• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

Tuilagi and England's centres

I'm happy with our back row as it is, a 6 (Wood), a 6.5 (Robshaw) and a big, ball carrying 8. However I'm too much of a traditionalist not to fear that the lack of an out and out 'fetcher' does make us weaker. Yes, Launchbury and Cole do a lot of breakdown work but, as we saw least year in the game that must not be mentioned, playing a back row without a 'real' 7 against a traditional 6/7/8 combo can lead to you being right royally screwed. Having a proper ball carrying 8 helps, as does having a more physical second lock in Lawes or Attwood (in place of Parling) but I'm still not convinced.

I do like to think its a sign of how good a player Robshaw is that he has ended up being so convincing while playing out of position.

In an ideal world, most back rows have a player who is generally recognised by people as a 7. The skillset associated is so very useful that the ideal team will pretty much always have someone who has it. However, there are other ways to get that your skillsets in and ideal worlds are so rare that I feel you see very few traditional 6/7/8 combos these days. Debatably Wales were the only team in the tournament playing that model.

Certainly, as already mentioned, the lack of a standard openside was not the issue that day.

Oh. Yeah. Centres. Meh. Pick two, let the pack win. Simples.

What I would say is that Joseph's probably not getting anywhere. It's a shame, he has talent, but Lancaster has a clear preference for big centres so Joseph, Eastmond, Trinder, Daly... are all probably out of luck. Its one of the reasons I'm really in favour of Daly at full-back...
 
Yeah I didn't see heaps of the 6N, saw a few England games and backs + midfield looked much better. But that could also be because the team as a whole is playing better, the forwards are making the gain line, getting the defence on the backfoot, quick phase ball to the backs, making it much easier for them. I've seen a few England games, where Tuilagi was given horrible slow ball or a slow cut out pass and expected to do something with it..

If England can play like they have been, retain possession, recycle the ball quickly, a player like Tuilagi can really shine. Hitting a flat pass at pace, he will be hard to put down. He just needs to be used correctly. Chucking him the ball and hoping he will do something with it, is not the right strategy.

I personally think England will be very hard to beat in the World Cup next year, especially considering it's at home for them. They are starting to remind me of the 2003 team.

yeah, all fair comments.
 
Oh. Yeah. Centres. Meh. Pick two, let the pack win. Simples.

What I would say is that Joseph's probably not getting anywhere. It's a shame, he has talent, but Lancaster has a clear preference for big centres so Joseph, Eastmond, Trinder, Daly... are all probably out of luck. Its one of the reasons I'm really in favour of Daly at full-back...

I'm not sure that's the case. I think he just likes a bit of balance, he's said all along he likes a ball player and a power runner - obvioulsy ones not exclusive of the other but for the most part he's tried to stick to that.
 
Yeah, they can switch between IC and OC depending on situation. Roberts-Davies have done it.

So what's the point in giving him the 13 jersey?

That's my point - he's going to defend at 12 - he's going to be a 1R... so why give him a shirt he's only played in once?
 
So what's the point in giving him the 13 jersey?

That's my point - he's going to defend at 12 - he's going to be a 1R... so why give him a shirt he's only played in once?

No the idea is that Burrell defends at 12 and attacks at 13 . Eastmond would defend at 13 because his pace and size and if we had a break or intercept than you have eastmond making the last pass to the wing which means 99% he will make the pass
 
Agree about attacking shape, which is why I like the prospect of Manu as a winger.
That way we can get to use him almost as often as we want, without it necessarily removing our shape.

Nope he's a centre we have an absolute tonne of wingers . No one need play out of position with the depth we have . If we don't want him as a centre we should drop him imo
 
Don't cry, dry your eyes....

You said it was ALL Tuilagi, and it wasn't, the try was made from people doing their parts correctly, and yes a 2 on 1 is easy. The thing i will say is Jane is in the wrong, he should have tracked onto Barritt once he'd passed as dagg was coming across.

executing a 2 vs 1 is basic core skills that everyone should be able to do, yet Tuilagi seldom does and nearly butchers with a frankly poor pass....no need to take contact on that situation should have passed as soon as Dagg was commited.

I did also say he was involved in the other two trys, you should really read the whole of a post not jsut the bit that makes you clench your jaw.

Obviouslly you don't really seem to want to read what doesn't agree with your point of view focusing on small parts of it, if you take the time to read my comments I actually said that even now I'm struggling to think I'd start burrell over Manu in New Zealand.

I really love how the Leicester fans cannot see past anyone in a striped shirt (unless they leave the club)

Who is crying? This post shows you up as the witty intelligent gentleman you are, nice job. I didn't realise I was a Leicester fan too, thanks for letting me know.
 
Nope he's a centre we have an absolute tonne of wingers . No one need play out of position with the depth we have . If we don't want him as a centre we should drop him imo

I agree though he played wing as a youngster he isn't a winger anymore and his skillset has lent him to be a centre. There is nothing wrong with having a player of tuilagi's calibre not playing, you don't see New Zealand cramming in all there good players out of position just so they're on the field. They play the best they have in each position and if you're not as good as you peer than you work harder until you are.
 
That's why you'd try him out there... to see if he was any good - I don't think we are talking about starting him on the wing in an actual test.
Maybe give him half an hour in a mid-week game - just so you know for certain.
 
Err can someone please explain what skills tuilagi has that lens him to a centre?

Passing? No
Vision ? No
Kicking game? No
Power ? Yes
Defence organisation? No

He doesn't really stack up in my books as a centres skills?
 
Because nowadays a centres job is to get other the line and score tries. You normally have one who is like a second receiver and another who is the go to guy to try and power over. His defence is fine other wise he wouldn't be playing so much for Leicester and England, I don't see him being targeted like he use too and in our system he is encouraged to come out the line and smash people. Now he is an incredibly limited centre, he doesn't pass like Conrad Smith, though apparently he does for Tigers must have missed them games :p He can't kick all that accurately but I have seen him kick when he was younger and he had a pretty decent boot on him. What he does have is power and pace he is a lot quicker than he looks and he can throw must people out of the way. 21 England games at centre and 11 tries is nothing to be sniffed at and he does the job he is asked to do get over the line and score tries. I say Burrell stays at the moment and that makes Tuilagi add passing and kicking to his game.
 
Last edited:
That's why you'd try him out there... to see if he was any good - I don't think we are talking about starting him on the wing in an actual test.
Maybe give him half an hour in a mid-week game - just so you know for certain.
Fair enough I thought people where talking about him starting as our new wing. His positional play would possibly be caught out at wing. As a winger he would remind me of Napolioni Nalaga, incredibly good going forward but is defensively caught out by smart teams kicking the ball over his head, I just think we would have better options than him though you can't always tell.
 
I'm not sure that's the case. I think he just likes a bit of balance, he's said all along he likes a ball player and a power runner - obvioulsy ones not exclusive of the other but for the most part he's tried to stick to that.

Given how long he stuck with Barritt, I don't think he has tried to stick with that balance. He's settled on the biggest ball player he could find. More over, the ball player/power runner combo leaves no obvious room for the evasive centre.

Maybe it would be fairer to say he prefers rock solid defence to all other traits in his centres though. Which tends to eliminate the smaller guys pretty quick.

No the idea is that Burrell defends at 12 and attacks at 13 . Eastmond would defend at 13 because his pace and size and if we had a break or intercept than you have eastmond making the last pass to the wing which means 99% he will make the pass

Eastmond's size means you want him defending at 12. Being at 12 reduces the chance of him being stuck in a 1 on 1 with a power runner which is generally a situation to avoid with all less bulky centres (I recognise Eastmond's defensive record as being very good, he's not a specific worry). His fly-half and back-row can step in and make a double tackle at 12, they can't at 13.

I agree though he played wing as a youngster he isn't a winger anymore and his skillset has lent him to be a centre. There is nothing wrong with having a player of tuilagi's calibre not playing, you don't see New Zealand cramming in all there good players out of position just so they're on the field. They play the best they have in each position and if you're not as good as you peer than you work harder until you are.

Cullen in the centres, Muliania in the centres, SBW on the wing, Ben Smith in the centres... this list can stretch on and on but yes, they'll pull players out of position for the good of the team/to fit exceptional players in. I believe there is something wrong in not having Tuilagi playing, he is not complete but he is incredibly talented and I believe we shoot ourselves in the foot by not picking him, albeit if we possibly shoot ourselves in the other foot if we do.

Right now we have a useful centre partnership and no established wingers. Tuilagi has some of the qualities of a winger for definite and may have others, or be able to learn others. He does have experience there. Lancaster's seem him at close quarters, presumably he thinks its realistic.

I think it has to be tried.
 
Cullen in the centres, Muliania in the centres, SBW on the wing, Ben Smith in the centres... this list can stretch on and on but yes, they'll pull players out of position for the good of the team/to fit exceptional players in.
Muliaina was an established outside centre for his club and Ben Smith is an utility player who plays 13,14,15 for his club. SBW on the wing I had forgot about but he came off the bench he did not start as a winger, he started one game at wing vs Argentina in the quarter finals. Tuilagi as a youngster played on the wing but is now established at 13 and he should start there, as a 23 maybe come onto the wing but would rather have Eastmond or Daly

Given how long he stuck with Barritt, I don't think he has tried to stick with that balance. He's settled on the biggest ball player he could find. More over, the ball player/power runner combo leaves no obvious room for the evasive centre. Maybe it would be fairer to say he prefers rock solid defence to all other traits in his centres though. Which tends to eliminate the smaller guys pretty quick.
I think at the start when he first came in he was more of a stop-gap he was kind of just reliable, Barritt is a better player than is given credit for and is passing isn't Eastmond standards but isn't as bad as people make out. He did try to play a creative midfield and power player when Barritt got injured with 12. Tuilagi 13.Joseph he just felt that Barritt was a player that he wanted to lead the defence and help Tuilagi who was quite green at the time. Now Tuilagi has calmed down a bit Eastmond and Twelvetrees is our first choice 12's.
 
Because nowadays a centres job is to get other the line and score tries. You normally have one who is like a second receiver and another who is the go to guy to try and power over. His defence is fine other wise he wouldn't be playing so much for Leicester and England, I don't see him being targeted like he use too and in our system he is encouraged to come out the line and smash people. Now he is an incredibly limited centre, he doesn't pass like Conrad Smith, though apparently he does for Tigers must have missed them games :p He can't kick all that accurately but I have seen him kick when he was younger and he had a pretty decent boot on him. What he does have is power and pace he is a lot quicker than he looks and he can throw must people out of the way. 21 England games at centre and 11 tries is nothing to be sniffed at and he does the job he is asked to do get over the line and score tries. I say Burrell stays at the moment and that makes Tuilagi add passing and kicking to his game.

Yeah spot on TheSaffeyCen, pretty much what I was going to write. His D is fine and I don't think there are many centres out there who are scoring as regularly as he does. Nonu has scored 25 tries for the ABs, but that's after 88 games. Tuilagi is one of the quickest in the squad over 40m (That's coming from Lancaster) and weighing in at 110kg, you've got someone that is going to be very hard to put down exemplified by Ashton's try vs the ABS - he beat 3 tacklers with his power & pace.
 
you don't see New Zealand cramming in all there good players out of position just so they're on the field.

Actually they do.

They frequently play people out of their regular position, Umaga played a long time at wing before moving to centre, Ben Smith at the moment is a regular 15 who plays wing and 13 for New Zealand. Carter has played 12 alongside Cruden, Charles Piutau is a Winger come centre.

Their back three interchange all the time selection wise. Mils Muliani played 13, 14 settled in at 15 but still moved around. Dagg has played winger and 15, and so on...

*edit: sorry saffycen, just seen this has already been discussed
 
Last edited:
Given how long he stuck with Barritt, I don't think he has tried to stick with that balance. He's settled on the biggest ball player he could find. More over, the ball player/power runner combo leaves no obvious room for the evasive centre.

Maybe it would be fairer to say he prefers rock solid defence to all other traits in his centres though. Which tends to eliminate the smaller guys pretty quick.

Fair comments, i would say that he's been on record as saying that he wants a ball playing 12.

I think the Barritt thing was more about cohesion in a developing side, Farrell was young and raw and i think the idea was to play Barritt outside him whilst he developed and to also bring a solidness to the midfield (as you said). Barritt to be fair can play teh distributor game i just think it's been coached out of him at sarries - i remember him being quite the fly half in SA.

I'm a fan of Barritt, he's hard as nails and i think a fantastic leader. i'd keep him in and around the Englad squad just because he's such an intelligent rugby player.
 
Last edited:
They frequently play people out of their regular position, Umaga played a long time at wing before moving to centre, Ben Smith at the moment is a regular 15 who plays wing and 13 for New Zealand. Carter has played 12 alongside Cruden, Charles Piutau is a Winger come centre.
I must be honest that Umaga and Cullen are players before my time so I can't really say much about them :p What I am making the point is that all the players talked about where playing rugby at the time in that position, Carter played 12 with Cruden when Nonu was out injured but has played 12 a lot, I think he played 12 vs Lions? Piutau is a fullback by trade but has played on the wing for the blues though he may be a centre all I've seen of the Blues this year is that he plays 15. The point I will make to be clear is that if we have everyone fit Tuilagi should not start on the wing, my New Zealand point has been ripped apart it seems, we have no need to start him. If he is given the 23 shirt and Nowell goes down injured than fair enough, but he does not need to start there.
 
Tom Youngs was a centre just a handful of years ago . Does that mean we should start him at centre or maybe use him as centre back up ?
 
Top