The fly-half who never was
- 31 Jan 07, 01:58 PM
London - "What might have been?" Four words that never should be spoken in professional sport.
So is it ok to at least think them? Because I can't help it when I consider two players on either side of the Calcutta Cup divide on Saturday.
The first is, of course, Jonny Wilkinson - a name which, for the past three years, has been uttered by rugby fans only in conjunction with a furrowed brow, a rueful shake of the head and increasingly wild (and possibly untrue) speculation about his health.
"He'll never play again, of course". "I heard he had to have a stair-lift installed at his house"."Friend of mine said they had to replace his entire left leg with a titanium job. Japanese technology."
Not true. He's fine and he's back. Good news for England, good news for rugby fans and above all, good news for him.
I would prefer, though, if I may, to draw your attention to Scotland's missing stand-off. A man who hasn't pulled on the number 10 jersey in years. But he's seldom been injured. And he's Scotland's captain.
Yes, Chris Paterson is playing this weekend. Sometimes he's given full-back duties, sometimes he pops up on the wing, as he will on Saturday. But he's not a natural winger.
He's quick, but not blessed with scorching pace, and he certainly doesn't possess the brute strength which some wingers rely upon.
Of course he can, and has, scored tries but doesn't seem to be a natural finisher.
Instead, he's a natural creator. His footballing skills should earn him a place at the heart of affairs, pulling the strings instead of drifting on the fringes looking for scraps.
And what's more, in the absence of the Wilkinson fellow, Paterson has become the most successful place-kicker in the northern hemisphere.
He could have been a fly-half contender.
Of course there are obvious differences to Wilkinson. Perhaps a lack of physical presence would have prevented Paterson being a truly great number 10. I'd just like to have seen him given a chance, that's all.
I'd like to have seen a fully fit Jonny Wilkinson lining up against Chris Paterson on Saturday with a few years as Scotland's fly-half on his CV.
It is quite an old debate in Scottish rugby circles but I think it still deserves another airing.
And of course in sport we all like to debate possible selections. We all like, occasionally, to dream about "what might have been".
Wales 27-18 England
Comments Post your comment
Should have happened four years ago. He was never given a run in the shirt. We kept turning to Townsend, then Hodge, then back to Townsend, and then on to Gordon Ross, then we called in Parks, and finally that kid from Edinburgh.
You're right it's too late now, but if they'd have just kept on playing him game after game at fly half, he could have been great.
While I'm at it Kenny Logan should have played centre.
Complain about this post
The problem with Chris Patterson (and I am sure the reason he wasnt picked for the lions tour) is that he cant tackle. O'Driscoll embarrassed him recently in the heineken cup and that is hardly the first time. A ten that cant tackle gives the opposition licence to run riot in the midfield. Sadly I dont think Parks is the answer either and Godman has not managed to prove himself yet. Ten is ultimately a position where we are desperately short of talent.
Complain about this post
I agree - Paterson has been Scotland's best option at 10 for some years but has been a victim of the short termism that pervades the sport these days. People need instant success - hence the number of debuts of talented individuals who have one bad match and never get the chance again. Why do coaches/press think that players should shine on a debut? Even worse why do people only give combinations a match a two before consigning them to the bin? All the best 9/10 and 12/13 combinations took at least 10 matches to bed in. Andy Robinson's head rolled because of such a reactive approach - rightly so.
With the natural skill Paterson has he could have been a very good outhalf...shame.
Complain about this post
Agree entirely with Andrew, it's an old debate in Scottish rugby circles but this weekend would have presented the perfect opportunity to install Paterson at 10.
The main reason is that for once, Scotland have an abundance of 'on form' wingers to select from. Moving Paterson to 10 would allow Nikki Walker or Simon Webster into the fray (and why isn't at least one of Walker and Webster in the squad anyway?).
With Southwell off form, Paterson could easily have been put in at full back, again allowing a physical speedster onto the wing.
If, as every Englishman is saying, Farrell's "flat rugby league passing" allows Lewsey, Balshaw et al crash ball one-on-ones against Paterson, it could be another Calcutta Cup highlighting Paterson's tackling weaknesses instead of his natural footballing talent.
Cusiter, Paterson, Webster, Dewey, Henderson, Lamont, Southwell has a far more imposing look to it.
Complain about this post
I can't help but wonder what Paterson has done that means he isn't given a look in at fly-half...did he sleep with someone's wife or run over a favourite pet of one of the board members? Parks has been given two or three seasons to show what he is capable of (not too much!) and is still getting selected, despite all the evidence that shows he isn't up to it! Godman isn't there yet and Gordon Ross has been banished to the wilderness. What has Paterson got to do to get a shot at the 10 jersey for Edinburgh for the rest of the season? Whatever it is, he should do it!
I know that Paterson is no spring chicken but he's hardly an old man either! Put him in at out-half and give him a few years in the jersey. The fact is that there are a number of decent wingers around (Lamont x 2, Walker and Webster to name the obvious ones) who are better wingers than Paterson...because they are wingers and not converted fly halves!
I hope that Blair the younger (who is currently at Sale) recovers from his injury soon and shows what he is capable of. Then we might have a number 10 worthy of the jersey in a few years time.
Complain about this post
Whilst Patterson has been run over at times, he's also made some try saving tackles when playing at 15. He's also a much better tackler than Parks, who seems to rely on standing in the way until a flanker comes to help him out.
It's too late now though sadly..
Complain about this post
Surely Stephen Jones, O'Gara and Yachvilli are all better and more successful place kickers than Paterson???
Complain about this post
Jim @ 6.
No. They're not. Look at the stats of the last 6 nations.
Complain about this post
(reply to andy yorston-comment 2). Chris Paterson can indeed tackle. an embarassment at the hands of BOD is not uncommon on the pitch. he can be relied upon to punch well above his weight and before u start giving reasons why he wasnt selected for te lions, just remember who was in charge and how much of a hash was made of the selections for the tour.
i accept that Parks' tackling is suspect but halfway through the 6nations last year SOMEONE certainly taught him how to tackle!
Complain about this post
jim @ 6. WHAT? Chris Paterson missed one (perhaps 2) kicks durin last years 6nations and eventually missed one in the 2nd test in south africa. so i dont know where ur getting your stats from!
Complain about this post
Patterson is a very good fly half, a very attacking fly half, which is what scotland need as their outside backs don't have the potency of say NZ. With Lamont, Webster and Southwell, I'd have thought he'd be a shoe in at 10. I don't think he's a true winger, he's a 10 or a 15 at best in my humble opinion.
Complain about this post
2nd entry by Andy suggests Paterson can't play there because of his defensive weakness. However, Ronan O'Ghara has been playing 10 for years & he is possibly one of the weakest tacklers I have ever seen. I would rather run at O'Ghara than Paterson.
Paterson has a great understanding of the game, quick feet, great boot & great pace to make an initial break. Also, 10 was his position for his club Kelso when he was first spotted as a new talent in Scottish rugby. Unfortunately he has been moved from pillar to post while less talented players attempt to do the job at 10. Only player that should have kept Paterson out of the 10 spot was Townsend & he hasn't been in the picture for years now.
Complain about this post
Just to scare the living dayligts out of the Scots. I live in Bath and have seen Jonny Wilkinson practising his kicking at the Rec this week. He is in awesome kicking form as everything is flying through the posts from all angles - be scared, very scared!
Complain about this post
Chris Paterson has been a very fine servant for scottish rugby for a number of years, often in a side that has been weakish by international standards. He has had some very good games indeed, but never at flyhalf, indeed his weakest performances for me, have been there. He is a superb broken field runner but does not seem to take the right options at fly half (when I have seen him there - limited evidence I admit).
He has turned himself into a very good kicker, the equal of anybody else in the 6 nations which has rid Scotland of one totally unnecessary disadvantage that we had for a number of years (Logan - shudder).
Complain about this post
Thats all very well in Practice, but kicking in a match is an totally different matter
Complain about this post
Good player Patterson; good touch, balance and timing and decent wheels tow. But two major flaws as a ten: 1. He doesn't seem to be able to command and structure a match at the highest level like a Wilko, Carter, Jones or Contepomi. 2. His near-distribution is spot-on; he has excellent touch and feel on a ball at close quarters so can put runners/ ball carriers into space in midfield...obviously very valuable, but his distributin suffers when he's asked to push wider, say leading a 13 into the outside break or bringing his 15 into the game if he's at second receiver...the pass billows a bit and isn't precise enough and gets picked off in a way that DC, JW and Contepomi don't...just an opinion...
Complain about this post
Good player Patterson; good touch, balance and timing and decent wheels tow. But two major flaws as a ten: 1. He doesn't seem to be able to command and structure a match at the highest level like a Wilko, Carter, Jones or Contepomi. 2. His near-distribution is spot-on; he has excellent touch and feel on a ball at close quarters so can put runners/ ball carriers into space in midfield...obviously very valuable, but his distributin suffers when he's asked to push wider, say leading a 13 into the outside break or bringing his 15 into the game if he's at second receiver...the pass billows a bit and isn't precise enough and gets picked off in a way that DC, JW and Contepomi don't...just an opinion...
Complain about this post
Apparently it was rubbish in a real game against Leicester last weekend though? Agree Paterson should have been tried at 10, although if they're going to persist with Parks at 10 I don't think Mossy can justify his place on the wing ahead of the likes of Webster, Walker even Danielli who's been having a good season injuries aside. Although from the 22 Hadden has picked it may be that Paterson has been running 10 in training as there is no other backup should Parks get injured!
Complain about this post
If i were you Andy, I'd be scared of one of our back rowers injuring him! Not that I want to see that because I would like to see Wilkinson play as much as the next man, but you shouldn't be so sure just because this is a 'new era'. Pride comes before a fall.
With regards to Paterson, he's extremely unlucky. We have to go back to the early reign of Matt Williams in 2003/4 putting him at Fly Half.
As a winger, he's ok, but not good enough to figure there in the national team. He can sidestep well enough and has an attractive burst of speed, but he's too light and prone to getting turned over. You could say Shane Williams has the same problem, but he's much quicker and has superior jinking and sidestepping skills, thus justifying his position.
As a Full-back, he's miles better. A position from where he can read the game (which he excels), kick and set up counter-attacks which suit his style of play. Remember that mazy run in the Calcutta Cup of 2005? When he played there against Fiji, it just made sense. Much better than Southwell anyway. Plus we could shift either Walker, Webster or Lamont Jr. in the place who are all in amazing form.
As a fly-half, well it's a bit like Wigglesworth of Sale who plays 9 but prefers 10, and plays better when he gets to play there. Paterson should be given this chance. The man has a demon boot for kicking. Our game will expand as a result and fit in Godman/Parks as 21.
Are you listening Frank?
Complain about this post
I'm glad that someone mentioned Lion's selection. It was beyond belief that Jason White was ignored continuously and finally made it as about 9th choice back-row (his name would have been the first one on the team sheet if I was in charge). Now he has picked up every honour going but I suspect Sir Clive would still struggle to select someone who had worn a blue jersey!
Complain about this post
Patterson is in terrible form at the moment and isn't 100% fit. Something I'm sure Frank Hadden is aware of even if Andrew Cotter isn't.
Complain about this post
As is kicking in a world cup final and johnny did ok then as i remember!
Complain about this post
As is kicking in a world cup final and johnny did ok then as i remember!
Complain about this post
The greatest fly-half that never was is actually Iain Balshaw. Given the role early in his career when he comfortably eclipsed Wilko he could have been Dan Carter.
Complain about this post
Back to Paterson.
It is not too late for Paterson, it is totally narrow minded to think so. You just need to read any reports on Paterson in the last world cup plus columns by David Sole, Hastings etc. to realise that.
Paterson should get the 10 shirt until he retires and maybe then we will have a new talent. And hopefully this one won't be wasted on the wing to catch flat hospital passes and having to jink around to avoid getting minced.
Complain about this post
Jonny Recaldin: Mate I also witnessed Bath's rapid rise last season when Brian Ashton was temporarily in charge for a few months and the rugby they played was awesome towards the end of his time here. England are due for a resurgence and the Scots may be the first to feel the brunt - you can't wheel out your silly fireworks and bagpipes at Twickenham to help you this time!
Complain about this post
- No 26. silly fireworks and bagpipes fair enough but I'm sure 181 or so tackles in 80 mins speaks for itself, silly fireworks dont stop a team from scoring points - pillok
Complain about this post
To all those who are saying "Paterson can't do this at 10" or "Paterson was never that at stand off" - all I ask is this: on what evidence is this judgement based? A handfull of games in an Edinburgh shirt? 1 game as an international during the dark and dank Williams reign? The last time I saw Paterson playing at 10 was for Gala. He was awesome. I mean, it's not like he's been given a real opportunity to show his skills in that position at a high level, is it?
He was never picked at 10 for Edinburgh or Scotland from the off because at the time he started on that road, he was simply too small and weedy. He has now bulked up and I reckon he could do the job well. I think we may just see him at 10 for the less important pool games at the World Cup. And let's not dump on Dan Parks from a great height either - true, I was one of those calling him all sorts of names when he first appeared in a Scotland jersey and was pretty bad, but he has stepped up to the line and played very impressively lately. He's a lightweight, that's for sure, but he plays sensible rugby and Scotland have seen the benefits of that in recent months. Give him a break.
Complain about this post
So the conclusions are:
1 - we have some useful wingers and could do without patterson in the back three
2 - patterson has more skills than most and should have been given the chance at 10 for club and country
3 - patterson can(not)tackle but thats not too important at 10 (although i suspect wilkinson would disagree)
4 - parks was terrible at first but has dragged his game up and now serves us well
so should patterson be given a chance at 10? and will we beat england? i think the answers are probably yes. and no. unfortunately.
Complain about this post
I do believe that Chris Patterson is a No.10 or 15 and not a winger. The guy is esten every time he tries to go on the outside, he will always cut in, which is not ideally what you look for in a winger. Patterson deserves his place in the team, but I genuinely believe that Simon Danielli should take the other wing. Scotland need his size and pace on the wing to compliment that of Lamont. With those two guys on the wings Scotland would have a genuine threat to any defence.
Complain about this post
He should be moved to Inside Centre, and play as a 'second' fly-half in the style that Aaron Mauger does for New Zealand
Complain about this post
Paterson has the potential to be best number 10 in Scotland, and in my humble opinion should be given the jersey for Scotland. That being said, he has only played a handful of games there since turning pro for Edinburgh, so it's fair to say that this would be a gamble of sorts. This wouldn't be the case if Mossy had been played at 10 since he truned pro for Edinburgh instead of being wasted on the wing for the last 5 years or so. Who was responsible for that - Frank Hadden - so don't be surprised when he doesn't get picked at 10 for Scotland whilst Hadden's in charge !
I would rather see Mike Blair (yes Mike, not David) play 10 rather than Parks. At least this way we could get both Cusiter and Blair in the team.
Complain about this post
Paterson has the potential to be best number 10 in Scotland, and in my humble opinion should be given the jersey for Scotland. That being said, he has only played a handful of games there since turning pro for Edinburgh, so it's fair to say that this would be a gamble of sorts. This wouldn't be the case if Mossy had been played at 10 since he truned pro for Edinburgh instead of being wasted on the wing for the last 5 years or so. Who was responsible for that - Frank Hadden - so don't be surprised when he doesn't get picked at 10 for Scotland whilst Hadden's in charge !
I would rather see Mike Blair (yes Mike, not David) play 10 rather than Parks. At least this way we could get both Cusiter and Blair in the team.
Complain about this post
I'm an Englishman. 10-12-13 is defensively strong for us, if nothing else. I'd bet good money that Paterson, were he playing at 10, would creat opportunities.
Had Paterson been playing at 10 for the past four years, he'd be in the league of any of the other fly-halves likely to play in the Six Nations. He's a reader of the game, not a finisher, and that's what you need at ten.
And he can tackle better than O'Gara. Somebody put Paterson at ten.
Complain about this post
Sorry to say it, but Paterson is getting into the side on his goal kicking alone. Anyone who has seen Paterson this season must realise he is slowing down and no longer runs with pace at the opposition. He also has defensive frailties and is not as strong as Southwell in this department. Godman is by far Scotland's most attacking stand off and leads the line well taking the ball at pace. He is a fine distributor of the ball and strong in the tackle. On the subject of pace, Thom Evans of Glasgow would be an intriguing option. He is by far the fastest winger in the UK and for the last 20 or 30 minutes of a game could be extremely destructive. Evans on one wing with Webster on the other would give Scotland pace and trickery.
A back line of Cusiter/Blair, Godman, Dewey, Henderson, Webster, Lamont/Evans and Southwell would give Scotland creativity, pace and power, something they have not had for years.
Complain about this post
Sorry to say it, but Paterson is getting into the side on his goal kicking alone. Anyone who has seen Paterson this season must realise he is slowing down and no longer runs with pace at the opposition. He also has defensive frailties and is not as strong as Southwell in this department. Godman is by far Scotland's most attacking stand off and leads the line well taking the ball at pace. He is a fine distributor of the ball and strong in the tackle. On the subject of pace, Thom Evans of Glasgow would be an intriguing option. He is by far the fastest winger in the UK and for the last 20 or 30 minutes of a game could be extremely destructive. Evans on one wing with Webster on the other would give Scotland pace and trickery.
A back line of Cusiter/Blair, Godman, Dewey, Henderson, Webster, Lamont/Evans and Southwell would give Scotland creativity, pace and power, something they have not had for years.
Complain about this post
In an ideal world.....Kydd, Webster, Dewey, MacDougall, Evans, Paterson, Blair, Beattie, Hogg, White, MacLeod, Hines, Murray, Ford, Jacobsen with a bench of Hall, Dickinson, Kellock, Taylor, Cusiter, Parks, Walker - A team with genuine potential to be a threat to other teams. The only area where we seem to have a lack of depth is probably the centres...Would love to see Hadden ditch his cautious selections soon and pick the guys on form with the potential!
Complain about this post
jst to add on to the douglas selkirk guys comment, why isnt thom evans in the squad? he can run 100m in 10.3 secs and i go to just about every glasgow home game, and he has a lot of attacking flair to offer. but i wouldnt pick godman, he is too weedy as he showed in the autumn internationals, paterson has more bulk on him.
cusiter, paterson, dewy, di rollo, evans, southwell, webster
that would be my back line
Complain about this post
I heard that Patterson loves cabbage, and so do I!
Complain about this post
Chris Paterson is a very good 14, he isn't as good as Hugo Southwell at 15. Southwell played amazingly last season and earned that number 15 over everyone else. Paterson, misses tackle alot but he is one of the best tacklers we have. We need him in the back 3 for his pace not at 10, I feel his talents would be "wasted."
We did have a very long time when Townsend was always picked by Geech but they always had a better number 10 waiting in the wings. I think Parks is not good enough to start. Hodge showed his class against the English in 2000 and Ross showed his class against the South Africans when we beat them(2003?)!
I know from 1st hand experience that Godman has been a very good number 10 since he was at school. Maybe Godman is our "Wilko"?
I think the ultimate backs 9-15 would be 9 Blair, 10 Godman, 11 Webster or Rory Lamont, 12 Dewey, 13 Morrison (strong and tall)14 Paterson and Southwell at fullback.
Complain about this post