See this is where I disagree. Navidi is as physical as Tipuric, and he has no issues with that aspect of the game. Navidi has shown an aggressive edge to his play this season, making plenty of carries and generally being a nuisance. He's developing very nicely. Daniel Thomas has a lot of potential, but until he plays regularly for the Scarlets we can't fully judge yet. I'd also say that Navidi is currently more physical than Thomas.
Navidi is shown up against the top sides, I remember him getting physically blown away by Toulon in the Heineken Cup which is the kind of back row he will come up against at international level. He's a good player at RaboPro12 standard for a lower mid table side and should have a decent career but as a club player not international. He's a mile away from Tipuric and Warburton. Tipuric is probably better in every aspect to be honest.
I'd argue that it harmed Henson early on. Swansea and the Ospreys should be decided on a position for him, either at 10, or 12, instead he was played in a different position every game, including on the wing and fullback. Hook also suffered as soon as he was switched between centre and outside half all the time. Gareth Owen is another example of a player struggling due to his versatility. I'm not necessarily saying that moving Patchell to centre for one game would be a bad thing, but overall I just want to see him kept in a single position and allowed to develop.
1. Henson's ability to switch turned out to be of immense benefit to Wales as it meant that both he and the best fly half Stephen Jones could be on the pitch at once. Otherwise we would have had to choose between one or the other at 10 and played an average player in Parker or somebody at 12 after Harris left. So it was a very good decision not to just stick him at 12.
2. Hook was a 10 for the predominant part of his career, the only times he played centre was for a very brief period when Stephen Jones was captain and both needed to be on the pitch in 2007. Soon after he was a Grand Slam winning fly half in 2008 and put in a very good performance at fly half against England, so no evidence to suggest that he suffered as soon as this happened.
The second time in his career he played centre was for the Ospreys with Biggar after he was on pants form for a period, he soon turned it around to put in a great season for the Ospreys to win the 2010 Pro12 and form a nice combination with Roberts.
Hook then insisted he was a 10 and left for Perpignan to do so, and moved back there for Wales. However unfortunately Hook has always had awful game management in tight knockout style games and this was soon found out and he couldn't make the team at 10, and Jonathan Davies had sewn up the centre position he deserted to move back to 10 meaning his only option was as utility back on the bench after Halfpenny also made 15 his own.
In fact he has never really been thrown all over the place week to week, and it has nothing to do with his weaknesses at 10 that he's had all his career and his preference to play 10 that has seen him limited to a utility bench player.
3. Gareth Owen struggled as he is a sub standard player who is only good enough to be a useful enough reserve fodder at regional level. If he was good enough, then he would have got a spot in the team and wouldn't have to worry about utility, the fact is he wasn't good enough. You won't find many more versatile backs than James O'Connor, Kurtley Beale, Juan Hernandez or Isa Nacewa, yet all have found themselves places in the starting XV of top sides as they are all quality players that Gareth Owen isn't.
So the evidence suggets will be no harm in Patchell playing 12 and in fact it could help him. In fact famously Dan Carter played 12 in his early days at RWC 2003. More recently Leinster are playing Madigan at 12 and I think Sexton may have played there in his early days. From Wales, both Neil Jenkins and Stephen Jones both played 12 very early on.
So much as I would like to see Jones and Henson on the field as opposed to Jones and Parker previously, right now I would rather have two better players in Biggar and Patchell on the field as opposed to just one in Biggar with a mediocre player in Spratt. Especially considering the lack of use future use Spratt is to the team compared to Patchell.
