Jake the Peg wrote:It's not ridiculous at all. A centre is likely to make far more tackles in a game than a full back (unless it's salford's full back ) Look at this comparison from last season (didn't use ours as we didn't have a settled side) HERE I'm not talking number of tackles, but how important they are. Stats are irrelevant.

Jake the Peg wrote:It's not ridiculous at all. A centre is likely to make far more tackles in a game than a full back (unless it's salford's full back ) Look at this comparison from last season (didn't use ours as we didn't have a settled side) HERE I'm not talking number of tackles, but how important they are. Stats are irrelevant.

So the man who has to make around 3 X the number of tackles doesn't need as good defence? Sounds like an interesting, if bollox, theory to me.

A FB may need to make a small number of crucial tackles in a game, however a centre will be called on to make several tackles which, if missed, are likely to result in tries (or opportunities for tries). Centre is a very difficult position to defend as it tends to be very exposed

Where did I say a centre doesn't need good defense?

Ah, the famous standee strategic withdrawal

It's a completely different type of tackle generally though. Fullback is about getting the tackle completed and little else. That isn't enough at centre.

I also think it suits his tackling style - i.e. catching a man or a side tackle. Yes a full back does have to make one on one front on tackles (a Wellens good point) but I stand by a centre needs better man on man defence.

I don't disagree.

So you agree?

By definition, yes.

Interesting to see Hall Packing in at loose man a couple of times on Friday . A good move move by Agar to tighten our defensive line up with a second row and not leaving Hall in a potential 1 on 1 scenario near our try line.