Just a bit of a debate, Is having a good scrum half what makes the difference between having a good team and a great team.
Is it coincidence that the Saints have enjoyed periods of dominance when they have had the best scrum halves we have ever had. Murph and Bishop in the sixties and Goulding and Long in the Nineties/noughties.
We have had great players in other positions over the years but only when we have had a great scrum half have we been dominant.
Other evidence ,remember a couple of seasons back when we were the dominant team of the season until Newton did Long and we fell away to win nothing.
Wigan dominated the eighties ,Edwards and Gregory scrum halves.
GB beat New Zealand in a series for the first time in yonks ,just when Burrow has started to realise the potential he has had for years.
Got to be worth a heated arguement?