Basically we've got no chance of ever catching the Aussies up now they've worked out how to put up bombs that come down [iat an angle[/i.

Thats because he is a conventional full back who played that position for a long time and was very good at it. Sam Tomkins hasnt played there that long yet and is still improving.

Like i said if he was so bad under the high ball he would of been shown up a lot more in super league but theres nobody in the same world as Lockyer obviously. Watch people try and bomb him in super league next season and they will pay the price when he returns the ball with interest.

To the original poster who mentioned Phil Clarke's comments, even i cringed when he said it was uncatchable. I just cant see how any ball is uncatchable unless you cant get to it in time.

Interesting. That being the case you'd think the kicker would just keep hold of the ball himself since he's standing where it's going to end up.

Wasn't uncatchable but was a cracking spiralling kick with great support from his front runners. Basically a kick that we didn't replicate once in the whole game despite them hitting several.

Whatever Phil. It was an atrocious attempt, and not the only one he made.

Dear Mrs Tomkins,

If you are wondering what little Sammy may be wanting for Christmas this year........may I suggest you pop these in his stocking!

Looked to me like he didn't want to pick up an injury before turning out for the Barbarians at RU.

Our protection of the FB was poor at best all night, the Cons knew the danger and worked hard to minimise it whilst attacking the potential weakness.
Again we were slaughtered in decision making.

What I want to see at international level is a player like Lockyer firstly putting up a devilishly cunning high bomb, spinning and spiralling the like of which you hardly ever see.

But then once I've finished admiring that, I want to see the opposition fullback put in a similar international class effort and miraculously catch it and turn defence into attack.

So I can watch open-mouthed at Lockyer's brilliance, and then gasp in admiration at the fullback's counter-brilliance.

What I sadly saw Tomkins do twice on Saturday and before that against NZ, was just make a total porridge of the kick, the first two he basically ended up making no attempt to catch whatsoever. Lockyer had not tied Tomkins' arms to his sides so sadly the conclusion is it was just terrible play by Tomkins.

One half of the show (Lockyer's kick) was international class; sadly the other half (Tomkins' "attempt", which it can only loosely be called) was rubbish.

couldn't have put it better but this is the amazing sam tomkins remember he can do no wrong!!!!!!!!

Funny thread.

For what it's worth, in my opinion, Lockyer has (had) the most difficult bomb in the world.

My club fullback, Josh Dugan, is great under a high ball. He got absolutely bombarded by Lockyer in Origin I and...oh, defused every single one. Nevermind.

Tomkins is an awesome player, potential superstar. I was very impressed with what I saw this Four Nations, my estimation of him has certainly risen. But compared with NRL fullbacks, he's still very much in the thick of it.

People talk about his youth, but Kevin Locke, for example, is the same age. The aforementioned Dugan, is a year younger. He's got the keep up with these young players (among others) before we can talk as highly about him as many already do. The absence of Slater for almost the whole tournament robbed the audience of a decent yardstick to compare, and no doubt an added spectacle.

Was Tomkins injured? He looked like it to me with a general lack of activity in the game in not getting to the high balls and when returning kicks he always passed it to another of the back 3 instead of returning it himself. Which is a shame because he's obviously very dangerous when returning the kicks. Didn't he pick up a knock against France?

Sam has a lot of talent, which will mean he can have weaknesses and still be considered a top performer, because of the slightly questionable all round ability of the SL professional compared to the NRL. Basically, he'll get away with dropping a few balls in SL that he wouldn't down under, because he can go up the other end and score one straight back.

If he's injured surely he wouldn't be playing RU at the weekend?

He failed to get to the pitch of high balls in the other matches too. Maybe he has a problem with his binocular vision - a gammy eye, eyes too close together, etc?

For what it's worth, I believe Australia had spotted a weakness there - hence the high kicks, which also gave the chasers time to stop him running the ball back. I had expected Oz to pressurise him at Wembley in some way - but they chose to kick to the wingmen instead. It was therefore inevitable they'd try to pressurise him in the final and based on a weakness they had perceived in other games.