I've only 2 positions in mind for Ratchford. One is at halfback and the other is loose forward.
Okay he needs to pack on another stone ideally, but very reminiscent of my all time fav loose forward John Pendlebury.
Ratch is nearer a John Pendlebury than he is a John Woods that I admit, but he's a million miles off a Allan Bateman or a Brian Johnson, so no at centre or fullback for me.

A lot of the posts on here seem to neglect the fact we have a season that will contain anything between 31 and 36 games, so it cannot be a case of 'first choice 17 plays until someone's form drops'.

Or, if it is, we will find ourselves at round 14/15 wondering why we have 7/8 injuries and why the guys coming in have no match sharpness and don't know the systems.

Ratchford is the new Grix, in that he is being written off while injured, on the evidence of a season where he was more or less playing injured throughout. His versatility will give us terrific options and flexibility later in the season. I would still play him at full-back more often than not, but he does need to be a bit more urgent in that position (unlike at year when he was, as I say, not fully fit). Still our best footballer when in the mood.

We do seem to have short memories here. Ratchford's last game was v. Saints at the end of the season. He produced a sublime bit of skill to put Jack Johnson in for a brilliant try (Johnson by the way looked a very good player). He is a top player.
Last year when Matty Russell was injured he seemed to be put down on this forum as was Rhys Evans.
God help you if you get injured.

Well said Smiffy and Browny.
Shame on many others.

I was watching back the 2012 and 2013 GFs and I was surprised at how poor Ratchfords' defence is. Anyone who thinks he can play in the middle six is a bit deluded.

He needs to earn his place back in the reserves as does Dodds. This club has made mistakes in the past by selecting players on the basis of reputation or the size of their salary.

Exactly my thoughts. He is a talent, but his defence is poor for me. Fullback is a no no, some shocking attempts at tackling last year. Good cover for the halves, But he would be better in the centres, back end of last year showed us that I think.

The best defence is attack. You complete and score, you will have done all the tacking you need.

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 could 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?