I even replied to it because it was just silly.

They are both good players. I don't see what the problem is. You seem to think I am saying that as a lie and I actually think Eastmond is better



Tomkins won the young player of the year award last year, he didn't win it for no reason. He won that award over Eastmond. This year I clearly stated that Eastmond has made a bigger improvement on last season than Tomkins has. Maybe that is because he is playing every game at 7 though.

I would love Wigan to sign Eastmond and you would be stupid to not be happy if saints signed Tomkins.

Actually, we've said that from the beginning.

What we HAVEN'T said is that Eastmond's in a "different class" or that he's "far better" than Tomkins. Because he isn't.

Where he is now isn't a million miles from where Danny Orr was at Castleford.

Can Eastmond organise and direct a pack around the pitch?

To me he seems very one man band, his speed and balance are phenomenal, reminds me of Matt Bowen.

Don't think scrum half is his position in all honesty, plenty of years left to find out though.

Doesn't matter, Saints don't play that way. We play direct through the middle with as little width as possible.

Half backs are for pu$$ies.

Can Eastmond leap tall buildings in a single bound? Can he bend bullets by thought alone? Can he crack mountains in two with his mighty schlong?

No?

He'll never make it.

Both are very exciting and different players. I still believe Sam has a more all round game to his than Kyle, both compliment eachother superbly when playing together but you only have to look back at some of Sam's assists to realise he's a completely different style of half back to Eastmond, watch out for Sam's pass to Pat yesterday for his 2nd try. It took some scoring but the pass was superb and has developed his attacking kicks this year as well. As it has been said, Kyle's playing out of his skin but there aren't many other Saints players challenging him on a consistent basis. Whereas at Wigan we've had Roberts, Joel Tomkins, Pat Richards and Locky all playing consistent rugby week in week out which makes it harder for Sam to have the lime light unlike last year.

Unless Tomkins bent the ball around a corner I doubt it's anything Eastmond hasn't already achieved. As far as kicking goes, I don't see any difference.

It's the same with just about every Wiganer that frequents this site. [i"Eastmond ... blah blah blah ... good player ... blah blah ... more athletic ... blah blah ... BUT Tomkins is better ... "[/i

The truth is - and I know this is difficult to hear - right now, the pair are just about equal in their abilities (it's worth remembering that Eastmond is the younger of the two by nearly a year). Eastmond is faster off the mark and more explosive. Tomkins appears to be the better organiser (although it's not easy to quantify this attribute).

Eastmond didn't play anywhere near as many games as Tomkins last season. Kyle was still fill-in for Longy and only played when Longy was injured and then on about three occasions at centre when Wheeler was injured. So it really isn't surprising that Tomkins won, is it, given the number of times he played as opposed to the number of times Eastmond played?

I don't know when players stop being Young Players but things may be different this season if Kyle continues to develop as he is doing presently. The two play different positions and they are different players but to my mind they are equally as good at present. The difference between them is that Kyle has more flash.

You could just as easily say that it's a lot easier to look good as a half back when the players around you are performing well. FWIW I don't think there's much between them - it's just nice to be talking about a genuinely exciting GB/England halfback partnership in the making.

Correct, looking at the stats there isn't. Kyle is probably more of a running back though with Sam being a bit more organised. As I said both completely different style of players who are a joy to watch for either team when on top form.

Having watched the Super League Show tonight, finally, I personally thought it wasn't as good as you make out. There was some terrible defence, all he really had to do was run and step.

Compared to the effort Quins had to go to to score against you, having seemingly far superior defence, I just didn't think it was anything to really talk about.

Not to take anything away from Kyle, but compared to other tries he's scored in his (so far short) career, I think that try against Quins is a poor example to pick if you were going to present "Kyle Eastmond's best try".

To be more specific, when we sat down to watch it, I mentioned this thread to the missus, saying "Eastmond's try is supposed to be superb". We both thought he must score again or something... But he doesn't.

Because you are so anti St Helens. Bryn Hargreaves could run 100m, beating every single wigan player, stopping short of the line, running back to his own ingoal area, then doing the same thing again, beating every wigan player and touching down under the posts and you still wouldnt think it was a great try.

Duh. Try scored as a result of poor defence shocker.

All tries are scored as a result of poor defence otherwise they would be stopped ... by the defence.

It was a 'superb' try because of the way he timed his run, caught the ball, sidestepped the opposition at speed, legged it, fended, switched the ball from one hand to the other while in motion, and successfully put the ball down. All in one fast, graceful movement. You really are bitter if you can't see the beauty in a try like that.

Good lad.

Sad bast*rd.

Really is hurting the pies that Eastmond is a better player than their saviour.

Wrong on every single level.

I heaped praise on Eastmond for his superb kick to the corner when you finally scored against us on Good Friday. I heaped praise on Eastmond throughout this thread because he's a very good player. If that is being "Anti St Helens", then how exactly can I praise anything they or any of the St Helens team do?

Over the years, I've praised many Saints players, just as I've been critical of Saints players, and I've praised and criticised many players from all teams. I do this WITHOUT bias, if a player is great, I'll say they're great. If they're dirty, I'll say they're dirty.

Here, have one more lump of praise for Eastmond whilst I'm being SO Anti St Helens... he's easily your leading contender for Man Of Steel, and in with a good chance as things stand, equally so Young Player of the Year. However, like the league leadership, these are only really decided at the end of the season, and there's a long way to go.




Not all tries are scored as a result of poor defence. Quins' tries against you, for example, were good tries because your strong defence tried hard to keep them out, but they kept opening doors until they made your line. I wouldn't have said you had poor defence, (OK, maybe for a couple of the tries, but certainly not all of them) but Quins had an uncharacteristically strong attack for their position in the league.

Eastmond's try against Quins is reminiscent of tries scored recently by Amos Roberts, Joel Tomkins, Danny McGuire, Rob Burrow, Kevin Sinfield, Ryan Hall, Sam Obst, and many more. Would you rate any of those players higher than Eastmond? No, neither would I.





Yes, you're right, being 4 points above you in the league and beating you at KR on Good Friday... so painful.

Seriously, grow up. Eastmond is a fantastic player, but as to whether he is better than Sam, or whether Sam is better than Eastmond, no-one can really say.

In my opinion the pain of losing on Good Friday is causing some of you to make ridiculous comments like "Eastmond is the ONLY 'WOW' player in Super League."




If you're going to do the infantile "Quote someone, change what they say and post it thinking it's funny" routine, at least try and get a grasp of reality, English and humour. Otherwise you end up looking a fool. Again.

Sad, very sad

See, this is what is SO frustrating with trying to have a discussion with the likes found here.

I post factual, evidenced information, venturing a qualified and referenced opinion, in a very honest and non-confrontational way, and the only way you can respond is with smileys and an insult.

If it's "sad", WHY is it sad?

If I'm wrong, WHY am I wrong?

If you disagree, tell us WHY and try not to resort to childish insults!

It's called "debate", it's not all that difficult to do, really it isn't.

I'm sure most of you AREN'T children really, but it certainly comes across like many of you (Don Brennan especially, no offence intended but I'm sure some will be caused) are 13 years old and worried that the pitch in your voice is changing.

As Michael Jackson said, if you want to make the world a better place, take a look at yourself and make the change.

You're indeed, very sad

You'll find a decent debate hard to find on most boards but in fairness to others your hardly the bastion of impartiality you claim to be your just a little more subtle with your insinuations and insults. I a couple of your posts and chuckled, you probably do have some decent points and personally I honestly cant just the point in slagging either player off...

Quote ="Fishsta"See, this is what is SO frustrating with trying to have a discussion with the likes found here. I post factual, evidenced information, venturing a qualified and referenced opinion, in a very honest and non-confrontational way, and the only way you can respond is with smileys and an insult. If it's "sad", WHY is it sad? If I'm wrong, WHY am I wrong? If you disagree, tell us WHY and try not to resort to childish insults! It's called "debate", it's not all that difficult to do, really it isn't. I'm sure most of you AREN'T children really, but it certainly comes across like many of you (Don Brennan especially, no offence intended but I'm sure some will be caused) are 13 years old and worried that the pitch in your voice is changing. As Michael Jackson said, if you want to make the world a better place, take a look at yourself and make the change.'" viewtopic.php?f=28&t=452756 Sat there with your camera at the ready,sadsac.

Quote ="Fishsta"See, this is what is SO frustrating with trying to have a discussion with the likes found here. I post factual, evidenced information, venturing a qualified and referenced opinion, in a very honest and non-confrontational way, and the only way you can respond is with smileys and an insult. If it's "sad", WHY is it sad? If I'm wrong, WHY am I wrong? If you disagree, tell us WHY and try not to resort to childish insults! It's called "debate", it's not all that difficult to do, really it isn't. I'm sure most of you AREN'T children really, but it certainly comes across like many of you (Don Brennan especially, no offence intended but I'm sure some will be caused) are 13 years old and worried that the pitch in your voice is changing. As Michael Jackson said, if you want to make the world a better place, take a look at yourself and make the change.'" viewtopic.php?f=28&t=452756 Sat there with your camera at the ready,sadsac.

He might be scum in wigan fans eyes, but hes still better than Tomkins.

And comments like that, which are like a fountain coursing from your keyboard, are why you - and note, you - will find it extremely difficult to find a discussion with 'the likes found here'.

We do enjoy laughing at you though. So please, go ahead.

I bet you can't decide who gives you a bigger hard-on now, can you? Kyle or Keiron.

It was a good try. He's scored better. And he will score better.

For sure - if one of the Monkey People had scored it they'd be trucking in extra workers at the Vatican to deal with requests to have it officially ratified as a miracle and sure sign of The Revival - or is it The Reflux?

I don't insult anyone unless they really deserve it, and believe me, I won't be subtle when it comes to that. Some people read too much into my posts, I think. If you read them over and "keep it real", I've been nothing but positive about Eastmond and his talent. I have a lot of respect for him, and that comes from him not just being a very good player, but he's a very clean player. There's none of this "ego" you got from the likes of Paul Sculthorpe and Cunningham.

That's the worst bit, I'm TRYING to hate him because he plays for the opposition, but I can't. I want him to play for Wigan.

The ONLY point I'm making is that you CAN'T say he's the "only WOW player", and suddenly discount Tomkins, especially given Tomkins performances have been excellent in their own right.

Between the two of them, both Man of Steel and Young Player of the Year are up for the battle. Who'll win? It's too early to say.

Honestly, if you think there's a "subtle" insult towards any Saints player or fan in that, there's not. And what I've just said is EXACTLY what I've been saying throughout this thread.




It's good to know The Raggy Dolls are as popular among under 8s as it was in the 80s when I were a lad.

(Note to No1Saint, I said I wouldn't be subtle with an insult, and I said I wouldn't deliver one to anyone who doesn't deserve one. I'm true to my word.)

In response, however, an amusing typo, whether deliberate or not, by someone who is absolutely NOTHING to do with me is NOT ammunition you can somehow use against me. And the camera is kept nearby, so what of it? I'm a keen photographer, and see no reason to be ashamed of it. I'm intelligent enough to know how to use one, are you jealous?




That's just it, he ISN'T. That's ISN'T scum, by the way. If he is better than Tomkins, maybe he should have acheived more on Good Friday?

No-one from the Wigan camp is disagreeing he's a very good player, but thus far Tomkins outshone him in the last derby and won Young Player Of The Year last year. Last year's derbies were very close to call. Come the end of the season, maybe we can say for certain one way or the other. Until then I would say that anyone proclaiming one is better than the other needs to hold their tongue for a few months because it's far from settled.





There's a strong case of double standards. Whilst I'm not discounting Eastmond's current level or potential level, I'm sticking up for the other big talent coming through in Super League, and to be honest, we're all being a little unfair because Eastmond and Sam are NOT the ONLY young talent around. More and more youngsters are stepping up in many different teams. Everyone's talking about these two because as it stands they are the brightest sparks, but apart from the Saints fans who are saying Eastmond is the "only WOW player", no-one is being so biased as to say "So and so is the best and that's it". We've established they're two great players. We've established they're different. Yet certain fans - and mainly Saints fans (but not ALL Saints fans) - are making claims that cannot yet be proven. Current records and honours denote that Sam is the better player, I myself have already said I think Eastmond will clinch those honours this year. In their next match, either one could sustain a serious injury and never play again, and I would mourn for Rugby League no matter who that happened to.

I'm posting balanced, fair comments, but because I'm not a Saints fan, some of your fellow fans are jumping on the "Insult Fishsta, he dares to post the truth" bandwagon. And it is frustrating because some fans CAN view things objectively, but they are drowned by the torrent of abuse coming from the moronically biased portion of your fans.

It's like in the Wigan Tactics thread, a Saints fan comments "There's a long way to go (in the season)", I say "Indeed there is", I get called a "cock". If I'd said, "No there isn't", I expect I would have received the same insult.

If people could actually respond with something constructive instead of resorting to insults, forums in general would be better places. As it is, the imbeciles concerned effectively admit defeat without even trying to contest anything I've said. Like I said, I don't insult anyone who doesn't deserve it.



If I was a rampant homosexual, Keiron would have to take it because I wouldn't like his 29stone frame on top of me. Besides, I daresay Kyle is faster than me, and I would struggle to catch him.

Seriously, though, (and if anyone takes this to be some sort of sly insult then there really is no hope), Kyle and Sam have the quality at their disposal to not just become great players, or even legends of the game, but the potential to achieve "Best player of the Super League era".

If Eddie and Stevo are still around in ten years time, I will buy their latest Rugby League DVD (costing £673.99 because of the inflation) and I would not be surprised if one, or both, replaced Andy Farrell with that particular honour.

Tell you what, Saintsfan, if Kyle ends up higher that list than Sam, I'll buy you that DVD for Christmas. If Sam ends up higher than Kyle, you buy it me. We'll meet here ten years from now to see. (Yes, I do see the slight problem in that one of us has to buy that DVD anyway, so maybe we should just make it a tenner instead.)




Now THAT sums it up perfectly.