Bristol vs Northampton, Friday 4th (7.45pm KO):

[Banquo]

The Saints unoffical board mentioned that Vesty sees 12/13 as interchangable - not sure I'd agree (especially on defence) myself...

Purdy at 15 is get POC into the 13 shirt, Alapati has been "unconvicing" as a 13 on defence. Vui hurt his hand against Wasps, he was supposed to play last week but failed the last minute medical check. I assume he's being rested for the Euro games now.

I did wonder if its their worry about Hutchinson defence at 13, but interestingly I think that's the first time in ages that Francis and Hutchinson have started together.
12/13 interchangeable....pfft

Depends on the centres involved. Unless you are playing a 10/12 or 13/wing your centres should be able to interchange.

It’s a fairly long running joke on the board, as I always rise to dully point out the positional differences between 12 and 13, especially in defence off first phase. My view is that all centres as we call them should have a fully rounded skill set and present a genuine running threat, and be top defenders. So in theory that makes them ‘interchangeable’. In practice, for example, defending at 13 in a drift defence say, is very different from defending at 12. So there are different positional skills distinct to inside and outside centre, which will also change depending on the attacking or defensive strategies esp off set piece and second phase ball. Then add in the reality that few players sadly possess all those skills at high quality, and your options narrow a bit more; and then you have the debate over direct bosher at 12 or 13, and/or playmaking runner at 12...and it becomes more and more specialised positionally requiring differing physical attributes, skills, and positional nous. The game also continues to evolve- when I started playing, left and right centres were common, and I think still are in France, so placed an emphasis on all round ability. In NZ you don’t/didn’t have two centres, but a second 5/8th at 12, and a centre at 13.
So whilst I was being a bit tongue in cheek over interchanging 12/13, in practice there aren’t many players who can do it well within a lot of systems. From my own experience, my all round skills were decent and could defend ok at 13; as I lost a bit of gas and was put more at 12, I really struggled to get the hang of defending there and had to really adapt mentally. Of course the game has changed a lot, and outside of more than a couple of phases, being generally skilled becomes more important than specific positional skills important at first phase. But I still think that in most sides, 12 and 13 (and other positions eg left and right wings) need differing positional abilities, skills and especially experience. (By skills btw, also including a midfielders need to contribute at the breakdown- good jackaling opportunities wider out too )

[FKAS]

I loved playing centre and I was normally there as the defensive glue because we had a 10 who could destroy teams in attack and disappear in defence (literally, he'd in the line alongside you one second and then all of a sudden he wouldn't). I always found 12 quite easy to defend, you've just got to be disciplined and communicate. 13 can be a really tough position to defend its certainly tougher for a 10/12 to step to 13 than it is for a 13 to step into 12.

At club level an experienced centre should be able to cover both at international level it's going to be a lot harder. Obviously if you're a crash ball 12 who's getting on a bit and aren't that quick defending at 13 could quickly become a misery. You'd certainly need to have a well rounded skill set as you say.

[Mr Mwenda]

I also wonder how relevant these things are at test level. I seem to recall the England break that led to the try v NZ in the semifinal was due to England targeting the fact that the Kiwi 10 defended at 13 only on lineouts. Presumably defensive structure is trained for in most situations.

[Banquo]

I loved playing centre and I was normally there as the defensive glue because we had a 10 who could destroy teams in attack and disappear in defence (literally, he'd in the line alongside you one second and then all of a sudden he wouldn't). I always found 12 quite easy to defend, you've just got to be disciplined and communicate. 13 can be a really tough position to defend its certainly tougher for a 10/12 to step to 13 than it is for a 13 to step into 12.

At club level an experienced centre should be able to cover both at international level it's going to be a lot harder. Obviously if you're a crash ball 12 who's getting on a bit and aren't that quick defending at 13 could quickly become a misery. You'd certainly need to have a well rounded skill set as you say.

....and that’s the point though- I was a much better defender at 13 than at 12 (initially, though 12 is a little easier if your 10 is up for a bit of tackling )because of experience and positional skill. The higher you go, the harder it gets because of reaction times and unconscious competence. Also applies in attack. So it’s really not an easy switch, especially at senior levels. Which you can readily tell when they are asked to do it in a lot of cases.

[Banquo]

I also wonder how relevant these things are at test level. I seem to recall the England break that led to the try v NZ in the semifinal was due to England targeting the fact that the Kiwi 10 defended at 13 only on lineouts. Presumably defensive structure is trained for in most situations.

Very. See Brad Barritt all at sea at 13 in an England shirt, but one of the best defenders at 12.

[Mr Mwenda]

I also wonder how relevant these things are at test level. I seem to recall the England break that led to the try v NZ in the semifinal was due to England targeting the fact that the Kiwi 10 defended at 13 only on lineouts. Presumably defensive structure is trained for in most situations.

Very. See Brad Barritt all at sea at 13 in an England shirt, but one of the best defenders at 12.

Sounds like a poorly thought out defence putting a player in a situation they can't manage rather than a statement about different centre positions.

When I played, I preferred 13 because defence was more about reading rather than not giving ground. But then the attacks coming at us were pretty rubbish.

[Banquo]

I also wonder how relevant these things are at test level. I seem to recall the England break that led to the try v NZ in the semifinal was due to England targeting the fact that the Kiwi 10 defended at 13 only on lineouts. Presumably defensive structure is trained for in most situations.

Very. See Brad Barritt all at sea at 13 in an England shirt, but one of the best defenders at 12.

Sounds like a poorly thought out defence putting a player in a situation they can't manage rather than a statement about different centre positions.

When I played, I preferred 13 because defence was more about reading rather than not giving ground. But then the attacks coming at us were pretty rubbish.

Again kind of my point- put in a position he wasn’t equipped to deal with by dint of lack of familiarity and physically not able (bit slow and static).

Agreed at 13, though you need quick feet and good acceleration to give you margin for error (see Barritt)