I've read a couple of interesting articles of late from Thurston and Lockyer about positional play and how to best lead a team round the part from the halves.

Now Lockyer has retired Thurston has been campaigning to become the new 6 for Aus/Queensland and NQC.

Obviously the best teams in the world aren't using split halves anymore, but almost reverting back to a deep lying second receiver as once more commonly used. However the position of the 6 as a deep lying second receiver isn't to 'run off' the 7 but to have better vision, call for the ball when they want it and attack from deep.

Thurston like Lockyer likes the 6 position, neither JT or Lockyer are used at 6 for their pace, it's for their reading/understanding of the game.

Now apply this to Wigan and how we currently play.

We are currently still using split halves, one either side of the dummy halves. We only play with depth when Sam joins the line from the FB spot as a second receiver, other than that we look flat and are totally void of any pace in the halves. And as it has become apparent, no kicking game.

I was a fan of Sam as a 1 if we play split halves, however both 6/7 acting as first receivers aren't cutting it. I propose that we learn from the best and adapt our attack- Sam becomes the deep lying 6 (second receiver). From here we suddenly have pace in the halves, someone with vision who can see the game from a deeper perspective and can kick.

I believe Finch is an experienced 7 to take the ball regularly as a first receiver. Is an intelligent player who will make the right decisions.

Naturally with this move Tommy back to 9 for the love of all things Wigan! I don't exactly thing NZ Warriors are signing him as a 7. He's a quality 9, and an average 7. Lets sort it out.

With this we are left without a FB. I believe we have options with Amos, and Russell etc. I'd love to see Amos or Russell as a second reciever option on one side of the pitch as Sam is on another, or even playing as a 3rd receiver off Sam.

This would cause overlaps and inject so much pace into the backs.

Lets face it, it works for The Kangaroos.

Sam can play either 6 or 1 and be world-class. At the moment IMO we need Tommy at 9. Therefore the sensible option is to move Sam to 6. However, I won't be complaining if he stays at FB.

Spot on! Teams have worked out how to deal with Sam at FB. We need him back in the action at 6, with Tommy at 9, and Amos or a youngster at 1.

I always thought Sam was most effective as a 3rd receiver, with a couple of dummy runners going through, giving him the extra space he needs.

Haven't you just said Tomkins is second receiver whether he plays 1 or 6?

I understand what you're saying but I think Sam has proven that fullback is his most dangerous position in attack. It would be a shame to move him from that role simply because the halves aren't threatening enough, but obviously the team has to come first.

I should stress that it's far too early to be writing off our halfbacks as ineffective and thinking of massive changes that need to be made. However, if things do continue in that manner then the team will have to look for different options.

The issue with moving Sam from fullback is who replaces him. Roberts keeps getting mentioned but I just cannot see why. How can a plan be created that relies on a player who hasn't had any form for over a year and is still currently absent after surgery. Roberts shouldn't even come into the reckoning until he's actually played a game. He's had no pre-season, he has no definite return date from his injury. He's not a solution and cannot possibly be a solution until he's at least taken to the field again.

Matty Russell is the only option currently should Sam move back to 6. The question with him is whether he's ready for first team rugby yet. He's definitely got the ability to cause problems to a defence and in the testimonial game his one on one tackling as the last man was superb. The issue is whether he would cope with a bombardment of high kicks that would come his way and with the big step up from academy level.
He could be an excellent player to bring in, but throwing him in at the deep end should be thought through carefully.

I still think the most obvious first option would be to play Joe Mellor. He's got pace which is something the halves don't have. He's shown that he can put in some good kicks which is an immediate improvement on Leuluai. He's defended very well in pre-season and seems to be deceptively strong for his size. He's also further ahead in development compared to someone like Russell or Powell.

Oh, and he also wears number 25!

It's about the system and positioning. Different playing a second reciever 6 in split halves in relation to playing like the Kangroos. That's the whole point.

I said after game yesterday I'd put Russell on the bench against Leeds. When we spell McIlorum bring him on at fullback and move Sam up to 6.

He'll offer us pace and threat from fullback as Sam will from stand off. We'd also see a team trying to close Tomkins down quickly suddenly finding him in the line attacking in different areas where they don't expect him.

Maybe I'm wrong but I think it would work an absolute treat.

Is it wise to throw an 18 year old into what could be a very heated game where he will be faced with one of the best kickers in Super League?
It's a bit of a gamble compared with adding another halfback on the bench.

Of course with Farrell looking likely to get a ban this is a perfect opportunity to stick an attack minded player on the bench. Though I feel if Farrell does pick up a ban Wane would be more likely to bring Spencer onto the bench.

It's a gamble for sure and that's why I'd have him on the bench to start with. If things are going well then we can either give him just a few minutes or like on occasion last year not play him at all.

On the other hand if things are going poorly then why not chuck him in and see what he can do. He would have nothing to lose in a sense.

I've seen this lad play a few times now and he looks very good. I think he stands a better chance of making an impact then Mellor or Powell coming in to the halfs. I think people would expect them to be some sort of kicking saviour and it's too much to ask IMO.

I'm going off the idea of Sam at fullback, when he first went there it was new but teams have sussed him out now. He doesn't return the ball himself for fear of getting clattered (understandable) his one on one tackling at the back leaves a little to be desired and we are now short in the halves.

Makes sense to move him for me, Micky Mac and Tommy to spell at hooker would give them the chance to really rip for 40 mins each. I'd think about moving Richards to fullback, if not the guy needs to find some pace.

The problem with that is it means all the attacking moves the team has worked on in the past year and a half would be ineffective because Richards offers very little attacking threat from fullback.
It also means we have no target for cross field kicks on the left unless Charnley played there. That would mean Goulding and Gelling on the right and that's just making more issues than it's solving.

I think only Tomkins or Russell will be effective at fullback. Richards would be a step backwards.

Russel may well get a lot of game time this year if yesterday's performance is anything to go off. It would allow Tomkins to move to six, giving us some much needed pace in that area, plus it would free Leuluai to return to nine. We may not see it for a while, but it's something I'd like to see happen sooner rather than later. Bradford away sounds like a good place to start to me.

I like that idea. Give the players a chance to bounce back against Leeds and prove that Sunday was a blip against Shudds. If they manage it then we can go from there but if not I would tweak it slightly for Bradford.

I see your point but I would argue Tomkins is offering little in defence, Richards would offer a straight return without the constant passing and I'd say Richards isn't offering much attack at the minute? Haven't seen this Russell guy.

After Sunday i'd like to see changes sooner rather than later!