Round 2 - Raiders vs Broncos - Build Up Thread

[Jeba]

Everyone knows I'm a Hunt fan, but **** me I can't justify picking him on the turd sandwich he dished up last night.

And that's the big reason I haven't wanted to see Wallace dropped. Hunt has done little or nothing to show that he would do a better job in the #7. Just have to hope like hell that Wallace improves a thousand percent.

 

[Charmamba]

To be honest I would like to see McGuire start. I know he is awesome as an impact player but maybe having him belting them from the start could unsettle them early.

 

[Porthoz]

I know there is a poor season behind it also, but rushing into decisions after the 1st game of this season, especially when Wallace managed to be the best out of himself, Hunt and Macca, albeit pretty poor, is more panic driven than sensible IMO...

But if there was to be a change, despite Macca having played more good games than Wallace in 2010, I think Wallace can become a really good 80 mins hooker, and Hunt may fill the halfback position better than him. Glenn could then be the utility on the bench and Macca... Well, he's just too slow!

 

[Bucking Beads]

Everyone knows I'm a Hunt fan, but **** me I can't justify picking him on the turd sandwich he dished up last night.

And that's the big reason I haven't wanted to see Wallace dropped. Hunt has done little or nothing to show that he would do a better job in the #7. Just have to hope like hell that Wallace improves a thousand percent.

well they are not going to drop Wallace after 1 round anyway. Our best chance of that happening is Hunt playing the house down in QLD cup in the 7.

 

[kluppy]

[quote="The Rock":2usxdufk]No McCollough CAN play 80 minutes, he just isn't given the opportunity to do so. He played 80 minutes in quite a few games last year and the year before.

TBH I don't think he deserves 80 mins. IMO Hunt looks the more likely to become the better hooker.[/quote:2usxdufk]

personally i'd axe mccullough, put wallace at hooker and have hunt at half.

 

[Porthoz]

[quote="The Rock":1czd0r58]No McCollough CAN play 80 minutes, he just isn't given the opportunity to do so. He played 80 minutes in quite a few games last year and the year before.

TBH I don't think he deserves 80 mins. IMO Hunt looks the more likely to become the better hooker.

personally i'd axe mccullough, put wallace at hooker and have hunt at half.[/quote:1czd0r58]
Wallace at hooker looks very attractive, problem is I don't think Hunt can deliver in the halves. Despite being more creative than Wallace, his (lack of) speed may well be his downfall. [icon_shru

 

[db1459]

[quote="The Rock":32e4y2ek]No McCollough CAN play 80 minutes, he just isn't given the opportunity to do so. He played 80 minutes in quite a few games last year and the year before.

TBH I don't think he deserves 80 mins. IMO Hunt looks the more likely to become the better hooker.

personally i'd axe mccullough, put wallace at hooker and have hunt at half.[/quote:32e4y2ek]

Baptiste would a much better option.

 

[Porthoz]

[quote="The Rock":1y1b5nti]No McCollough CAN play 80 minutes, he just isn't given the opportunity to do so. He played 80 minutes in quite a few games last year and the year before.

TBH I don't think he deserves 80 mins. IMO Hunt looks the more likely to become the better hooker.

personally i'd axe mccullough, put wallace at hooker and have hunt at half.

Baptiste would a much better option.[/quote:1y1b5nti]
Baptiste looks the goods, but I don't think he's ready for the NRL, neither is he an 80 mins player yet.

 

[Kimlo]

[quote="The Rock":2p9mx87r]No McCollough CAN play 80 minutes, he just isn't given the opportunity to do so. He played 80 minutes in quite a few games last year and the year before.

TBH I don't think he deserves 80 mins. IMO Hunt looks the more likely to become the better hooker.

personally i'd axe mccullough, put wallace at hooker and have hunt at half.[/quote:2p9mx87r]
I honestly would love to see this. IMO it could be a masterstroke(or fail for that matter) but I think Wallace has the traits to be a really good hooker for us and we need a halfback whit more creativity.

I'm over Wallace and McCullough(and I was backing up Wallace all last year) but I think Wallace has more to offer than McCullough at hooker if we put him there.

Either way no changes should happen until at least round 3 or 4 see how we go with Hannant and Hodges first.

 

[Alec]

1. Hoffman
2. Gagai
3. Reed
4. Hodges
5. Yow Yeh
6. Lockyer
7. Hunt
8. Hannant
9. McCullough
10. Anderson
11. Thaiday
12. Te'o
13. Parker

14. Glenn
15. Gillett
16. Tronc
17. McGuire

I like it. icon_thumbs_u

 

[Alec]

Didn't Wallace play hooker at the Panthers a bit, and was just as megashit?

 

[Donny]

I've been thinking about the game last night and how i would change the team on how they performed last night. My team for the Raiders next week would be

1. Hoffman
2. Gagai
3. Reed
4. Hodges
5. Yow Yeh
6. Locky
7. Hunt
8. Hannant
9. Wallace
10. Mcgurie
11. Teo
12. Thaiday
13. Parker

14. Gillet
15. Glen
16. Tronc
17. Anderson

Gillet and Glen can slip into nealy any position we need them too. We dont need a spare back on the bench. Especially since we are playing the raiders who have a huge pack

 

[Steve]

Can't remember when we last won down in Canberra. I reckon we'll be 0-2 this time next week eusa_think

 

[Big Pete]

Pretty sure it was 2005.

 

[kluppy]

[quote="The Rock":25sc27es]No McCollough CAN play 80 minutes, he just isn't given the opportunity to do so. He played 80 minutes in quite a few games last year and the year before.

TBH I don't think he deserves 80 mins. IMO Hunt looks the more likely to become the better hooker.

personally i'd axe mccullough, put wallace at hooker and have hunt at half.

I honestly would love to see this. IMO it could be a masterstroke(or fail for that matter) but I think Wallace has the traits to be a really good hooker for us and we need a halfback whit more creativity.

I'm over Wallace and McCullough(and I was backing up Wallace all last year) but I think Wallace has more to offer than McCullough at hooker if we put him there.

Either way no changes should happen until at least round 3 or 4 see how we go with Hannant and Hodges first.[/quote:25sc27es]

atleast with wallace at hooker you know you have an 80 minute player, glenn on the bench as a (and i hate the word) utility, hes adequate in the centres/wing, he's good enough for the back row and could fill in at hooker if one of our halves fell over and wallace had to cover them.

 

[shaneomac]

i dont see a solid halfback option yet so keep wallace. BUT

could we see an improvement from our first receiver with just a change to their supply ie.. a new hooker.

maybe glenn at hooker

 

[Bucking Beads]

Raiders were on fire today without Orford, Campese and Dugan. We could be in a for an arse whopping but hopefully we turn up to play

 

[Nashy]

Yeah. Lol. Raiders are going to fkn smoke us.