Its a worrying one for Tomkins down under where he won,t get the time and space to be a threat in the NRL, the world cup is kind of a rehearsal of how life will be in the NRL.
Will he be able to fix his weakness for the high ball, if not maybe he will be used in another field position, its a big challenge for Tomkins he,s in an isolated postion and won,t be easier than Burgess, Graham etc.

You would think England had just played in the Final.
England played well, made loads of mistakes and was dominated big time for several parts of the game where England had no ball or field position for long periods.

It was the Semi Final, which ever team won today would have a massive task in beating Australia, they are just clicking up the gears to be primed next week, Hayne looks lethal.

There is always next year.

We were totally short (through mispositioning) on that side. As I said before they set up that move and England fell for it. Sinfield realised they were at sea and made a split second judgement - got it wrong but he had to try something. Someone with explosive pace over 15 yards - like Ellerly Hanley of old could probably have got their in time to shepherd Johnson wide.

At the end of the day we lost because we can't handle taking a lead and pushing on. Too much trying to score on every play when we had the chance to push on. I thought it was going to be all about "building pressure" this time? I am afraid we fell short again there. I think too many people, fans included, had an inferiority complex yesterday. To me we should have won that game quite comfortably.

I've got no doubt Tomkins will excel in the NRL.

Fullback in the NRL has been a real glamour position for a long time now, but when you think about it, the talent in 2014 is pretty insane: Tomkins, Inglis, Slater, Hayne, Milford, Barba, Stewart, Dugan, Minichiello/Tuivasa-Sheck, Gordon, Boyd, Moylan...

Completely agree. In that last 5 minutes, we abandoned what had worked so well for 75 mins and started to play 'cling on' rugby. With ball in hand we were soft and too cautious, and in defence we were panicking - hence the burgess high shot, too many numbers sucked into the middle and eventually Sinfield shooting out of the line (we were short on numbers, but ultimately, he shot out and was beaten by the man). We just didn't have the confidence in ourselves that we would and should win the match - we suddenly became nervous and that cost us the match. In those situations, teams like NZ and Oz have just the slight difference in mentality that they 'know' they will finish the game off by continuing to turn the screw with big hard yards and a good kick chase and defensive set.

It was an absolutely shattering end for England - I feel if they'd held on, that could have been the catalyst for them to have the belief to go on and beat the Aussies in the final. Hopefully the team can kick on from here and build on what is the best platform we've had in probably my 30 years of watching - over to the powers that be to ensure this momentum isn't lost.

I agree. I thought in this tournament although he had his momenents linking up with the attack - in an overworked move he seemed very lightweight in all other facets of his game. He may rise to the challenge in the NRL but I am not so sure he'll be able to. It may not go well for him and if not then I suspect he'll drop down to Union where he'll be a revelation because of lower defensive standards.

A lot will depend on Tomkins idea of how he will do.
He must realise there are not acres of space to run the ball back in the NRL like in SL.
He still looked a bit brittle a few times in this WC where he was milking stuff and resenting the tackle, that will not be an asset in the NRL.
The Warriors do not seem like a good choice but I guess they sprung the money that no other Club would.
I wonder how much his signing has been greeted by his team mates, big money, I believe the transfer fee is part of the Cap? replacing a current team mate....

A slightly built SL stepper with some speed on top dollar that is touch and go under the high ball and defensively fragile on his try line.
It could all turn to crap.

Tomkins has had a good tournament under the high ball and after seeing Locke completely bottle tackling Burgess for his try I don't think he'll have any problems getting in the team.

Funnily enough, at a coaching event at Headingley organised by the Leeds Rugby Foundation Ivan Cleary said that the defensive line is probably up quicker in SL than the NRL and so there is probably a bit more space in the NRL.

I think he did in the latter games where he got a bit more protection from the wingers coming inside. It was still a scary moment though taking an isolated high ball, will he won't he!
The quality of kicking in the NRL looks more accurate and clinical, something Tomkins will need to improve in his reading of the game, if he succeeds then its a win win situation for England.

SERIOUSLY!?!?!? Sam Tomkins did F all wrong yesterday apart from dropping a ball cold. linked up well created an over lap god knows how many times, passing was superb, didn't drop a high ball and there was one with locke and johnson on top of him, god knows how many 1 on 1 tackles and ragged dolled Isaac Luke to the ground who is regarded as pound for pound strongest in the NRL.

Can't believe there is still bitter fans, the haters tried to chirp up a few times through out this tournament but he has played well.

I don't hate him I want him to do well for the sake of England. But the fact remains world class players (as he is billed to be) perform and are the difference on the big stage. Think Meninga, Fittler, Lockyer, Lewis, Murphy, etc, etc. I've seen Sam play all his major tests against NZ and Australia in this country and he has never looked someone who makes the difference to me. Burgess certainly does.

Just put BBC2 on to watch the highlights. Seems history has repeated itself in another sport. NZ just equalised against Eire in RU in injury time. Won on the conversion (at secon attempt!). They are saying Eire deserved to win and it was an unbelievable game and Eire missed a kickable kick and gave away a penalty near the end. What are the chances of that happening again!?

It's Ireland, not Eire.

You're right, they include the northerns.

Just watched it myself. Gutted for them also. Ireland have never beaten the All Blacks, hard to believe they will get a better chance than that.

Still, at least my U11's won 20 - 0 this morning.

I've finally found the courage to watch it again might skip the last minute though.

Me too.i cant beleive how many 'if only' moments there are in the last 10 minutes!

Still,very proud of the efforts of the lads.cant fault any of them and they did us proud.gives us all hope for the future international wise.

Rather than focus on the last minute, where we really lost the game was the 10 mins in the 2nd half when we gave 5 pretty soft and in some cases questionable penalties.

Yes this is what I said yesterday. Seen some match stats today and the two teams are quite even, one telling stat was England had to make 36 more tackles than the Kiwis. In a match played in that style having to defend to what equates to 6 extra sets showed in the legs in those final few minutes. So much of that extra defensive work came in that opening period of the 2nd half.

Rubbish. Ok, so NZ had 4 men and England had 3, with G Burgess on Sinfield's inside. There were enough to defend easily - all it would have taken was for all 3/4 to move in fast, hold their line and drift at the diagonal as the ball and/or players moved wide. The slide/drift defence is a basic of RL and had worked well pretty throughout the game. In no time the attackers run out of room. Offer them a solid wall and the touchline and they've nowhere to go. Anyone shooting out the line risks leaving a hole for a runner or getting stepped, which is exactly what happened. You're travelling too fast to recover.

Sinfield played magnificently yesterday and it's a terrible shame his error led to the try. But it did. However, as I also said a game is won over 80 minutes. G Burgess conceded a poor penalty - and others throughout the game made errors and the last 5 minutes saw a string of poor decisions. England should never have been in that position.


Comfortably? NZ are far too good to beat 'comfortably'. Yes, I agree we were in position to push on and secure the win, and for a few poor decisions and a couple of dropped balls (Lockers in particular, though the passes were poor), we'd have been there. England played superbly and came within a whisker of beating the World Champions and arguably the form team. There's a lot to be proud of.

Sinfield putting pressure on Johnson stopped the ball going out wide where we were outnumbered and made him go inside......where George Burgess was.....and his effort was non-existent. Yes Sinfield could've stopped the try with a tackle but so could G.Burgess, watch the footage back and both he and Sam are slightly hesitant and ball watching instead of drifting right away.

Plus even if we tackle him it's still 4th tackle with 15 seconds left so no guarantee they wouldn't have worked the ball over to our under pressure left side and scored.

Yes, but if Sinfield hadn't shot so far ahead, Burgess wouldn't have been so far behind. That said I do agree George was horrendously slow moving up. The safest rule in defence is generally that the line should only move up as quickly as the slowest man to avoid holes. Of course that's a simplistic view but in general rings true.

Are you another one who's never heard of a drift defence? NZ having one extra man more tight on the wing does not mean a scoring overlap was on. The defence only has to hold a solid line and slide a few metres and they have nowhere to go.

Fact is, he made the decision to sprint out and missed his man, who scored. It's a terrible shame as he was superb yesterday and has been throughout the tournament, but there it is.

Yes the defence should drift, watch the video. Sam Burgess starts off stood next to the post, he makes it to 8/9 metres out and is still pretty much in line with the post....had he taken 2 steps right instead 2 extra forward he could've reached Johnson too.

Sinfield didn't make the tackle but he cut out the outside option and let's face it neither Watkins or Charnley are renowned for their defence at times, he just needed those back on his inside to be there.

I think that by watching on repeat in slow motion people are forgetting that we'd played 80 mins of brutal high tempo rugby . There were times where I thought that SoL and Sam Burgess were broken but they kept getting back up.