All in the half backs. If we can put Atkins in space (remember those days) then Charnley will be fine. Riley scored a bucket load.

we had rhys evans, but decided he was bobbins, so we let him go.

This is precisely the point abolut Ratchford. He enjoys the freedom to step into the action, and a short spell works for him. He was given numerous outings as first choice starting 6 especially in 2014/15 and looked hopeless.

Not sure if i am being harsh on Ratch here...however, ive found on a lot of occasions this year, the fluidity of some moves have broken down when he has chimed into the line. By stepping back the other way, or keeping hold of possession for too long.....

Not sure if a move to 6 would improve that....as at Full back he should in theory have more time on the ball, would that be an issue if he played 6? Or does he now have more experience under his belt and we should give him another go in the halves?

Im not sure TBH....

How do we go from signing Charnley to discussing Ratchford in the halves, I don’t want him anywhere near it, tbh I’m still not convinced he is a fullback, but for me no way a half. Just leave him we’re he is for now.

Because the signing of Charnley now asks questions (or at least can be discussed, as its a forum). Is it a straight swap...i.e Lineham or Mitch to be dropped. Or is Price thinking of positional changes i.e Mitch to Full back, Ratch in the halves, as mentioned earlier in the thread.....my thoughts were we looked a lot better in attack in the last 15mins of the Hull game when Ratch moved into the halves. All this was based on IF the Roberts leaving rumors turned out to be true......all guess work and 'what ifs' of course.

Its been tried before Ratch at 6, and didnt go well, i am aware off that. But does that mean it cannot be discussed? So, thats how we got to discussing it.........Apologies for the semi-derailment.

Give him a fair chance, and if he does make an error or two just think to yourself :

" What would Matty Russell have done differently there? "

You wont have to worry about Matty Russell for too much longer, he will be a black and white by the end of this season at the latest.

Totally neutral comment here. Mitch Brown's primary position is FB. Would you not consider Ratchford to Hooker? That role would probably bring the backs more into the game along with the likes of Charnley.

No. Ratchford at 6 or 1. He could cover 9 though as he can any position barr prop.

i can't see hull wanting to sign him

Not exactly a like for like replacement for Watts ....

No but pound for pound they'll get more from Matty on the pitch.

Interesting what Carney says " five to six - to get himself athletically right to play rugby league again." www.skysports.com/rugby-league/n ... h-charnley

Interesting what Carney says " five to six - to get himself athletically right to play rugby league again." www.skysports.com/rugby-league/n ... h-charnley

He is a guest on the Golden Point on Thursday before the game, be interesting to listen to him on there.

No, they won't (I think deep down you do actually realise that).

Change of career?

hes got mock the week to fall back on

Indeed. Positive moves. We didn’t transition from the 2010-2013 side well but we’re trying to address that at least.

Ratchford would be the centre inside Charnley for me

I’ve said it a few times on here about Ratchford at centre,but I guess some don’t like him being tied to one side of the field.

He could send the Hudds vs Warrington 2018 DVD to You've Been Framed.

No, not at all. Watts spends half a season suspended. That's a lot of wasted pay checks.
So pound for pound Matty is s more viable return.

During his Super League career with Hull KR and Hull FC he had served no suspension until last season when he was suspended for 6 matches. I know what you are driving at but the stats don't support him 'spending half a season suspended'.

Including our coach, it seems. But it may be that he feels he has options at centre but not at full back.