No straw damn us wrote:Brett Kenny started off as a centre, and both he and Sterling were over 20 when they moved to their #6 and #7 positions. Yes they were young, but I'll stand by what I said. Also it was the 1962 tour when Murphy and Bolton really came together as a pair IIRC Jeff Stephenson was the incumbent scrum half. And having to go back to a completely different era of 30 - 50 years ago sort of proves my point.
Sterling was at 7 from the start, Kenny moved to 6 from centre bizarrely because Ella at 6 did not work for Parra and IIRC he was 20 at the oldest.
The reason I went bACK TO 58 AND 62 WAS TO SHOW THAT FANTASTIC YOUNG HALF BACK PAIRINGS HAVE (Apologies caps) existed for most of RL historu. Those pairings are comparable to any in any era in any country IMO.
If you are good enough you are old enough! If you are crap; Young or old it does not matter!
No straw damn us wrote:Brett Kenny started off as a centre, and both he and Sterling were over 20 when they moved to their #6 and #7 positions. Yes they were young, but I'll stand by what I said. Also it was the 1962 tour when Murphy and Bolton really came together as a pair IIRC Jeff Stephenson was the incumbent scrum half. And having to go back to a completely different era of 30 - 50 years ago sort of proves my point.
so what you are saying is you are prepared to lose one of the most natural halves we've produced in years and by your own admission after playing against St's a performance up there with only shaune edwards cause it's not right to play two 21 year olds together. You are prepared to lose what could be the most prolific half back pairing for years to keep playing smith.
I think comparing 50/60's to now is difficult, the physical demands required to defend/run against the modern professional player is much higher. BUT, playmakers back then were open to a lot more "treatment" from the opposition.
In essence one generation required much greater mental strength, while another requires to be physically ready before you can test his mental strength (unless you play him out of harms way on the wing or full back position)
I've thought for a while that there is a difference of opinion between IL and Rads compared to Waney.
SW will not play Hampshire at half back if he can possibly avoid it. There is no half back place in Waney's squad for Ryan.
On the other hand IL and Rads have a contract with the player until end of 2017. IL speaks of the long term future of Williams and Hampshire as half backs and how he's looking forward to it. That doesn't tie in with Waney's refusal to play him at 6 or maybe 7.
We are all too aware of the significance of signing Lee Hansen with Longy going to Widnes as the make weight. Just a few games and Saints signed him for £100k.
If Ryan goes to Cas on a perm deal after a loan spell then as soon as they are in financial trouble Leeds will come along with a deal Cas can't refuse and Hampshire goes to the Rhinos. We all know where that will go!
The loan deal seems the best at present to get him playing pretty regularly and Powell will not miss the oppostunity.
In view of what IL and Rads have said in the past I simply can't see them allowing Ryan to leave. What happens end of 2016 with one year left on his contract I don't know.
If 2016 ends as another trophy less season then there may be changes at the club which would not directly involve Hampshire, they would most certainly involve him indirectly though!
Should Ryan have a stellar season at Cas then he'll be back here 2017. I'm pretty sure about that!
producing possibly one of the best, if bot best back-lines in the history of RL
