I think Tomkins should be protected more by refs if obvious intent and attempts to injure him are made, I haven't seen this maliciousness yet and don't believe many players intentionally try to 'hurt' a player just rough him up abit

I agree that Burrow takes too many head high shots, but players like Crabtree are going to find it hard to get down to a safe hight, the same excuse doesn't exist for Tomkins. Indeed his hight should mean he gets less high tackles (as would Crabtree's hight).

I don't know of any occasion where Tomkins has been looking for any excuses. Indeed, I don't see Tomkins taking a backward step. JJB hit him in the Leeds game and Tomkins was there, in his face. I can't think of a time that Tomkins hasn't got up and got on with it this year.

I'm not sure what you are alluding to about Wigan fans being on dodgy ground. I hardly think that any comments about a certain Leeds player injuring himself whilst coming foul play as vaguely the same thing, nobody wished that on McGuire. There is a view that Karma is a bitch about the subject, but if anything my experience of the Wigan fans and forum is that there are very very few people whom would wish an injury on any player.

Do you need my to explain what if means to you?

Ablett caught Tomkins with a high shot two years ago, get over it, it was hardly a Mick Cassidy or Terry Newton level of Shithouseness

Don't be silly. Have you seen every minute of every SL game this year and in person? If not then it's best that you don't make any comments about any game or player this year based on your point.

BTW - also, don't comment on any comment or topic on the board unless you have read every single piece of text....

Burrows height isn't an excuse, a foul is a foul.

And I was posing a hypothetical question I was posing about Tomkins moaning, I have seen plenty of players look to the ref, rather than just knuckling down. In fact being able to dust yourself is, always has been, and hopefully always will be part of our game. RL pretty much personifies the old creed 'it's not how hard you get hit, it's how many times you can get back up'

And sadly a depressingly high number of Wigan fans who did wish injury on Mcguire, and there are sadly, people who would argue Tomkins getting injured would be 'karma being a bitch'

Wane* is talking about protection for Sam Tomkins. If what is happening to Sam, is happening to other players throughout the league then it doesn't make it acceptable. What Wane is doing foremost is looking to protect his player.

Regardless of what goes in on in all games, in the games involving Sam, Wane has noticed that foul play is occuring quite frequently against his star player.

And what you, for no obvious reason, fail to see is that frequency is a relative concept

Actually an intelligent piece of PR by Wane this. Places the refs in an awkward position now re: any vigorous tackle on Sam. Could lead to a lot more penalties awarded Wigan's way. It's really just a coach trying to give his team every advantage he possibly can. Fair play to him.

BTW, a significant factor of Burrow being "hit high" is that alot of the time he just loses his footing when trying to step defenders and actually falls into arms that are at a perfectly acceptable height. It's not the defenders' problem that Rob is of small stature & sometimes loses his footing. But a penalty often arises.

Suggesting someone can learn a lesson from someone else implies they aren't doing the thing you're suggesting they can learn. Therefore it doesn't matter whether you use the word 'if', you're still insinuating that the lesson needs to be learned. That was my objection to what you wrote.

And there's no need to be defensive. It can't be helped if the most obvious example of Tomkins brushing off a tackle and not complaining was after a high shot from a Leeds player.

But he has no way of knowing if that is normal right across the league just as you don't.
As an example I have seen Micheal Dobson battered during some games.
It happens but Wane isn't interested in all that apparently he just wants little Sam protected.
You seem to have a similar opinion.
As Smokey rightly says (God I can't belive I have just said that!!) it is all relative which is why I said this.

No, 'if' by its definition states that the statement is uncertain. I was simply stating 'if' Tomkins complains then he would be better placed learning from Burrow who hasn't. 'if' he hasn't and won't then he doesn't. It is the reason 'if' was included.

And my issue with your use of Ablett as an example, was less to do with him being a Leeds player and more the nonsensical argument of stating Tompkins needs protecting from players doing something which happened once, wasn't that bad, and was two years ago

It was a bad one though. 3 match bans don't get handed out for nothing these days. Just because it's a Leeds player doesn't mean it was less serious than from any other player.

And I didn't state that Tomkins needs protecting. I was using it as an example of him brushing off a big tackle. I don't think he needs protecting, he's perfectly capable of looking after himself.

If you're just too sensitive to take any mention of a Leeds player doing anything wrong, there's a clip on youtube of Tomkins getting a big hit off Jason Baitieri and giving him a big old smile as he's getting up. That demonstrates the point without threatening to impair your rose tinted view of Leeds.

Care to explain?

You saying he's not Wigan's big danger player? That opposition players don't try and smash or hurt whenever they get hold of him? That he doesn't 'brush himself off' and get on with it pretty much every time?

Which part of this is incorrect?

You are right when you say it's relative, and relatively speaking Sam takes more shots and rough/dirty treatment per tackle than the majority of players. That's not to say he's not the only one who gets treatment.

Anyway, your whole post was flawed. Sam has made no complaint, not in the press and very rarely in games. That you're now desperately citing semantics when the meaning of your statement is embarrassingly clear is merely digging your little hole deeper.


Ps: no, it's his height. Yes, at times fatigue leads to a lazy tackle but when the player in question is 5 foot & a fart tall and nippy, he will inevitably receive more high shots than most. He also often tries to duck tackles. That you're arguing otherwise is indicative of your usual level of reason: flawed and delusional.

It has nothing to do with him being a Leeds player, its that it wasn't that bad and was two years ago, I'd agree he can and always has looked like he can protect himself, if I were him I'd be seething that Wane had singled me as needing it

There was nothing in the Sa tackle. Wigan fans are living in their own world.

Sam gets more than enough protection. The problem is not that it's open slather on him, it's that he gets away with murder.