Nope. The best defence is good defence. If the opposition don't score you won't lose. Simple as that. You earn the right to play by defending well - the Leeds game demonstrated that, as did Sunday.

For me Ratchford is cover at 6 and no more. With work on his defence and positioning he [ucould[/u be an outstanding full-back. At present he's probably the best centre we have at the club. I don't think anyone would split up the Gidley/Sandow combo unless it was needed to.

As said earlier in the thread, we've probably got the best squad depth since 2011 with a good mix of youth and experience too.

Erm, you need far better defence (assume you mean tackling) to be a centre than a full-back. Just as a quick illustration, Moon and Watkins made 466 and 403 tackles each last year, while Hardaker (generally thought of as a great defensive fullback) made 130.

I happen think Ratchford's defence is far better now than it was in 2012 or 2013. Players can work on things. Comparing with Shenton, an excellent defensive centre, shows Ratchford made 345 tackles with 51 misses last year, while Shenton made 403 tackles with 73 misses.

Theres the age old subject, if you're a fullback and having to make a or bust tackle, its usually because someone else has missed a tackle further up the field.

Can tell your from the School of Paul Cullen with comments like that...

Centre for me instead of Atkins. Absolutely no to loose forward.

On Ratchford, a quick look at his Opta 2015 stats and you'll find he isn't too bad on the missed tackle count and was far and away our chief try creator with 20. Nearest to him was 12.

Part and parcel of being a full back, last line of defence. You can't think 'oh I'll just let him through cos some clown already has'. We could debate ratchford's skills/best position all day but one thing is for sure he's a poor defensive full back who doesn't put his body on the line.

Best defence is attack, Brian Johnson is the all the proof you need.

No it isnt.. the best defence, is as someone has already pointed out, is a good defence.

This tired old cliche you keep trotting out doesnt really work when you're pinned on your own line having to defend repeat sets does it?

In 2011 we had one of our best defensive records ever, do you think it's just coincidence we also had the best attacking record ever?

Ratchford can be a big threat, but he is not a good fullback and does not have the play-making skills to be a top class half back. Unless he bulks up enough to have a future as a no 13 his best chance for us is in the centre, where a player with lesser ball-playing skills but with a good step and swerve can thrive.

A poor defense generally means camping out on your own line then gifting the opposition possession and repeat sets whether it be conceding penalties, drop outs, handling errors or simply kicking the ball back to the opposition after they have scored. Very draining plus without the ball it's pretty difficult to score.

A great defense means you're stopping the opposition further up the field and getting the ball back in more dangerous positions. You'll generally have more possession of the ball and you're less tired. If you have the players to capitalise on that possession then you'll score more points.

I think if someone commented that it was a bit chilly outside you'd have to argue that it's a lovely evening!

Ratchford is the third, maybe soon to be the fourth, best fullback at the club (behind Russell, Gidley and soon maybe Johnson). He's not in the same league as Sandow and Gidley at halfback. He's not big enough to play in the pack. He is however highly suited to playing at centre especially in a team who's best centre at the minute is a young forward 'filling in'.