Kyle Eastmond wasn't playing in the Grand Final, so how can you compare them then?

As for the Four Nations, at that point Sam Tomkins had had more first team game time than Kyle Eastmond so he should have progressed further. However, to pretty much everyone's mind bar those of Wigan fans, they are both equal but different. It's like comparing chalk with cheese comparing those two. They have very different games but both are highly skilled in their own style. That is why they would make a great halfback pairing at international level and had Kyle been fit, they would both now be down under.

Kyle Eastmond had a sensational Four Nations tournament last year. At that point, I knew we had a star it's just a shame injuries have ruined his year this time round. Keep Kyle fit and there isn't alot between him and Tomkins talent wise.

No he hadn't.

No they arent equal. Only a saints fan would think that. Tomkins has by far the better game and its frightening how good he can go on to be. Tomkins can do everything eastmond can but better, except for ducking under a tackle and getting injured

You've made some interesting posts in the last couple of weeks.

According to the stats on the respective Wigan and Saints sites:

Tomkins appearances: 2010 = 30, Career = 61, so 31 first team appearances before the Four Nations at the end of 2009.

Eastmond appearances: 2010 = 23, Career = 41, so 18 first team appearances before the Four Nations at the end of 2009.

Not sure if they are accurate, but they're from the official sites. If you also factor in a lot of Kyles's pre-2010 appearances weren't at 7 due to Long being at the club (whilst Tomkins played 6) then I'd say Tomkins had far more top level half-back experience than Kyle by the time of the 2009 Four Nations.

Veridian Dynamics.

We use stats to make you look like a fool. Yay.

4.59423828125:5