Debate around stump receiver at run out

There has always been an interesting debate around a non-wicket keeper receiving the ball while making a run out.

Should the receiver receive the ball in front of the stumps and then break the bails, or should they be waiting behind the stumps for the ball to pass - basically acting as "the back up"?

Its a pretty open debate - 90% of receivers have the logic that you stand behind the stump and simply catch and break if the fielders throw has missed.

But a few years back the South African cricket side started the habit of receiving the ball in front of the stumps and then swinging their hands back to break the stumps. (The theory being that you guaranteed a run out).

The actual success of the South African technique was called into question where at least one run out was missed, simply on the grounds that the 1 second it took to catch the ball and then break make the run out cost them on at least 1 occassion.

My take - a receiver always stands behind the stumps and provides backup - he should not be interrupting the flight of the ball of an accurate throw for any reason...