Re: Sam Tomkins : Tue Oct 05, 2010 12:16 pm  

McClennan wrote:

Can't see that at all. The reason why is between them Moore has a rugby brain and Smith doesn't in the same way that Tomkins has and Long hadn't at the same age. If Moore can get rid of his handling errors he will be a useful squad player. If he finds a bit more inside of himself he could even become a key player in the way that we're still waiting for Wilkin to do. A lot of it is about consistency with these good players whereas Smith may have a more consistent game it is only occasionally that it rises to grade B or above. That's not good enough level of performance for us to maintain our title challenges.

I've had this thought before though, and the debate in my mind springs from the fact that Scott Moore is often judged on what he could do, whereas with smith, you're a lot more sure of the level that you'll actually get. Smith impressed at crusaders playing at hooker and to be honest it suits his playmaking game a bit as it thrusts him further into the action.
Moore has wonderful potential and can come up with some wonderful plays, but he's also got some rotters in him. I've also questioned his heart on occasion - he loves to smash the full back as they take a kick, but there was definately a moment in the Leeds game at home when he bottled the tackle on Bailey close to the line, from which they scored.

--

Re Tomkins. I think he'll become a more rounded player as we go on, but his raw talent combined with his spirit make him such a handful.
Midway through the season I'd have rated Eastmond higher, unfortunatley we just can't get him on the pitch long enough and while he's been sidelined, Tomkins has been stealing the show. It just makes Eastmond's apparent susceptibility all the more frustrating when his Wigan counterpart seems pretty much bullet proof.

Re: Sam Tomkins : Tue Oct 05, 2010 12:25 pm  

FearTheVee wrote:

Pat Richards played full back when we won at Wigan.

So?

Re: Sam Tomkins : Tue Oct 05, 2010 1:13 pm  

Offside Monkey wrote:

--

Re Tomkins. I think he'll become a more rounded player as we go on, but his raw talent combined with his spirit make him such a handful.
Midway through the season I'd have rated Eastmond higher, unfortunatley we just can't get him on the pitch long enough and while he's been sidelined, Tomkins has been stealing the show. It just makes Eastmond's apparent susceptibility all the more frustrating when his Wigan counterpart seems pretty much bullet proof.

Karl Pryce. All the (potential) talent in the world and doesn't have the heart to fulfill it. I worry Eastmond is heading the same way (although not as drastically)

Re: Sam Tomkins : Tue Oct 05, 2010 1:18 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

So?

Sam is harder to control from fullback, as he has a bit more time to decide when to run and when to pass.

Watch the Leeds semi at Headingley and you'll understand what I mean. he's a superb talented and tough player, who even now would walk into any NRL side.

Re: Sam Tomkins : Tue Oct 05, 2010 1:30 pm  

Offside Monkey wrote:

Re Tomkins. I think he'll become a more rounded player as we go on, but his raw talent combined with his spirit make him such a handful.
Midway through the season I'd have rated Eastmond higher, unfortunatley we just can't get him on the pitch long enough and while he's been sidelined, Tomkins has been stealing the show. It just makes Eastmond's apparent susceptibility all the more frustrating when his Wigan counterpart seems pretty much bullet proof.

Even as a Saints fan I would take Tomkins over Eastmond any day. He's a talent that comes along rarely - he has vision, pace, guile, speed and is as tough as anyone. But the one thing that makes him better than many/most is what most class players have - time. He appears to have oceans of it and he's a pleasure to watch.

Kyle is an opportunist - mesmeric in flashes and bursts but not consistently even accounting for his injuries. A number 7 (and Tomkins isn't one so the comparison doesn't apply) he needs to control and direct a game, take the ball to he line to bring on runners and be prepared to take a smack, and be present throughout the game.

I am not bagging Kyle - he has talent and has bad luck. But on what I have seen so far I wish Tomkins was a Saints player.

Re: Sam Tomkins : Tue Oct 05, 2010 1:38 pm  

Allez wrote:

I am not bagging Kyle - he has talent and has bad luck. But on what I have seen so far I wish Tomkins was a Saints player.

Despite so many comparisons that are drawn between them, I think they're very differnet players. I (perhaps in the minority on this board) think Kyle is ideally suited to the first reciever role of scrum half. He's got a decent kicking and passing game but it complemented by his speed off the mark, something very valuable close to the ruck. Sam seems to especially excell when he gets the ball slightly wider in his stand off or full back roles, already moving when he can utilise those rangy sidesteps to taunt the defence.
What would have hopefully improved with Kyle's game had he got a full season would have been his decision making and game plan execution, something saints are very much missing at the moment.

Re: Sam Tomkins : Tue Oct 05, 2010 1:51 pm  

Offside Monkey wrote:

Despite so many comparisons that are drawn between them, I think they're very differnet players. I (perhaps in the minority on this board) think Kyle is ideally suited to the first reciever role of scrum half. He's got a decent kicking and passing game but it complemented by his speed off the mark, something very valuable close to the ruck. Sam seems to especially excell when he gets the ball slightly wider in his stand off or full back roles, already moving when he can utilise those rangy sidesteps to taunt the defence.
What would have hopefully improved with Kyle's game had he got a full season would have been his decision making and game plan execution, something saints are very much missing at the moment.

They could have been a devastating partnership if they linked up for England fully fit.

Re: Sam Tomkins : Tue Oct 05, 2010 2:00 pm  

inside_man wrote:

They could have been a devastating partnership if they linked up for England fully fit.

Agreed.

Re: Sam Tomkins : Tue Oct 05, 2010 2:37 pm  

inside_man wrote:

They could have been a devastating partnership if they linked up for England fully fit.

I think it was what any sensible England RL fan wanted.

Re: Sam Tomkins : Tue Oct 05, 2010 3:21 pm  

McClennan wrote:

Just to emphasise the point, Tomkins rattled up twice as many metres as Wello with the ball in his hand. Pace at full back please Royce.

I agree with your point of needing pace at full back, although Wello does a superb job for us at full back. The only point I wanted to make about the number of metres made by Tomkins compared to Wello is that our kicking game played a vital part, in that:

1. We kicked to Tomkins on the last tackle a hell of a lot (while Wigan kicked to Wello, Foster, Meli, and to touch).
2. Tomkins got the majority of our kicks on the full, whilst we had to retrieve the ball from the floor.

Both of those contibute in Tomkins being able to gain more metres.

I do agree though, that a pacy fullback is almost a requirement these days.