I am suggesting Smith's positional play was poor and led to problems.

You are suggesting it wasn't poor and that he was just doing what he had to do.

Not much point arguing over such polarised opinions, we all have our views on what went wrong.

Check my post of 16:16

What I have eversohelpfully done, is also explain why it was so, and why it was so for several players.
Which I thought was a better explanation than just claiming him to be a fullback.

I was actually just trying to find out what Code13 thought was the right position for a centre in defence.

You know that HUUUUUUUUUUUUGE gap Inglis kept running through...there.

Even if he was laying down in the hope of tripping Inglis up he would have been more use.

You prefer to see opponents break through the middle and score under the posts then? Why?

Give up. Objective views are in such a minority, they are indistinguishable amongst the drivel.

Smith, McGuire and Briscoe didn't do very well at all at covering the right side. Poor decision-making and coordination, lack of technique and lack of nous basically. However, ignoring the fact that England's right side defence started about halfway across the pitch and that whenever Australia gave the ball air to the left Inglis and co were in acres of space is doing those three a grave disservice.

The English defensive structure and in particular the positioning of the backrow was equally to blame. If you had Hodges, Hayne and Hindmarsh defending half the pitch against Slater, Inglis and whoever else, they'd be in trouble. Undoubtedly they'd do a better job than our three hapless heroes, but I suspect they'd leak at least a couple of tries. Hence that defensive structure not being something you'll ever see in the NRL.

And whilst I defend Tony Smith a lot - I feel he comes in for a lot of unnecessary flak - I do think that the responsibility for such a poor structure, and the failure to adjust it DURING the first half are down to him and to some extent some of the senior players. He obviously thought Australia could be sucked into a forward-oriented game, and was equally obviously wrong.

England is absolutely doomed whatever the position.

No, he should be screaming at his inside man to pull out pardon the pun). They teach it at school level, they teach it at amateur level, hell, even I know to do it. You look up, see where the opposition are set and move accordingly. I completely agree that the defensive strategy was wrong, but to put no blame on the wide markers is a bit apologetic. The only player on englands right who stuck to his man and marked his position was Briscoe. Mcguireand smith were consistently marking the same man.

That's the problem we still have people not knowing the game, likely unqualified, teaching that at school and amateur level.
Yes, call your man out to cover the overlap, but whilst doing that close the gap inside. Don't just stand out wide. If that means everyone in a couple of spots, well better that and the opposition have to work to get outside them and are pushed to the touchline, than let them break up the middle with support either side. Always take your positioning of the teammate inside you.

P.S. I always find it's more effective to have the players on the side where you're over manned push the extra defenders away to where you're undermanned than have defenders on an undermanned side pull players across. When pulling players across, you're always asking a defender to move and leave someone else uncovered. What you should have is the winger or half on the overmanned side call to players, who are likely doubling up on an attacker or covering no one, to push across to where you're undermanned.

The fact is a similar list could be drawn up for every position.

Spot on.