Assuming that Ratchford and Bridge works as well as you think it will, at what point will you bring O'Brien back in? You're convinced we're going to go an a winning run if Smith agrees with you, so presumably it's going to be rather awkward to break that up and bring O'Brien back in?

You are now Cunningham....Would you play Walsh at FB and Charnock at SH?
That is essentially what TS is doing, because he is more senior and could play FB better than the junior but sacrificing the craft in the most important position to do so!

HBs do not carry the ball loosely. The play is tight and collision is high. You just don't because you can't.
Ratchford used two hands when at HB.
Ratchford has craft, few of our players are so gifted. You play the best players in a position where they can get their hands on the ball.
If Ratchford would push up into the halves in attack at every opportunity, I wouldn't care what team sheet official position he was given. The problem is he isn't pushing up.

I would play my best organiser and kicker, with an ability to steer a team around the pitch, at scrum half - Walsh.
I would play an elusive runner with a decent passing game but little capacity to organise or control at fullback - Lomax.
That is what Cunningham would be doing for not for injury.
That is also what Tony Smith is doing - playing your best organiser (whoever that may be, G'OB or Patton, it's certainly not Ratchford or Bridge) at scrum half, and his elusive runner with decent passing at fullback, Ratchford.

You answered the question about Sts perfectly then contradicted it when it comes to Warrington.
You have just said in effect Walsh is not an organiser and Charnock is!

I am just dumbfounded when we are crying out for leadership, quality and strength at half back and we continually play our best half back at full back.

We could play Penny at FB just like Keiron Dixon played FB to great effect against us.