Well, at least we saw on Saturday that Tomkins future does not lie in Rugby Union, certainly not at an international level, and I doubt there are too many clubs willing to take a punt on him either.The predictable cross field run was easily dealt with, as was the attempt to step the defence.

I reckon he'll stay on another couple of seasons as a big fish in a diminishing Wigan pond, before being tempted by the sunshine down under.

Let's face it......anywhere is preferable to a wet Wigan!

For the first and hopefully the last time, I concur with William.

Hang on - he's never played Union before, EVER, and his first game is against the 2nd-ranked team in the world and reigning Tri-Nations champions, against an invitational team of some of the world's best players. He has no idea of the intricacies of the game, or where he should be positionally, yet he does ok - makes his tackles, a couple of runs, some of the few exciting moments involve him - and he only goes and scores their only try.

It's clear in a game of giants he's not a physical match for most of them with his lean physique built for League, and it's clear there are too many players on the pitch to allow the open-space running he is capable of in League - and it was also clear he was looking for gaps RL-style, which obviously won't work without a 10m defence. None of this is a surprise to anyone with half a brain cell.

Are you saying the premier talent in English Rugby League wouldn't do well at Union if he had a season or two at club level and some decent coaching? Of course he would. Club level is a rather different prospect to playing the Australian national side. Once you pick up the gist of RU it's not that difficult - especially for backs with a bit of talent.

It'd be like asking Ben Youngs or Delon Armitage to play in a Kangaroos (or NZ) vs ROTW fixture. It would NEVER happen because we know he'd be lost and would probably get hurt. That one of our players can slot in fairly well at such a high level on his Union DEBUT says at lot about RL, and possibly more about RU.

I'm not convinced about Sam's prospects in Union. He looked lost in the game and scoring a try wasn't any reflection on him, Danny Arnold would have scored it.

His style is very much League-centric and I doubt it will ever adapt to Union in the way Robinson was able to. He looked so lightweight and floaty and lacking in the real pace some of the other backs in the game had.

He's got a nice step and is an elusive runner, which in league is great as there are more broken field moments for him to exploit. He won't get that in Union and he hasn't got it in him to get through a well organised 15 defense himself.

If I were England RU I would be looking at Ryan Hall more than Sam Tomkins.

Ah, the view through cherry tinted glasses

So what compelled the most over hyped player in the history of Rugby League to take part..... Arrogance, Stupidity or a very large cheque being wafted under that pointy nose? Kudos to whoever spotted the marketing potential in what looked a pretty empty stadium, although the TV figures will have shown an improvement



Indeed. but obviously not that obvious to the Boy Tomkins, eh?



eeerm, no, I never said or insinuated that, but it is a fact that the number of talented English League players who have successfully crossed the divide has been pretty poor. Jason Robinson sticks out, maybe Ashton as well, but I'm struggling to pick out any more who are English rather than Welsh, Irish Aussie Kiwi etc. Agent Farrell doesn't count either!



Fairly well? Whilst not a complete embarrassment, he showed about as much in this match as he did against the Aussies in our code the other week.

I think it says more about a commercial decision between both RL and RU to boost viewing figures, and extract the maximum amount of hard earned cash from a gullible public who turned up to see what turned out to be a damp squid of a match.

Wait. Saddened!, did you watch a Union match!?

And that's relevant why? He was asked and he gave it a go, simple. Why shouldn't he? And why should your idiotic opinion be of any relevant or concern to him or anyone else?


Well it wouldn't be, seeing as he's never played Union in his life. I'd have thought that was clear.

“When I came in on Tuesday I was so raw I didn’t even know what the numbers for each position were. The boys were saying ‘we'll play this off the 12 or the 10’ and I didn’t even know where those blokes were so that was a bit of a challenge."


So the relative failure of others to become world beaters means Tomkins couldn't succeed? Strange that many Union pundits who know something about their game disagree, including former All Blacks coach Graham Henry:

“There’s no doubt that Sam’s a talented footballer who will be a big success in either rugby code. He had never played Union before - he didn’t know what a ruck was or what a maul was. He has got good balance, he’s quick and he’s got a good head.”


In a completely outmatched team that played awfully, he did ok. And let's not forget this was his Union DEBUT - some errors were to be expected. What, you expect a Dan Carter-esque performance in his first ever game?


Oh right, so you know the RFL had a hand in it? And they've formed some commercial agreement with the RFU? Any proof to back that up or are you making things up again?

I'm with your broader points but just for the record, it's a damp squi[ub[/u, not squid; squids are, by their nature, pretty much always damp, so it wouldn't really work when trying to describe something that was dud, defective or failed to meet expectations.

I hope that helps in future conversations.

ahem … are you after my pedantry crown?

Union simply isnt the game for Sam to show his talents, no space, little passing moves and little to no ball when you're stood on the wing with a centre that has no idea what a pass is. Yet he scored a try.

He's pledged his loyalty to Wigan and will no doubt make the transfer in a few years.

What exactly is it about a squids nature (rather than its habitat) that makes it inherently damp?

They get excited easily

Is it the teriyaki sauce?

You've answered your own question - it's a marine mollusc with gills that enable it to breathe under water, ergo, it's damp.

[url=http://lmgtfy.com/?q=what+is+a+squid%3FThis[/url might help.

A poor game with too many errors (especially from the BaaBaas) ........... however Tomkins did okay.

Two things which I noted and enjoyed from watching the game.

1) How nice to see a ref who can spot a forward pass, and penalise it........... wish the SuperLeague refs would do the same.

2) How much more pleasant it is to hear commentators who are calm and rational, and don't scream at errors, but merely point them out. I thought Barnes was especially good at explaining tactics and crucial plays with his use of on-screen graphics (arrows, circles, shaded areas etc) .......... I wish we could ditch Eddie and Stevo and have some equally knowledgable and informative presenters/commentators.

I hate the union commentary, saying somebody is world class because he runs straight through a gap, or bigging up a tackle that you see 30 times a match in leageu doesnt do it for me

I went to the game on the remote off chance that the Baa Baas would beat the Wallabies and I could mercilessly rip into the Aussies I went along with. Sadly it didn't happen! The Barbarians were shockingly bad and the Wallabies played some decent Rugby.



Up until last week when it was announced someone from league would be playing none of the people I went to the game with had ever heard of Sam Tomkins. He played quite well for someone who has allegedly never played Union before although it's fair to say even I could have scored his try.

I think he played union better than he did playing his own code in the 4N final

Your last sentence sums union up to a tee mate.

Union can use on screen graphics during the game as there is plenty of downtime. The game stops an awful lot while we dont have that in League. There just isnt the timeframe to use such graphics.

I just wanna hear some fresh southern accents in the RL coverage. Every voice is northern and I just dont understand why its like that.

So, you think it developed the gills and then decided to live under water? The squid has adapted to its environment and it is its environment, not its nature, that makes it damp

[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Origin_of_SpeciesThis[/url might help

F*ck's sake, this ridiculous thread had almost - finally - dropped off the first page and you resurrect it to bicker about a damp (or not) squid?

Please accept my apologies

Strange stuff, most of the proper RU fans (of the club game, rather than the hooray henry Twickenham lot) dislike the commentators and prefer the RL crew.

I have to agree, Barnes is a muppet.