage doesn't mean he doesn't have any weaknesses. For a start he is awful under pressure with the high ball. His whole career there's been errors waiting to happen. Frankly, he never got much better with the stuff ups he did (VERY regularly) early in his career - it's just that the rest of his game improved so much.. to the point where either it didn't matter, or he was given too much respect (much like players watching Thurston dummy and run, or Hodges run from dummy half - you objectively know something about a player but don't act on it). Now that the rest of his game is slowing down a little (and his team isn't as dominant) those weaknesses are becoming a little more exposed.

Oh and Inglis & Hayne? Both were heavily experience NRL & rep players before moving to fullback. Hardly a good comparison.

 

[JJ]

Oh and Inglis & Hayne? Both were heavily experience NRL & rep players before moving to fullback. Hardly a good comparison.

I see the value, just don't think he's been brilliant yet

Comparing them to an International fullback lauded as the equal of Slater isn't fair? Seriously?

I am fine with him, he was the best available - I just expected better...

 

[vvvrulz]

The argument that Tomkins isn't even there to make tackles = his miss tackle stats are invalid begs the Q.

In a defensive line....if a players is not making misses by not being there.....

what is the responsibility of the players who make up that portion of the line ?

Are they somehow exempt because Tomkins (who is renowned for covering a lot of ground) is not there instead ?

Its cases like where Graham barged through in the dogs game, and I think it was Leilua fielding a grubber and going to the line untouched.

Tomkins should have been around in both cases to at least attempt to make a tackle, even if in probability it wouldn't have stopped them. In both cases he was miles away.

 

[vvvrulz]

But in all honesty this argument is spiralling down into oblivion :lol:

I've made my point and am going to leave it there, and of course will hope that Tomkins goes up a notch and becomes one of our greats.

 

[Izz]

Its cases like where Graham barged through in the dogs game

edit--thinking about different try

 

[jaseg]

Comparing them to an International fullback lauded as the equal of Slater isn't fair? Seriously?

Ummm... they had huge experience playing in this competition (and at the top levels of the game on this side of the world). That's a huge advantage. Given the World Cup is on at the moment it's only fitting to look at the examples in soccer - players don't often switch between competitions and immediately play at their best, even when they're switching between two competitions of relatively equal strength. In fact it's actually very rare for that to be the case. Need examples? This season just gone Gareth Bale took a good 5-6 months of the season to get into the groove at Real Madrid (and that was the most expensive transfer ever). Despite being awesome at Atletico Madrid, David de Gea took about a year to adjust to the different style of play in England... and now he's just about the best goalkeeper in the Premier League.

The comparison would be totally fair to make... after time. Not now. Regardless, I really like what he brings - just frustrated at his dropsies. If he sorts out that aspect of his game alone he goes from being a (in my mind) top 8 fullback right now to a top 4 fullback immediately, and pushing hard at #3.

 

[sup42]

Its cases like where Graham barged through in the dogs game, and I think it was Leilua fielding a grubber and going to the line untouched.

Tomkins should have been around in both cases to at least attempt to make a tackle, even if in probability it wouldn't have stopped them. In both cases he was miles away.

Tomkins made a tackle on brown under the goal posts.

Two passes from that Ruck later , James Graham goes in twenty meters away. from where Tomkins was at marker.

The Newcastle game. Tomkins has come across to plug a big hole between Ikahihifo and Mannering otherwise it's a five meter hole without Tomkins there.

I think there is a miss perception that every time the team is scored against that the Fullback takes last responsibility.

This would be correct if the Warriors line didn't keep presenting gaping holes as in these two examples for their fullback to plug.

Fusitua pats Leilua on the back as Leilua goes past him that's how close he was to the play.....Like I say without looking at What Tomkins was doing leading up to those moments in games....and looking at what other people aren't doing....people will see what they want to see.

I'm ok with Tomkins defending up in the line. That formation has led to the teams best defensive run in the comp.

They will as a result concede Try's through kicks. All teams do , Kicking is a lottery and an admission by the attacking team that they can't breach that first line.

 

[Izz]

Tomkins made a tackle on brown under the goal posts.

Two passes from that Ruck later , James Graham goes in twenty meters away. from where Tomkins was at marker.

Ah, that was the try i was thinking of. heh.

 

[attila_the_gorilla]

I'm ok with Tomkins defending up in the line. That formation has led to the teams best defensive run in the comp.

They will as a result concede Try's through kicks. All teams do , Kicking is a lottery and an admission by the attacking team that they can't breach that first line.

What??? Every team will kick on 5th tackle at the latest in most sets. Kicking in not an admission of failure, it's a way to earn a repeat set or a try. Which is why every team has the fullback behind the defensive line to diffuse these kicks and get the ball out of the in-goal if possible. I know you're the self-appointed Tomkins apologist, but really some things you just need to let go, this is getting out of control.

 

[vvvrulz]

What??? Every team will kick on 5th tackle at the latest in most sets. Kicking in not an admission of failure, it's a way to earn a repeat set or a try. Which is why every team has the fullback behind the defensive line to diffuse these kicks and get the ball out of the in-goal if possible.

This is my point exactly, doesn't matter how big the defensive holes are its not the fullback's job to rush up on defence. Their job is to make the covering tackle if someone runs through said gap.

Any good opposition halfback will exploit the crap out of it if the fullback comes up to the line.

 

[sup42]

What??? Every team will kick on 5th tackle at the latest in most sets. Kicking in not an admission of failure, it's a way to earn a repeat set or a try. Which is why every team has the fullback behind the defensive line to diffuse these kicks and get the ball out of the in-goal if possible. I know you're the self-appointed Tomkins apologist, but really some things you just need to let go, this is getting out of control.

Ok so you know a fullback that can cover twenty meters in one point five seconds do you ?

You also took the narrowest interpretation of what I was saying about sets ending on kicks instead of using your intellect.

The thing is my hunnic friend , I was speaking to two specific incidents and not some Tomkins love or hate fest...specifics ......specifics......not opinion

 

[vvvrulz]

Boy are we making this teacup stormy.

 

[sup42]

True.

I still think Tomkins errors suck the Kumura and are bitterly disappointing.

 

[attila_the_gorilla]

Ok so you know a fullback that can cover twenty meters in one point five seconds do you ?

You also took the narrowest interpretation of what I was saying about sets ending on kicks instead of using your intellect.

The thing is my hunnic friend , I was speaking to two specific incidents and not some Tomkins love or hate fest...specifics ......specifics......not opinion

Your statements I reacted to were generalized opinions, not referring to specific incidents. And they were nonsense. That's a specific fact.

 

[sup42]

Your statements I reacted to were generalized opinions, not referring to specific incidents. And they were nonsense. That's a specific fact.

You had an issue with the idea that forcing the other team to go to tackle five then kick is in my opinion a sign that a team is defending well.

Rugby league is a simple game. It is preferable to maintain possession then score having held continuous possession.....than to kick away the ball to create chances / favorable outcomes....or because you have run out of tackles. If your opponents Kick the ball on the last it means they have failed to score in their allotted tackles. This is a fundamental of the game.

The examples I talked about were both cases where the fullback was needed to defend in the line, there is nothing wrong with arguing that after looking at the tape it is clear Tomkins joined the line to fill the gaps.

Standing back and leaving a gaping hole means you give the attack multiple options.....Run and Kick.

Probably the relevant point here is the improvement in the Warriors Try's conceded.

 

[attila_the_gorilla]

If your opponents Kick the ball on the last it means they have failed to score in their allotted tackles.

Kicking on the last tackle is a weapon, so much so that a lot of teams don't even try to score in their allotted tackles. Last tackle kicks are an attacking option. They can help you score a try or maintain possession. Getting to the kick does not equal failure. Being out of position to defend one does.

I don't remember the instances you mention, I do remember one when Tomkins was up in the line for no reason on 4th or 5th tackle and a try was conceded from the ensuing kick. The reason that caught my eye is cos I can't remember any other fullback making that sort of blunder, it just doesn't happen in the NRL.

Your state that: I'm ok with Tomkins defending up in the line. That formation has led to the teams best defensive run in the comp.

Which implies that it's an actual tactic to have no fullback defending kicks. Lucky none of the other fullbacks and coaches know about this new tactic, let's keep it a Warriors play.