might be a silly question but can someone tell me what the difference is between a stand off and a scrum half please apart from shirt numbers

Depends what team you look at.

Some split the field and play the 6 and 7 on opposite sides, in which case there's not a huge amount of difference other than who shoves the ball in the scrum.

Other teams play 1st and 2nd receiver.

They don't exist anymore.

Pretty much every team splits their playmakers.

Yep.

Years back your scrum half would always be first receiver and your stand off a few men out.

Scrum half - 1st reciever - Organiser and kicker
Stand off - 2nd reciever - Free to do what they want out wide whether they run or pass, maverick style of player.

Nowadays the 6 and 7 are both similar with the 1 doing the stand off role. Us, Melbourne and Huddersfield all do this.

Thats my understanding.

For me a 7 is more of the creator. The first receiver of the ball and so a passer, a kicker, and someone who stays in and around the middle of the field, as a general. The 7 dictates the play and where the play goes, and creates chances for other players by their vision and understanding of the game (Deacon / Dobson / Long / Orford/ Thurston etc.)

A 6 is normally a more off the cuff individual player who, while he still needs to be a creator and a reader of the game, creates more through individual brilliance, and off the cuff unexpected plays, often playing in a free'er role in and around the fringes. Hes the opportunitst in the team, who might create something from a darting run, a quick play the ball, a chip over the top etc (Read Mcguire, Tomkins, Chase etc.)

There has been a bluring of the lines in recent times IMO and most of the time in SL theres little between the two, ie/ Brough as a 6, yet plays more like a traditional 7, Burrow as a 7 yet plays more as a traditional 6, and in essence in these sort of teams, this is because they're essentially running with two natural s/o or two natural s/h.....however traditionally that is my understanding, and IMO the teams that tend to run better, are those with two halfs who perform the traditional differing roles (ie/ a Tomkins and Deacon), rather than two would be traditional stand offs (ie/McGuire / Burrow etc.). This is why IMO teams like leeds look more structured when Kevin Sinfield comes into the halves, as he plays the game very much like a traditional scrum half, and directs the play better from the middle rather than round the flanks as a loose forward.

one puts the ball in the scrum and is usually big headed, the other isn't

As FearTheVee touched on, there is very little difference between 6 and 7 now except which side of the field they play. Most teams operate a split field with one running the left side, and the other running the right.

They even both put the ball in the scrum nowadays and are classed as left or right 'ball players'.

Millward at Saints was the first I rember a definate left/right set up with martyn and Long. We switched back to first and 2nd when Anderson arrived.
Tony Smith brought the left/right to leeds and often used Sinfield (13) as 1st receiver in the middle.
I think I'm right in saying huddersfield would use the same system, but with their scrum half at 1st receiver, brown as 2nd on one side and the full back hodgson on the other (I stand to be corrected though).

I think playing the 2nd and 1st leans itself more to playing expansive rugby.

in the modern game theres no difference any more,

years ago , they were specialist positions.......7 the organiser, 6 out wider linking with centres or doing own thing.
hooker was there to "hook", or contest the ball in the scrum (these days every put in would be a penalty back then),

times change.
today 9 is more like the organiser , and 6 and 7 are like old time stand offs,but closer in like scrum halves.
the old time stand offs role of linking with centres is a role now taken up by 11 and 12.

thats my take on how the games changed

Glad you explained what a split field meant mate,



But yeah, there is literally no difference nowadays as fax said. In effect we have used at times this year 4 players as effective half-backs creating and moving the play around the park. ( Sam at fullback, Deacon and Tommy at HB positions and Lockers at Loose FW)

With sam, finch, Tommy, possibly deacon and Billy Slater next season we're gonna have a few headaches

Good discussion, one that interests me as a fan of the tactics and of our game, more so with the question over where do we play Sam.

I personally was a big fan of the 'golden triangle' attack with Edwards. Greg and Hanley. With this Wigan had the luxury of having Greg as a 'true 7' as a first receiver with the options of having Hanley basically playing as a second receiver off him on one side with Edwards on the other both acting as a second receiver. Obviously with our success it worked very well.

I've seen this used at Leeds (Sinfield, Burrow, Maguire) it's the advantage of having a very good ball player at 13.

I think spilt halves works if you having a ball playing FB. otherwise the attack can look flat as it's harder to create depth and overlaps. having the first and second receiver on the same side can create a man over in attack.

If we are to play split halves I think it's better to play Sam from FB, he's a running half who's VERY effective as a second receiver.
Look at Storm, they in essence have two 7's at 6 and 7 with Finch and Cronk. Slater is often the second receiver (we do the same with Sam) and it works a charm!

If we were going to play split with Sam in the halves he's basically playing as a 7, was act as a first receiver.
Unless we go old school and use him as a second receiver.