Back to his best and has certainly convinced me that he is not wasted at full back.

And to think some people were calling him 'not good enough to be in a SL team with aspirations' at the start of the season. The lad is quality. The same people were questioning clark. the fact of the matter is our halves/backs/pivots are not starting to look the business because they are now playing behind a forward pack that has dominated the opposition middle.

Forwards decide who wins the game. The backs decide by how much.

Clark for me has been the most outstanding and is better than his MOS year at Cas due to his defensive work.

Ratchford is not back to his best at all, he’s much better. He’s got all the confidence in the world now he’s slotted into this structured attack of Price’s. Way more comfortable than having to play off the cuff at half back in the Smith-style teams. If Bennett picks him for England again this year no one could argue with it. Last year it was questionable but justified due to utility value - this year he’s the in-form British full back and its only the brilliance of Barba that’s hiding his achievements in SL.

Is full back the most important attacking role now, taking over from half back?

Price and the coaching team ordered the performance analysts to concentrate their cameras on Ratch for a full 80 mins early on in the season - since then the coaching has brought out the best from him .. well done to all concerned! He's been outstanding since the Wakey game at home

He's even started carrying the ball out from his own line with 2 hands! Hallelujah!

i for one called him early doors and the team too..so glad im eating a huge slice of humble pie..keep it up boys...

Ratch and especially Daryl Clark have been exceptionally good this season.

So was Tony Smith more of a great motivator and tactician with players already at the standard, whereas Price is actually a better ‘coach’ who can improve players even if the rugby is simple, structured stuff?

Would seem that way. The NRL way?

Its hard to argue against Price not being a better coach. The improvement in the players inherited from Smith would back up this theory.

Nothing simple and structured about a couple of the try's last Friday. Played what was in front of them and the players flooding through in support was refreshing.

Would it?...or would that back up the new coach syndrome.
Smith had a mirror effect on Paul Cullen's team.

Actually I think this is a big part of it. The difference being that Cull as a coach had taken the players as far as he could, Smith on the other hand was disinterested ( that is my interpretation of "fell out of love with the game"icon_wink.gif.

My opinion is that Smith was ok when there were overseas players of reasonable quality on tap to sign up. They didn't even have to be great players to look good in SL. Unfortunately,when coaching & development of young players to first team status was called for the coaching set up was found wanting.