How do you like to see your centres play?

To me, in general terms there seem to be two main ways of playing in the centres.  First is the play-making inside centre paired with the strong powerful take it up outside centre.  Great example is the England centre pairing from 2003.  Greenwood (though wearing 13) was the inside centre paired with Mike Tindall at outside.  The other way to play is more or less the opposite, the basher-type at 12 and the more nimble, better ball handler at 13.  A good example is the All Blacks when they play Nonu at 12 and Conrad Smith at 13.  

I don't want to compare nation to nation, per se, but really how do most of you play?  And which style (approach? game plan?) do you prefer?

This comes up, like a lot of Rugby questions through my kids teams.  A team in Pennsylvania asked if we could supply a few kids to play in their side in a friendly against a touring English side.  My son usually plays Hooker, but I played him sometimes at outside centre because he is very fast and is a powerful runner.  Makes him a good 7s player, too.  The other team needed him to play in the centres and their coach placed him at 12 because 'he is a bigger kid' than the centre he was paired with.  I discussed with their coach and he explained this is their style of play.  Ironically, his two tries came form a pass from the fullback taking an inside line when he took the ball wide and from when he set himself up on the blindside of an attacking scrum and ran straight to the line.  

I have played both ways, but generally prefer the playmaker on the inside.   Seems many top flight out-halves served an apprenticeship at 12.  So I am simply asking for you preference.  Just for information.  

Thanks.

I think it comes down to the players availabe, their relative skill sets, the potential of the outside backs and the gameplan.
The traditional boshing 12 when I was playing juveniles stemmed from the ball rarely going beyond the 10/12 chanel and you wanted a big guy to truck it up in attack and to make the tackles in defence.
The coaching at underage level is streets ahead of where it was when I was starting out with huge emphasis on passing skills and particularly spacial awareness.
I want the centres to play whats in front of them but if there is a particularly big strong lad I would be still tempted to put him in at 12 to get him as involved as possible and to protect the outhalf somewhat.

Submachine,
I played with both styles, but in the end I prefer the bigger player at 13 only because it creates a bit of a mismatch with the opposing centre. I always preferred to have a better ball handler moving the ball wide. Suppose its all in how we are used to playing.

But I would still like to see what the group here thinks. Maybe give me some ideas for caoching the kids.......

South Africa

Crashball with the odd pass.

Mostly forward.

doctor_grey wrote:Submachine,
I played with both styles, but in the end I prefer the bigger player at 13 only because it creates a bit of a mismatch with the opposing centre.  I always preferred to have a better ball handler moving the ball wide.  Suppose its all in how we are used to playing.

But I would still like to see what the group here thinks.  Maybe give me some ideas for caoching the kids.......

I am hopefully working with U13's this season which is when they step up from mini's to 15 a side on a full sized pitch. This is a huge learning curve for them as they are used to playing so narrow. As I said above, the emphasis now is on spacial awareness and improving passing skills. There really is no reason why the big guys can not also be good distributors. If they have that as a base then the size and strentgh is an added bonus.

A really good warm up game I play is a version of Rugby Netball. The idea is to get the ball over the try line but it can be passed in any direction, however the receiver can not run once he has caught the ball. The players with out the ball are contantly moving looking for space. You see them improving within minutes as the player with the ball weighs up his options. Would play that for about 10 minutes at the start of a session, it's great fun, no contact defenders can only try and intercept.

Another concept that i have been introduced to recently is the part/whole/part method of coaching an idea or a particular skill. Start out with two lines of 6 cones. Say two red, two blue, two white.
RED BLUE WHITE WHITE BLUE RED




RED BLUE WHITE WHITE BLUE RED


PART
Have four players line up between the red cones. with four more players on the grid facing them. Call red and both sets of players run forward passing the ball along the line with long passes. As each line meets in the middle the ball carrier has to decide whether to pass or hold until the way is clear. Each crew of four is now on the oposite red line. You may then call blue or white and each set of players has to line up between those cones and do the drill again. Blue cones = medium passes. White cones = short passes.
WHOLE
Run this about 5 times on each colour and then have a game of two handed touch but load the teams either 8 on 6 or 6 on 4. Overloaded team gets the ball. Idea is that there should now be space either out wide which might be exploited with a long pass or if the defence is stretched out wide a little inside pass might be on.
PART
If the game breaks down, (and it will) call "FREEZE". All players stay in exact positions and you question them as to why the move broke down. "tried a long pass when player was covered", "inside pass was to firm" whatever the case may be. They really appreciate being involved and working it out themselves rather than being told all the time. You then go back to the drill and practice the skills again before going back to the game situation.

This isn't solely a drill for centres, we involve all players but it is particularly relevant to them

One bludgeon and one rapier works best, Jauzion and basteraeu, smith and nonu, greenwood and tindall, roberts and o driscoll, I think having the meat head at 12 only works if you have a decent ball playing 10 like carter, if you have a positional 10 like wilko then you need a creative 12 to put the big carriers into space otherwise you have a very blunt predictable attack.

One bludgeon and one rapier works best

Yeah, we don't have rapiers in SA, two broadswords will do it.

Yeah you need that balance of physicality, pace and stealth for me. Some great examples below.
 
Gibbs and Gusgott
Herbert and Horan
Roberts and O'Driscoll
Nonu and Smith.
 
The way the game has gone I think a big man at 12, who can break the gainline and offload and a clever 13 who see space and pick angles is the best template for success, as mentioned above though it works best with a 10 who stands flat.

Considering some of the dross that England have served up in recent years (mainly pre-Lancaster to be fair), any two guys who are comfortable with a rugby ball will do!

Personally I like to see the bigger guy at 12. You can either crash him up and look to get an offload in, or use him as a decoy and hit a runner from deep or hit the 13/15 in the wider channel and play off him. If you are crashing with your 12 having him crash closer to the scrum will allow your back row to get there quicker as well.

Obviously having players with well-rounded skills are better than players at the extremes, and at if the players aren't available you have to adapt to what you have, but if I was designing my archetypal team I would look for a bigger 12 who can drag me over the gainline and a ball-playing 13 who can bring my back 3 into the game.

Interesting comments, gents.

Submarine,
The game you call Rugby Netball is, I think, a great drill, and a lot of fun. We introduced it for the kids a few years ago, but the coaches, and now the mens team all have a go from time to time.

The other drill is something we do a variant by having a 5 on 4, 4 on 3, or 3 on 2. BUt same general idea. Its also a great drill.

Rodders and Robbo, I guess I am in the minority by wanting the basher type at 13. But I agree, it depends upon personnel. Ironically, I like my more powerful runner further from the breakdown for the same reason you like it closer. Harder for the flankers on defense to get there and a greater chance of mismatch.

Horses for courses, I suppose. But this is why I asked the question. I want other people's opinions. Thanks.

doctor_grey wrote:
Rodders and Robbo, I guess I am in the minority by wanting the basher type at 13.  But I agree, it depends upon personnel.  Ironically, I like my more powerful runner further from the breakdown for the same reason you like it closer.  Harder for the flankers on defense to get there and a greater chance of mismatch.  

Dr Grey I think since the ELV changes a few seasons ago it works better for the more powerful runner to be at 12. Previously the defence stood at the hind most foot of the scrum which left less space for the attack. This meant the space was in the wide channels which made a 1st 5/8th distributor type 12 and a strike runner at 13 the ideal combo to shift the ball away from the breakdown or set piece quickly.

Now with defenses 5m behind the scrum and the rules of the breakdown favouring the attacking side it means if you have a 12 who can hit the ball flat and break the gainline off 1st/2nd phase then the attacking team can build up a lot of momentum and then create space for the second and 3rd phase attacks.

Also in the past teams usually opted for man on man or drift defences, whereas there are so many defensive systems now which shut down the space out wide, like the blitz. This makes the gainline battle even more crucial and the 10-12 channel, being the quickest route across is now an even more attractive place to target as the ELV rules make it harder to defend there.

Because of this 12 is now a big mans position I think, with the quicker footballing player better suited to 13.

Good points, Rodders. And makes a lot of sense. And I agree the remains of the ELVs has changed Rugby in ways that probably a lot of people might have missed.

However, the centre situation is still not consistent anywhere. Look at England: If starting Barritt and Tuilagi, then where is my distributor? And with Saracens, Farrell will go from 10 to 13 with Barritt staying at 12. But back with England, Twelvetrees comes in at 12 and not 13. At Leicester, Anthony Allen is at 12 and Tuilagi is at 13. So no common threads, except perhaps that some teams will do without the second distributor type at all now?

For me a lot depends on the level you are playing at.  Currently, at international level I think you have to be an exceptional playmaker with serious pace and/or footwork to make that work consistently in the 12 channel without a physical edge to back it up. Ten years or so ago you could get away without that, but modern defences, tactics, player abilities and law changes have reduced that margin significantly.

There's more scope for that sort of 12 the lower you go down the levels, but I agree with others above that whether you want that sort of player depends on what sort of 10 you have.  The best sides have great blends and counterbalances of abilities.  If you've got a wonderfully skillful 10 (surely the most desireable) I think playing a similar player immediately outside him doesn't get the best out of each compared to other options.

I'm not sure I agree that Greenwood was simply a playmaker type 12, he was a pretty big lad and more than physically able, making use of that as much as his other skills.  Giteau or Catt would more closely typify that role for me.

Personally, in general regarding backline setup I've always preferred a skilled runner at 13; silky footwork, a tasty outside break, not necessarily a special distributor, but someone with a good awareness of the players around him and great timing, if not making the scoring break himself then dragging defenders about to create space for others or reading the movements of those in front to perfectly capitalise on any opportunities they provide.  The extra space in the outside channel with the type of outside backs that are immediately around him allows that sort of player to thrive and produce some special rugby moments.  Sella would be a prime example.

Someone like that you can pair with almost anyone, but my preference would be a top playmaker 10 and a 12 with physical presence (not especially an outsized bosher), good awareness and decent enough hands (e.g. Jauzion in his prime, I also think Greenwood was closer to this sort of player) to keep the defence tighter and maximise what's available in the outside channel or in close support.

doctor_grey wrote:Good points, Rodders.  And makes a lot of sense.  And I agree the remains of the ELVs has changed Rugby in ways that probably a lot of people might have missed.  

However, the centre situation is still not consistent anywhere.  Look at England:  If starting Barritt and Tuilagi, then where is my distributor?  And with Saracens, Farrell will go from 10 to 13 with Barritt staying at 12.  But back with England, Twelvetrees comes in at 12 and not 13.  At Leicester, Anthony Allen is at 12 and Tuilagi is at 13.  So no common threads, except perhaps that some teams will do without the second distributor type at all now?

No you are correct, but I think this depends on the type of fly half you have. For the big man at 12 to be most effective you need a Sexton/Carter/Priestland etc. 10 who can stand flat. If you have a fly half who stand deeper everything becomes telegraphed and the 12 is taking the ball behind the gainline.

No one size fits all but I think the template has been proven to be pretty successful by Wales and NZ.