So the Super League Website lists these as the best full backs Super League has ever seen:

Kris Radlinski
Paul Wellens
Brett Hodgson
Luke Dorn
Sam Tomkins

First three are all locked in choices for mine but the last two are embarrassing. For me, a Full Back has to be above all else, a fantastic defender, they are the last line of defense for the team, I can't count how many times Radlinski and Wellens pulled off brilliant defensive acts when it looked dead certain that the opposition would go over. Brett Hodgson is a step lower but still worth his weight in gold as a Full Back.

Luke Dorn is a try machine and a very good player, but he doesn't spring to mind as a top quality FULL BACK, for me, he doesn't have the attributes to be mentioned in the same breath as the 3 above. Now, Sam Tomkins, I find to be an absolutely laughable inclusion when it comes to being a great Full Back. Fantastic broken field runner? You bet, one of the best actually, he's lethal with space in front of him, but a great Full Back he is not and it's just ridiculous to me that he makes such a list. He can't defend, he's dodgy under a high ball, and I don't rate his linking into the line either unless he catches and goes himself, his passing game isn't anything notable.

Paul Wellens was a steady very reliable player but also over rated. Iesten Harris and Zak Hardaker far better full backs.

The last two convertered from half back. Dorn has had a good couple of years for Cas recently but before that he's been ridiculously average to poor. Had Tomkins stayed and not gone over to the NRL then maybe.

Surprised no Michael Withers!

Thought the same, first three really good in defence as well as attack also safe as houses under the high ball, bit embarrassing putting Sam Tomkins in there.

As a Wigan fan that has watched Radlinski at his peak and Tomkins' while Wigan career, I'd rather have Tomkins in my team.

The agenda against Tomkins on here is the embarrassment. You would do well to realise that the role of the fullback is not the same as it was in Wellens's or Radlinski's day.

Firstly I find that incredulous, secondly, still doesn't make Tomkins a great full back just because he happens to be a good player who is put at full back.

He's a little scrote but there is no agenda here, other than pointing out the truth, that he isn't a great full back, he is well below average when I think of what makes a great one. It's true that Radlinski and Wellens were a different breed of FB but even Hodgson who was more of a modern full back still had way more attributes to make him a good Full Back than Tomkins has ever shown. Tomkins (and Dorn!) are great players in terms of what they do, but they aren't Full Backs, definitely not in the top 5 ever in Super League.

Paul Reilly was better than all those but played for a crap team

2005 London Broncos - 24 tries
2006 Harlequins RL - 18 tries
2007 Salford City Reds - 11 tries
2008 Castleford Tigers - 19 tries
2009 Harlequins RL - 13 tries
2010 Harlequins RL - 18 tries
2011 Harlequins RL - 15 tries
2012 London Broncos - 16 tries
2013 London Broncos - 6 tries
2014 Castleford Tigers - 19 tries
2015 Castleford Tigers - 6 tries
2016 Castleford Tigers - 8 tries *so far

If that record is 'ridiculously average to poor' then I'd take anyone else you don't rate.
From 2005 to 2013 Dorn scored 140 tries playing for relatively poor teams. That doesn't seem too shoddy to me.
I also wonder how many other players have scored 10+ tries in nine consecutive seasons?

Michael Withers is a good shout.

How much full-back did Robbie Paul play? Was he always in the halves? Another candidate from the Bulls - Stuart Spruce.

Not enough Richard Barnett in there.

Richard Barnett was a brilliant player for London Broncos, and in terms of raw talent he was streets ahead of Grandpa Wellens.

Grandfather?

Shaun Briscoe, great full back and very brave

Way off the mark, Barnett is not even in the same "league" as the five mentioned especially with longevity at the highest level in both attack and defence.

Wellens 231 tries
Radlinski 183 tries
Hodgson 147 tries
Dorn 178 tries
Tomkins 159 tries

Barnett 59 tries

As for grandpa Wellens him and Hodgson are probably the best full backs at taking the high ball, they didn't call Wellens "Mr Radar" for nothing especially with those ears.

Why are people putting tries scored up to show how good a full back might be?

Leave the tries to the wingers. What about, first and foremost, defence? Hands under a high ball? Spotting plays from the opposition and organising the defence in front of him to combat that? Kick returns? Link up play as a third pivot?

But certainly, unless a player is an excellent tackler, especially on his own line, he shouldn't be anywhere near that list.

Is Slaters game based on Defence?

Shaun briscoe
Steve Prescott

I think Dorn has been an asset at whichever club he's been at and because it's never been at one of the big 4 I think he's often underrated.

I'd add Harris, Briscoe and Webb to the list of top full backs in SL.

I played full back for a number of seasons (amateur level, granted), and I see the fullback position as predominantly one of attack, rather than predominantly defensive.

Obviously, every position in a RL team is a mixture of the two, I just feel the mix for fullback should be more attacking minded, it should be your most potent weapon. Broken field running, chiming into the line either as a pivot or finishing moves, and support play on the shoulder. Speed, guile, agility, balance, good hands - the list of requirements for a fullback I higher than any other.

That's why all the top fullbacks mentioned (even Wellens, who we all think of as being defensively excellent first and foremost) scored a hat-full of tries.

There are defensive attributes they must have of course; fielding bombs and kicks, reading the play and marshalling the defence, but if a fullback is making a shed-load of one on one tackles, serious questions have to be asked of the team's defence.


Hull have had some very good FB's over the years: Prescott, Briscoe & Shaul are up there, but probably not in the same league as those mentioned originally.

Gary Connolly was always a favourite of mine.Not sure how much FB he played during the SL years though, probably mostly centre due to Radlinski.

Wellens
Hodgson
Radlinski
Webb
Greenshields

(In no particular order btw)

Dorn has been very good, but not sure he belongs here, for me Tomkins is too young to be on this list, considering he didn't spend all his time at fullback. For the same reason I wouldn't have Hardaker on there.
Webb was the best in this country before injuries crippled him, but like Tomkins wasn't the best defensively.

Someone who I've not seen mentioned on here is Clint Greenshields who I thought was excellent for a number of years at the dragons.

You have blundered in your analysis by failing to take account of the fact that Richard Rohan Barnett was in Super League for only a very short time -- two years -- unlike the other dreary characters you mention who spent their entire careers there. That is why comparative try tallies are irrelevant.

Richard Rohan Barnett did not have lengthy career in first grade rugby league, because he was living in New Zealand before the expansion of the now fabulous NRL. He first made his name as a winger at the Cronulla Sharks and subsequently at the Sydney Roosters. He came to prominence as a full back -- the best in Super League -- during his twilight years with the London Broncos. He had lost some of his speed but not his sidestep, which bamboozled the opposition in a way that straight running Kristopher Radlinski or the boring and painfully slow plodder Grandpa Wellens never could. Richard Rohan Barnett captained New Zealand from full back in the 2000 World Cup.

There is only one player in Super League who could dazzle at full back like Richard Barnett, and that was another former London Bronco named Mark McLinden.

In that case I can amend Barnett's try tally to 13 trys in 2 seasons at full back for the Broncos, which is pretty poor for an attacking full back.. Always better to judge a career over a long period of time for consistency in that position, I don't think Barnett is on the same page for comparisons, so I'm going to leave it at that to avoid consistent minority viewpoint.