Lee Smith was out of position because if you watch the game he goes flying out the line trying get an interception and misses by about 10 metres every time, leaving Briscoe on his own against the best centre in the world, the NRL's top try scorer on the wing and probably a second rower too.

For the whole of the half?
Presumably you think his OWN position was man marking his opposite number? Watch the game back - if he had stood face to face with Inglis there would have been a twenty yard gap on his inside shoulder.

England's defensive strategy was to push the Australians onto one side of the field then condense in, expecting the Aussies to try and batter their way through the middle.

Obviously nobody had pointed out the speed and accuracy with which Lockyer and Thurston can pass a ball from right to left. The ball moves faster than the man, particular if you fix the inside defenders with decoy runners. All the Australians had to do was keep their width on the left hand side and use ball movement to outflank England's defence.

He left a gap the size of a bus for Inglis to run through anyway so what's your point? I'd rather he left a gap for Josh Hannant to be honest. Fact is he was reading plays badly, not being some mid-pitch saviour for the forwards as seems to be your interpretation.

He was out of position. Constantly, for whatever reason. I'm amazed that doesn't seem clear to you.

Constantly? Throughout?
Australia should have scored every single play the ball

I'll give you your due, you got one thing right. He was pretty much in the middle of the pitch when Australia played the ball near their right hand touchline.

Now would you like to give some thought - be brave, I know it will hurt - as to why he might have been defending that centrally? Start by looking at the positioning of the players on his left and go from there.

So not throughout and not constantly now then?

As to your second para, you're the first one to suggest that. Not sure why you would, but there you go.

Probably for the same sorts of reasons he came out of line at the wrong times on occassion. He was reading plays badly along with many of his team mates. As I would expect for a fullback playing centre against such a good team with a defensively weak 6 beside him.

How about I ask you a question - is it your assertion that Lee Smith was completely free from blame defensively throughout the first half?

You appear to be suggesting he has no responsibility for marshalling the defence on that side and that everything is dictated by people to his left. I played right centre, and I wouldn't have got away with that excuse with any coaches I played under.

Nope, that's an interpretation you've put on my posts, probably based as much on who I support as their content.

Have a look at how England defended when Australia had the ball on their right hand side of the field in that first 40 minutes. Have a look at how condensed the defensive line was, where all the players were lining up. You think condensing the defensive line that much was a unilateral decision taken by the players on the field.

If you had disregarded the team's defensive pattern and left a 15 yard gap on your inside, what do you think your coach would have said to you?

Peacock, Sinfield, Smith, Mcguire and Briscoe all made clear errors in their defensive positioning in the first half. I don't think any sensible poster has suggested otherwise.

He would have been too busy thrashing the players at fault to find time to criticise me for deciding not to leave the best player in the world half a pitch to run around in.

I'd be inclined to say rather a 15 yard gap on my inside left by others than a 30 yard gap on my outside left by me, with the latter gap housing the most dangerous player on the planet.

At the end of the day, the defensive pattern was daft, but to suggest Smith was somehow forced to abandon for mid-field for the bulk of the first half is equally daft. He was exerting no control whatsoever over what was happening on his side of the pitch. Probably because he's a blo*ody full back!!

Your point is a fair one. Its all very well bad mouthing Smith, but if he's the best we've got, then we have to work with it.

From my team's point of view (Sts), with gidley filling one centre, the other has been filled by both Eastmond and Gilmour, but before his injury, young Wheeler played a good run of games there and was quite impressive (when our season was going well). He's a stand off by trade but looked a very composed and capable centre. There's young Chris Dean who is a solid but unspectacular player who'll probably carve out a decent SL career now that the quota's tightening. Tyrer who's gone to Salford - he's struggled, but is still only 20 and could always find the try line. I have a felling he'll do ok in the long run, but England might be a long shot.

From England's point of view, I have to say I was very impressed by Bridge when I saw him play centre this year fro Wire. His play looked like that of a classic centre, he hit the gap outside his man well, and has an excellent step back. I never saw him troubled in defence and his a fair lump so would be ok from that point of view. For me - a better choice than Smith.

Those who mention Atkins? Well, i've been shocked at how bad his positional defence can be in the centre channel when I've seen him over the years. He's definately not the answer to plugging the defensive gaps.

Huddersfields youngsters confuse me - Lawrence and Cudjoe. They're always bigged up and look good when you see them, but the coach often seem to leave them out for somewhat more pedestrian looking foreigners (thinking about it, obviously Cudjoe's got Hodgeson keeping him out of his favoured position). Perhaps the giants fans could tell me exactly how good these guys are.

There does [iseem[/i to be more youngsters of note coming through in the backs. Welham at KR looks ok and Cas have got some decent backs in Shenton/Dixon/Owen; Ratchford at Salford, Tomkins and Ainscough at Wigan etc etc. It all goes back to taking the talent and turning it into a really top class player, rather than a pretty good one - unless we're just hoping for 7 paul newloves to come along at the same time (and even then we'd be ed for away internationals ).

You have to close the inside gaps, and if you're going to leave space, leave it on the outside. At least that way you can take away most of the support players and leave the attack only one way to go.

Seems an English RL thing to think good defence is staying out wide "on your man" and waving the opposition through the middle