Rads all the way for me, hios defence was solid.

Sam is a legend of the game and no one can deny his talent and ability to turn a game but I think he was always more of a 6 than a solid defensive full back

You say Rads "all the way" then make no case for him! You damn him with faint praise!

I mean, Shaun Briscoe was "solid". Any number of Super League fullbacks are "solid".

If you think that Rads was better than Sam you have to do better than that.

I always thought that Sam's defence was really good. How many times would we see him fearlessly throw himself at players bringing down much bigger than himself only yards from the try line. His positioning was very good on most occasions and only the odd dropped high ball let him down now and again.

Saying Tomkins was/is seen more of a stand off is a little like saying that Jason Robinson was seen more of a scrum half.

I remember when Radlinski made it look impossible for a kicker to get a bounce on a kick, he just used to glide across the whole field and jump up and snatch it out of the air.

Also in my opinion he was better at backing up a player obviously not in the same league in the running and play making

As a outsider but admirer of both I would have to go with Radlinski. For me Radlinski was the more complete FB. Tomkins has that unpredictability about him, chases lost causes and although does get criticised defensively he often pops up with a telling tackle but imo his hands let him down as does his timing and positioning. Don't get me wrong these points are not bad but are lacking enough for me to go with Radlinski by the narrowist of margins.

This whole topic backs up how Rads is one of the most overrated players we've had. He was very good at the basics but oftered nothing special.

Incredible Reardon fits that description, Radlinski's support play, tackling, bomb difusal and positioning were all up there with the best.

No better than mathers then.........

No disrespect to Radlinski who was a fine FB, but its Sam by a distance purely for his gamebreaking ability. Pretty much from the start he was Wigan's best player and biggest attacking threat. As good as Rads was, he was primarily an excellent defensive full back, hard worker in attack and excellent in support play. At no point of his Wigan career would I consider him the most irreplaceable member of the 13.

Good post.

Rads was a good fb, but not in Sam's league. We've had other better fbs at Wigan, let alone in the world.

he overall game was better than Sams. He played against better players as SL was stronger.

By what definition of overall game? Rads' tackling, positioning and ability under the high ball was better than Sam's is, but Sam's passing, kicking, running, ability to beat a man and general attacking play is in another league. Radlinski was excellent at backing up a break but so is Sam.

It's difficult to compare the two directly because since Rads has retired there has been a shift in emphasis in what is expected from a fullback. Nowadays a fullback is almost a deep-lying halfback. Rads was an excellent player and get's all the plaudits he deserves, but Sam is a genuine superstar and I've no doubt he'll prove that in the NRL. I think the fact Radlinski played longer and coming out of retirement etc. is clouding some people's judgement on this. I don't buy the "but SL was stronger back then" argument either, there were as many poop teams then as there are now, Sam would have stood out in any era IMO.

you dont buy it but look at the teams.....speaks for itself really.

I think the thing that sets Sam apart for me is the sheer amount of times he grabbed the game by the scruff of the neck and dragged us out of the mire, I rate Rads as the 2nd best fb of the Super League era and my favourite ever clubman but he didn't have the same sheer impact on the game that Sam or Andy Farrell did which sets them apart in my eyes as the two best Wigan players I've seen live (been watching since 2001)