I think Michael Maguire would agree with you. He was moved to make the most of his running abilities not really to hide from defensive frailties, which have been over stated in my view. His defence is pretty good. He is certainly very brave, but because of his size can get mown down by a much bigger guy.

I think that it's a nailed on certainty that he will return to the halves in a few years (hopefully with Wigan). His passing is the equal of anyone's, he has the quickest hands in the England team and his kicking has improved no end too.

I agree with that. It also depends what you want from your halves and fullback and who you have in those positions. For instance if I had Chase as 1 halfback I wouldn't necessarily want Tomkins as the other, I'd want more of an organiser and a kicker alongside him. But if you've got, as we have now, Smith or Widdop as half back then I'd be happy with more of a runner alongside him.

Some great points being made on this thread and very few, if any, without merit. Good to see the art of discussion is alive and well and apparently living on the Leeds board!



As for the Tomkins v Hardaker for fullback debate I think it's too easy to overlook the fact that they offer different things. It's easy to make a case for one or the other by comparing one's strengths against the other's weaknesses but the truth is that neither is the complete fullback. In fact, fullback is such an exposed position in many respects, that it's probably true to say there has never been the complete package, even if some have come close. Slater, for example, is prone to brain farts that a lesser player would be crucified for making. I've seen better under the high ball (our own Steve Hampson for example) and more destructive runners (Inglis). There's been more creative players, more elusive runners and better passers of the ball. Yet he was, quite rightly, considered the best fullback in world rugby for a while... and still is by many!

I'm not saying that either is as good as Slater, of course. Just that put any player up against another and you will have one better at some things than the other and vice versa. In the end I think it's true to say that, on balance, Tomkins brings more to a team than Hardaker and that's why he's in there ahead of him. As well as the things he does better (not all by any means) he also brings leadership qualities and a stability to the team that Zak simply doesn't. Despite the desire of many to move Tomkins to half, as it stands he's a fullback and so it comes down to a straight choice of who brings the most. At present that's Tomkins.

Phuzzy-Fwiw we saw last year v Bradford Zak starting to take a more vocal/Nuturing leadership role so saying he simply doesn't have them is pretty wide of the mark.

Would these be the occasions when when Zak called for players to move from their defensive positions and leave gaping holes in the line?

you really do have an agenda against him don't you? still waiting for the other full backs you say are better

Why is it that if I make a point contrary to your opinion it has to be "an agenda against him"? Does this mean you have "an agenda" for him?

My argument has not been one-eyed and has included plenty of praise for Zak's strengths. I have never said he is a bad player or that we should sell him or drop him. But in pointing out his weaknesses I do appear to have upset his some of his myopic fans

i don't get the latest point, what's this about Hardaker creating huge gaps in our own defensive line?
Because I've got to say I've not seen it. In fact there have very rarely been huge gaps in our defensive line. Our defence in 2014 was excellent.

I'd actually say a key part of the reason why Leeds have conceded a lot less points in 2013 & then 2014 compared to the previous few years before that is because of Hardaker's organising from the back as he's grown more experienced in the FB role as time went on.

Zak has probably edged out Watkins of late to be Leeds' jewel in the crown.

If people want to pick over Zak, I'd ask them to point at easier candidates for criticisms. there's plenty to go at.

Now Kirek and Bailey have been moved on we need a new scapegoat though

My money's on Briscoe.

Im not one for scapegoats but a lot on here are, my moneys on Danny Mags!!!!

With Bailey and Kirke gone from the front row and a few on here against the decision to give him one more year then I reckon Leuluai could cop some depending on how much game time he gets.

Of course the ultimate in scapegoatery won't be a member of the playing staff at all. But that goes without saying.

My Money is on Broscoe.

Sorry, I meant more in terms of respect and professionalism off the park rather than any failings on it. I doubt even his most ardent of supporters would suggest he's a stabilising influence or a good role model within a squad.

Why? He's made a couple of mistakes, taken his punishment on the chin and come back to become one of the best players in the competition, and one of the leaders for his team. I've heard nothing from anybody to suggest he's a destablising influence at, the opposite infact.

I'm now convinced Tomkins is a stand off. Everyone talks about his weaknesses at FB, and what a great runner he is but really to me his kick returns have become less and less effective and from what I've seen he rarely makes a break when returning the ball. His major strength now is his link up play in the line and his passing. In other words I think he's become more of a pivot rather than a strike player so to me the time is right for him to move into the halves for NZ and England in particular, not to compensate for his weaknesses, but to exploit his strengths.
We have the best crop of FBs we've had in years so I think moving him from FB will not weaken England at all, and a half back will always be targeted in defence and although he's scrawny he's a strong player, and I certeinly thinkk he's a better defender than Matty Smith so it won't be the risk some people seem to think, in fact I think it's more risky to keep him in the side at FB

He wouldn't get in the Warriors side at half-back.

If they hadn't shown Kevin Locke the door to accommodate him, he probably wouldn't get in the Warriors side at full-back either.

The ultimate flat-track bully who simply doesn't produce in big games.

Thats a pretty big statement, but I was certainly underwhelmed by him in the 4 nations in the autumn. He was solid enough but didn't add too much going forward

"Solid" is not the word I would use to describe Tomkins. Now Hardaker at FB on the other hand!!!

JC has already shown his hand

.....

My money's on Stevie Ward (who no doubt will continue to be played in a role considered to be unsuitable by most)

One thing is for sure it will not be the captain - so McGuire is the one most on here like to deflect the blame away from his half back partner.

JJB will also not be immune if his previous habit of giving penalties away raises its head. Hopefully not as he seemed to have improved significantly in that area when he came back from injury last year.

What I saw of him in the NRL last year, he didn't look "first name on the teamsheet" material let's put it that way.

I certainly wouldn't have him in my team ahead of either Locke or Johnson.

I'd say Tomkins would go on better in the halves than Townsend or Tommy L.