So with the selection of Tomkins as scrumhalf, the question is does a scrumhalf need any specialist skills or are scrum half , stand off and fullbacks totally interchangeable?

No, some half backs become hookers and vice versa. Some full backs become wingers or centres and vice versa. Some half backs become loose forwards.

Some examples:
Greg Inglis, centre to full back
Michael Monaghan, scrum half to hooker
Darius Boyd, winger to full back
Stafan Ratchford, centre to stand off to full back
Sean O’Loughlin, loose to stand off to centre to loose

There are probably dozens of examples.

The main thing being that sometimes it’s just that there’s an injury in a team that means you play your most closely matched player or a player where he has a good replacement with strength in depth in the position that has nobody in depth.

There are players who are purely a full back, scrum half or hooker; the best examples are the big three Melbourne/Queensland/Australia players Slater, Cronk and Smith.

But a lot of good rugby league players can play across many positions.

Even in football City’s goalkeeper, Ederson, used to be a left back... Chris Sutton was a centre half and then was a centre forward... they are bigger changes in skill set than any change in a rugby league or rugby union position.

I've seen Silesi Finau play prop and right wing at Wilderspool.
As regard to half backs, the game needs some with handling skills and vision to make it interesting again.

Harvey Howard for a total position change

It's a reflection of the utilitarian make-up of squads theae days. Coaches these days prefer jack of all trades who can [iplay[/i in many positions rather than [iexcel[/i in one.

This is nothing new : Hanley, Schofileld & Davies played in a variety of positions because they were hugely talented athletes whose core skills allowed them to adapt.

The problem in the modern era is we have utility players who, due to the overall decline in the quality of attacking play, can make do.and.mend in key positions.

Hence we have average full backs becoming appalling wingers, average full-backs becoming average half backs and mediocre half backs becoming round pegs in square hooker holes.

Putting me in pink diamante glasses doesn't make.me Elton.John any more than hoofing the ball in the air on tackle.five would.make me Alfie Langer.

...and there we have today's SL in a nutshell.
Blokes who (just about) can play in most positions, do play in most positions, bar a small scrum half going as prop.

Coaches want their players to be athletes, rather than RL players. They (the players) all seem to be an identikit 6'1" 14.5 stone, lean mean (non fighting, 'cause that would be naughty) machines
The games crying out for a wiry built winger, a la Phil Ford, who could step out of a tackle and be away, rather than another [ibrick pooh house[/i battering ram, who's job it is to gain yards (nothing like a good stat, to keep bores interested).

Get some flair back into the game, rather than an English equivalent of American Football, where a laptop is king.

As I said on the Ratboy thread, yesterday, Ratchford must have been bored witless, watching that. 18th man, while Ratboy's (and Williams' ) aimless kicks were permanently going the throats of the Kiwi's back 3. Duller than watching a 6 year old repeat of a qualifying weekend of the X-Factor .

Tony Clubb winger/centre to prop.

Very much with your sentiments on this.
Our game does lack flair and we don't seem to have created a top class half-back for years. All supporters complain about their half-backs lack of flair. But defences are so much better and the best defensive team (Wigan) win the big prize. Their games are a grind. Even the great Alex Murphy might find it harder to create. Unfortunately I'm not optimistic for a sudden change of direction.
I mustn't be too miserable ... well done Wire.

Benny Westwood Winger/Centre/Second Row/Prop

Specialists in their positions are getting rarer.

Especially at centre and stand off.

I don't think there are any specialists anymore, other than perhaps goal kickers.

Hooker, who should now be renamed “dummy half” and be done with.

I'm intrigued now, and shall try to remember to keep a tally of how many players slip into dummy half during the next game against New Zealand.

Consider what is the main role of the "hooker" nowadays, it certainly isn't hooking the ball in the scrum...it never gets near them (a good thing too in my opinion).

OOI what is wrong with a contested scrum. It would stop those scrums where the forwards don't even join in. If it's a worry about stop/start RL we have that anyway now.

Would it not add a bit of interest, unpredictability and specialism to a game that is really lacking all 3 at the moment?

Simple to introduce, just enforce the feeding rule.

Put-in or Feeding the Scrum 6. (a) The ball shall be put into the scrum from the Referee’s side by holding it in a horizontal position with a point in each hand and rolling it along the ground into the tunnel formed by the opposing front row forwards.
(b) The ball shall not be put in before the scrum has been correctly formed.
(c) There shall be no undue delay in putting the ball into the scrum.
(d) The player putting the ball in shall not hesitate or dummy and after putting it in he shall immediately retire behind his own pack of forwards.

A proper scrum would definitely change our game. The players/clubs/administrators just don't really want a competitive scrum. At the very least ... making players bind properly would be a step in the right direction.

You can still contest a scrum.
You rule to put the ball straight for a hooking feed hasn't been changed....just relaxed to allow the team with the awarded ball to restart the game from what is in effect a penalty.

I love a contested scrum but can't abide the constant fouling or repeated collapse of the scrum...which half the time ended up with a penalty anyway from the result.

There's nothing to stop the pack of the defending team to push and spin to try and win a scrum...I've seen it happen when a team was chasing the game and in 2 out of 3 times in 2 decades or more ....the defending team won against the head.

The main aim for the defending team now is to try and break for defence...I'd instruct my front row in attack to hold on to their facing player a couple of seconds longer...you can help create a gap or create a penalty when the opposite forward tries to take a swipe at you.

I would be in favour to ensure the forwards are in the scrum and not first receiver.

I would also change the rule on territorial kicking such that all players need to be on-side behind the kicker instead of just ten yards from where the receiver collects the ball. This would allow more freedom to the receiver instead of the forlorn hope which is the kick return.

But I'm not even sure the RFL realise there is an endemic problem in the game so I may as well in the wind.

What is wrong with a contested scrum? As a one off nothing, on the other hand have you watched an RU game recently? Huge waste of time with endless possibilities for penalties.

I agree. You also need to consider that, if scrums are to be contested, then they have to be set correctly in order to prevent serious injury - and this eats up time.

The thing about a scrum was that it was meant to tie the forwards in for one play in order to create space for the backs. With so much emphasis on defense, and with forwards staying out of the scrum, seldom does a scum down result in anything. Maybe we need to move to an 8 aside scrum?

I was told, when the uncontested scrum first came about that it was as a result of Australian sports clinic analysis of sport related injuries. The numbers I was quoted stated that there were seven broken necks incurred in rugby league as a result of scrum forming/collapsing. The view was taken that that is seven too many and from now on they would be uncontested to try to avoid this. Incidently, I was also quoted that the same survey found twenty three broken necks in rugby union. Not seen anything myself about this though.

Yes I am not advocating scrums like RU just those like we had pre Super League.

As for time wasting we have Video Referee, the remarkable injuries preventing the drop out, the mandatory pause and reflect before a scrum, the constant chats before and after penalty award and the 4 seconds of nonsense each tackle. That is why the game is not as dynamic as it was.

In that case, might as well just do away with them and start with a tap like 40/20's now begin.

Thin end of the wedge is that.

What happens when the medics say there have been lots of concussions caused by full tackle, and for players' safety Super League should go to touch rugby.

It would certainly make the game more interesting...one out drives don't get you far in touch.

Not for me MPN at least a scrum ties up 12 players