England opt for Tomkins over Ratchford for Kiwis clash

[josie andrews]

Lomax is at FB, Tomkins in the halves at 7 with George at 6.
Gildart & Connor are at centre. Gildart preferred to Percival.

https://www.wigantoday.net/sport/rugby- ... -1-9415210

[josie andrews]

Teams for Saturday’s first Test at Hull’s KCOM Stadium:

England:

J Lomax (St Helens); J McGillvary (Huddersfield), O Gildart (Wigan), J Connor (Hull), T Makinson (St Helens); G Williams (Wigan), S Tomkins (Wigan); C Hill (Warrington), J Hodgson (Canberra), J Graham (St George Illawarra), E Whitehead (Canberra), J Bateman (Wigan), S O’Loughlin (Wigan, capt). Interchange: D Clark (Warrington), T Burgess (South Sydney), G Burgess (South Sydney), L Thompson (St Helens).

New Zealand:

D Watene-Zelezniak (Penrith, capt); K Maumalo (NZ Warriors), E Marsters (Wests Tigers), J Manu (Sydney Roosters), J Rapana (Canberra); S Johnson (NZ Warriors), K Nikorima (Brisbane); J Bromwich (Melbourne), B Smith (Melbourne), J Waerea-Hargreaves (Sydney Roosters), K Proctor (Gold Coast), Isaac Liu (Sydney Roosters), J Fisher-Harris (Penrith).

Read more at: https://www.wigantoday.net/sport/rugby- ... -1-9415210

[old hooker]

Depends on what you're looking for

Ratchford is better individually than tomkins

Tomkins is a better team player

First of all Ratchford is not a better player in any way or form imo, secondly RL is a team game so why would Ratchford be selected over Sam? Tomkins every time.

ok examples

Kick return on a broken field Ratchford has the ability to go full length beating a few players, tomkins does not. Ratchfords footwork and agility are better than tomkins especially 2nd stint tomkins

Ratchford also has no self preservation so steams into places tomkins wont.

what i mean for playing for the team ratchford would try something crazy like a chip over or take himself near the try line to score, sometimes it comes off and looks great, tomkins wont do this unless he is absolutely convinced he will score, he will take the tackle or move the play inside.

Really?

[moto748]

Well if you're going to play Sam T in the halves, surely all the more reason to play Ratchford at full-back? Surely he's better than Lomax? And has performed better for England in the past. I think he can feel pretty hard done by.

[TrueBlueWarrior]

First of all Ratchford is not a better player in any way or form imo, secondly RL is a team game so why would Ratchford be selected over Sam? Tomkins every time.

ok examples

Kick return on a broken field Ratchford has the ability to go full length beating a few players, tomkins does not. Ratchfords footwork and agility are better than tomkins especially 2nd stint tomkins

Ratchford also has no self preservation so steams into places tomkins wont.

what i mean for playing for the team ratchford would try something crazy like a chip over or take himself near the try line to score, sometimes it comes off and looks great, tomkins wont do this unless he is absolutely convinced he will score, he will take the tackle or move the play inside.

Really?

I agree with much you say WF about many things and understand your points but it boils down to this for me, who is the better player and who would you want in your team, Tomkins all day long!!

[Firestarter]

Tomkins is in the halves coz he has a far superior kicking game than lomax and connor...... hes also a better organiser and leader...... thats why i knew(thought) lomax would start at fullback