Anonymous person
Banned User
- Dec 16, 2008
- 4,635
- 932
i want the best man for the job, not the person whos been waiting the longest. if Smith is better than Hunt, why would you want hunt?
Tim Smith close to signing elsewhere.
- Thread starter Bannermania
- Start date
Anonymous person
Banned User
- Dec 16, 2008
- 4,635
- 932
lol
Bucking Beads
International Captain
- Mar 5, 2008
- 24,587
- 7,876
Henjak practically begged Smith to stay but he wanted a spot in first grade every week. We are not in a position to have a halfback on the bench IMO. Smith is a better player than Wallace IMO but we will never know how he was to go while playing with Lockyer.
Great post Rocky, sums up how I see the situation perfectly. Once Lockyer goes we need to find a 5/8th or half to play with Wallace that will play the flair role because Wallace is your "steady, organiser". It may be Hunt it may be Norman or it may be someone else but Tim Smith had one good year a long time back now and then a crap one and then disappeared from league for a few years, how anyone can just say he is better makes no sense whatsoever.
- Mar 26, 2008
- 7,924
- 6,846
The Rock said:
Really? We've all been waiting for Wallace to blow our socks off? Speak for yourself.
Wallace has never been the player to "tear a game apart". He's not that creative. He's a organisational halfback with a great kicking game, crisp passing game and probably one of, if not the best defensive halfback in the game. He reads the game well, he has absolutely no problem with putting on a set play with his 5/8 and his outside backs. He won't ever "blow our socks off" but he'll certaintly do a damn good job, week in and week out.
You can half the most creative players in the world, but without a halfback that can organise your team and do the little things right that a halfback needs to do, your team will struggle to score points. Ever wondered by we struggled to be a flamboyant team since Langer left? Because we didn't have a decent halfback that can organise the team. As great as Lockyer was, and while he was more than capable of running the team around the park, it was impossible to consistently get it out of him week in and week out. (Unlike Andrew Johns who was not only creative, but a great organisational hafback too and was more than capable of doing the lot) Not knocking Lockyer either, Lockyer's big game plays puts him above Johns as far as finishing off a game goes IMO, but I'm trying to make the point that we lacked that attacking flair since Langer because we lacked the organisational brains at times.
Since 2008, our attack has been WAY better. We've looked more flamboyant, we've had more options and we've become a more exciting team. Coincidence? I think not. Wallace can take a lot of credit for that.
Now, as for the Tim Smith argument - IMO, we should have just offered him a contract and said take it or leave it. (didn't we do that?) He has to earn his way into the team.
When Lockyer leaves, we'll REALLY need a half that can tear a game apart or win a game for us on the back of brilliance. Tim Smith is capable of doing that.
Smith doesn't want to wait though so shit happens, let him go. Nothing you can do about it.[/quote:9rmdr35h]
Agree, Wallace is a faster, younger, ranga version of Shane Perry.
Anonymous person
Banned User
- Dec 16, 2008
- 4,635
- 932
i get it, you guys prefer the no-frills-but-less-talented guys - we've seen this with your love of players like Kelly, Minto, McGuire and Perry - but Halfback shouldnt be a position where you want that over someone that has proven to not only be able to organise, but has also proven to be able to tear a game wide open by themself. Smith has proven he can do this, Wallace will never be able to.
like i said, i wouldve preferred they give wallace a few weeks off and let Smith have a go. if it doesnt work, no harm done. if it does, hell yes we now have a top quality halfback for the first time since 2002.
like i said, i wouldve preferred they give wallace a few weeks off and let Smith have a go. if it doesnt work, no harm done. if it does, hell yes we now have a top quality halfback for the first time since 2002.
Anonymous person
Banned User
- Dec 16, 2008
- 4,635
- 932
lol sure, thats it.
i understand football very well. its like being given the choice between Hunt and Slater, you guys all choose Hunt because hes 'solid' and wont let you down. thats the same thing here - youre choosing Wallace over Smith because Wallace is 'solid' and wont let you down, despite the fact that Smith has proven to be those things and more.
i understand football very well. its like being given the choice between Hunt and Slater, you guys all choose Hunt because hes 'solid' and wont let you down. thats the same thing here - youre choosing Wallace over Smith because Wallace is 'solid' and wont let you down, despite the fact that Smith has proven to be those things and more.
The Gymp said:
[eusa_clap.gi [eusa_clap.gi [eusa_clap.gi [eusa_clap.gi [eusa_clap.gi [eusa_clap.gi [eusa_clap.gi [eusa_clap.gi
My thoughts exactly - esp re Smith. Truly I hope that he can get back to the top of his game, but I'm not sure he will ever recapture the form of his debut season consistently.
QUEENSLANDER
NRL Captain
- Mar 4, 2008
- 4,316
- 537
m1c your stupidity honestly amazes me. we were still winning after slater gave away that try, maybe if the rest of the team could defend we wouldnt have lost instead? to blame slater for the one try is fair enough, he gave it away, but its hardly his fault that subsequent tries were scored.
QUEENSLANDER
NRL Captain
- Mar 4, 2008
- 4,316
- 537
we only remember the ones that dont stick tho, sad but true!
