Besides... just because they got taken away, doesn't mean we didn't win them. We still won those games.
Those were the good old days when every team had a lock or centre at five-eight. Inglis, Lyon, Bird, Anasta, Mateo, Bailey, Gasnier, Carroll ...
Yeah I agree. The five-eighth type aspects if you like if Slater's fullback play has always been his worst attributes. I think he's actually developed some excellent vision over the years and his ability to read the game in attack and defence is a massive part of why he's so good, but I think he lacks the basic skills of a half. He'd know what to do but his execution would let him down, and it'd take away a lot from his pace and support play.
The good thing about having Hinchcliffe at lock is that they run some plays like that anyway. Widdop plays as much if not more second receiver as first receiver which is pretty rare for a modern half, and they go through any number of first receivers on the left. Sometimes Cronk shifts to the left to play a traditional halves setup for a ruck. Sometimes they set up for what looks like is going to be a standard Hinchcliffe tight hit-up and his spins the ball left to Widdop himself. And yes, sometimes Hinchcliffe goes into hooker while Smith stands at left halfback. Sometimes Widdop just stands there himself too, of course, but they have developed a number of different ways to get him wider. The problem coaches have with no running split halves these days is that the direction the play is going can become too predictable for the defence if they just pick out where the halves are standing. But Melbourne's somewhat unique structure with Hinchcliffe and Smith being able to play a couple of roles has always left Widdop to be to play like a more traditional five-eighth, which was very much in line with the role he had in attack as a junior fullback. I'd just be keeping that structure when Widdop left and inserting Hampton at five-eighth.
