As Field is not out for months then I guess there was no need to look too far for a replacement?
Maybe throwing Eckersley/Sumner in may have knocked their confidence if it went badly.
However, Farrimond looks to have the confidence and ability to step up into the halves now and his kicking is a bonus.

Just bring out the next one off the Wigan R.L.F.C. production line.

I personally don’t like the idea of shifting French back there now.

French is a 6 and still learning the position I want him to stay there and we need in my opinion to look at options for 1.

I’d quite like to see Kerighan have a run there with Eckersley taking the centre spot.

Rocky for me has struggled so far when given a chance, obviously there are reasons for that, but I’d like to explore other options with Ricky being the fallback option

Smith and Farrimond for me doesn’t work at this stage in the halves. They have similar strengths and we lose a lot of strike if we go down that route.

Bin off Isa and bring in a loan player from Ozz, It worked out great with that Nick Graham fellow

I agree with much of that but the bit in bold is a little strange. How do you know it doesn't work? As far as I'm aware they haven't even played together. I'm guessing that the coaching staff will have tried this combination in training and would only put it into practice if they thought it could work. Besides which, we have won a title with Deacon and Leuluai, neither of whom were really a running threat. The combination may well not work but we simply don't know until we see it in action.

I can't say I'm an expert on Farrimond but I've seen a decent amount of him now between the academy, reserves and first team and I do think there is enough differences between him and Smith to make a partnership possible. He's got more of a running game then Smith for one but I also see him as a bit more of an off the cuff player than Smith. He can organise and kick a side around the field but he comes up with some outrageous bits of individual skill and he looks inventive with his kicking close to the opposition line, which is something I think Smith can struggle with at times. It's probably a conversation for a year or two down the line anyway but they could form a good partnership for me.

I thought the same NK which is why I found Jon's assertion a little strange. He's not a running threat in the way that French is but he certainly has more threat than Smith. He's also got an excellent kicking game in his own right which increases the options there and is something French has needed to add to his game since moving to 6 and is still something he is working on. Different from French for sure, but that's no reason Farrimond couldn't bring his own positives to the combination.

I wouldn't disagree with that, NK, but don't forget French is also 'inventive with his kicking close to the opposition line', and he'll still be in the team! So, we have options.

For me both Smith and Farrimond are organisers primarily.

The reason our halves are so effective is because French is generally a strike player whilst Smith is the midfield general.

Game has changed since the days of Tommy and Deacon.

They could make a good partnership in the future but Farrimond needs time to mature and develop that strike at first team level.

To be honest I’d be surprised though if we see it for more that a season or 2 if at all as front line halves.

I think Farrimond will replace Smith in the similar role rather than play with him, as I expect within 3 years Smith will have headed to the NRL.

Jon, I'm not saying you are wrong. I'm just saying you don't know and until you see them play together, that remains the case. It's not like Farrimond is a clone of Smith. They have overlapping skillsets but they also have several points of difference. Farrimond is more of a running threat for example. Not at the same level of French, for sure, but then neither is anyone else in Superleague. To suggest that 2 halves have to be polar opposites to be effective is, at the risk of sounding blunt, nonsense. Peet has recently said that they're looking to develop Smith's running game (why, if French is the running half?) and that they want French to develop his kicking game (why, if Smith is the kicker?). The answer to both those questions is, of course, that overlapping skillsets is desirable. Obviously, you would want points of difference too, but both halves being able to kick, for example, gives you options and makes you less predictable.

I've seen enough of Farrimond to be able to say that he has things in his locker that Smith doesn't have. Obviously, at 18 years of age, it's a question of whether he can continue to develop these enough to stand out at Superleague level as he does at academy level. That's the only variable that would determine whether he and Smith could perform well together, not that they have some similarities.

Finally, you say the game has moved on. Good half back play today is exactly the same as it's always been. Edwards and Gregory would be as good a pairing today as it was then. Deacon and Leuluai wouldn't suddenly become ineffective against Dodd and Lomax or Williams and Drinkwater when they won a title against much better players.

It’s interesting that the halves you mention all compliment each other in regards Edwards v Gregory, Dodd v Lomax and Drinkwater v Williams.

All have an organiser and a runner.

The game these days is currently seeing a trend of to use the Australian terms 5/8th (strike) and half back (organisers) for me both Smith are Farrimond are half backs naturally.

Can 2 half backs work? Probably but you need to find some considerable ball playing strike elsewhere like Tomkins for example with Deacon and Leuleui.

It’s the same reason Williams came in for Lewis in the Tongan test series last year.

Big call from fans for Williams and Lewis to partner given Lewis’ form in the first 2 games, but both are natural 5/8ths. Smith was always going to play as the halfback in that team.

Like French/Field with Smith and Farrimond for example?

With regards to Dodd/Lomax you're about 2 years too late. Neither takes the line on successfully any more. They are both ineffectual runners and are both more organizing halves now. Drinkwater is often criticized for having a terrible kicking game and not being a good enough organizing half (although I'd concede that's probably his intended role) so in both instances your appraisal falls short. I think you also forget that Edwards spent as much time as a 7 during his career as he did a 6.

As an outsider looking in, my understanding of Farrimond is that he is more of an oragnising 7 so I would lean more towards John.

However it would all depend on how Wigan would use them both- as split halves or on ball?

Sometimes halfbacks come along who can do it all and while it may not transfer in to the first team, I see Farrimond as one of those at academy level. Yes, he is an organiser but he's got a good running game and can play off the cuff as well. The step up may be too big, who knows but theres potential there for him to play alongside any type of halfback partner for me.

It won't be an issue for us for a year or two anyway. Talking of that, something will need to give at Wigan if he is to get a regular spot down the track.

I agree re Dodd and Lomax which also coincided with Saints decline as both have become halves as Lomax has aged and he has adapted his game and they have lost strike in the front line.

Drinkwater wouldn’t be getting a game were it not for Leon Hayes injury again a player who is an out and out half.

Edwards again adapted as he aged and took on the organiser role after Gregory and was paired with running halves like Botica and Paul much like many have done over the years as they lose that yard of pace like Danny McGuire did at Leeds and Shaun Johnson has more recently with New Zealand Warriors to great effect.