jonh wrote:
I’m not sure what I’d old school going into a season with 1 recognised pivot on the field.
I know if I coached or played against a team with only one pivot I’d be over the moon.
This isn’t kids rugby. Hastings is a very good half but as a defender the thought if only having him calling things and directing the team would be a massive mistake and basically put a massive Red Cross on his head as a target.
It’s not like we have a creative full back either.
Giving the opposition one man to target as a play maker would make us so predictable.
I agree I like the look of French in open play but for me he needs to be on the wing.
ZH is a fullback, no reason to shift him.
Bibby is a centre.
No point reinventing the wheel and making players play out of position to accommodate a player who clearly isn’t a half.
On the face of it it does seem a strange use of cap space but given we have gone down that route I’d be looking to shift Burgess and one of Davies/Marshall in the hope we can use that cap space to recruit a half, assuming we are already looking to move in Sammutt and Escare.
Still 2 pivots. 6 just plays off the 7. 7 closer to the ruck with the 6 outside of him. Then the 6 and 7 actually play together on the same side of the field in attack as a creative 2. One more controlling the other more running.
It’s more old school as that’s how it used to be as an evolutionary step from union where their 12 plays off their 10.
Salford did play with a dominant half in Hastings with Lui then Lolo playing more off him.
Canberra also let Sezer play the 7 using Wrighton as a running 6.
I don’t see French as a play making half, but I’d like to see him running off Hastings outside the 7 with the 3rd quarter line outside of the 6.
