Peter Wallace

[AuDragon]

Of course you do because it's never just Wallace's fault.

Meanwhile the rest of us can acknowledge he has an impotent running game. Seriously can somebody please tell him his hop and skip isn't fooling anyone.

His passing game isn't on the level either. If he isn't throwing them forward, he's picking the wrong guy out or throwing the wrong type of pass which inevitably stalls the attack.

In one pass, Ben Hunt showed Wallace up tonight as a ball-player - and that was a pretty customary pass.

The pass that gave Copley his try? Oh wow, amazing stuff! :crazy:

So now you speak for everyone else, do you? Because I'm pretty sure that there's many people out there that disagree with you.

If you can't take your anti-Wallace glasses and see where the real problem is, you truly have NFI.

I'll throw down the gauntlet and dare you to review the game if you recorded it, pause at the moment Wallace receives the ball, and take the time to see how often Wallace could really have taken a better option. By the way, if you do that exercise, check out where the line is at the time the ball is played, and where it is when Wallace receives it.

 

[Big Pete]

The pass that gave Copley his try? Oh wow, amazing stuff! :crazy:

And yet it was still better than anything Wallace dished up in general play. Which was my point.

I never said the dummy half wasn't an issue, just that it isn't the sole aspect and Wallace needs to take responsibility for his poor passing and running skills.

 

[AuDragon]

And yet it was still better than anything Wallace dished up in general play. Which was my point.

I never said the dummy half wasn't an issue, just that it isn't the sole aspect and Wallace needs to take responsibility for his poor passing and running skills.

How intellectually dishonest is that?
That was as easy and simple a pass as possible to a player in acres of space and no opponent in the vicinity. I'm sure Wallace would have screwed that up! :sarcasm:

His "poor passing and running skills" are directly related to the position he finds himself in through the crap service he gets, with the opposition line so far up his throat that his passing lines are often cut and he has to either rush a kick or run at a line swarming on him.

And before you or anyone else say it... Yes, Lockyer handles it better! But then again, Lockyer is probably the no.1 player you should never rush on, and Wallace will never be at his level.

We have the worst service from dummy half in the NRL, and 90% of the halves would suffer behind it, simple as that!

 

[GoTheBroncs]

To be honest I think its a combination of McCullough's service and Wallace's general lack of creativity and knowing what to do in attack. I like Wallace as a guy, he always gives more than 100% but he just doesn't seem to have enough in attack. And his running game is not much good as he doesn't have the speed/agility. His short kicking game is solid.

It's ok having Wallace if Lockyer is around, as Lockyer shoulders alot of the responsibility. The salary cap says you cannot be strong across the whole team. My concern comes in next season, when Lockyer is replaced by someone like Norman (who could end up an excellent player but I don't think in the short term.)

 

[Big Pete]

How intellectually dishonest is that?
That was as easy and simple a pass as possible to a player in acres of space and no opponent in the vicinity. I'm sure Wallace would have screwed that up! :sarcasm:

Yet it's still a better pass than anything Wallace has ever thrown. I even doubt Wallace would have been adventurous to go out wide like Hunt did. In fact, I'd wager Hunt has a better cut-out pass than Wallace once Hunt's given his chance mid-season.

There is only so much you can blame on poor service, and at the end of the day it doesn't force Wallace to do his silly skip hop runs or throw his wayward passes that are neither here nor there, or predictibly hit the second rower 9/10.

I really can't understate how good his kicking game - it was very very good. But if his running game was better, he would've been close to my MotM and it disappoints me that I can't acknowledge him because of his stitled play in general play.

Hopefully it clicks, because if Wallace could fix that aspect he'd reclaim his position as one of the best halves in the game - a title he had 2-3 years ago.

 

[jarro]

The thing i've found lately is that he's getting a lot more involved, which is a real step forward for him.
It's only a matter of time before he plays consistantly well for us

 

[Dazzat]

Please note the level of whinging about our playmaker when we are top of the ladder. God help us when we lose a (one) game! The whinging level will hit the roof.

Late breaking news: Peter Wallace will never be Alfie Langer; he plays like Peter Wallace. And coach Griffin has him playing a role that isn't attractive, but is doing the job.

Last night I saw a player willing to take on the line, sometimes managed an off-load, and sometimes didn't. He took the pressure off Lockyer by drawing in two-three defenders.

I saw Lockyer make some dud passes ... should we start a whinge thread about him as well?

 

[user_nat]

I saw Lockyer make some dud passes ... should we start a whinge thread about him as well?

Probably does deserve a thread after some efforts this year.

 

[hellteam]

He's our best halfback. Ben Hunt isn't up to a whole game, he probably hasn't played a full game of footy since the start of last year. Wallace is great in defence too.

In good news Hunt had one of his best games in the NRL last night IMO, hopefully he builds from here.

 

[hellteam]

To be honest I think its a combination of McCullough's service and Wallace's general lack of creativity and knowing what to do in attack. I like Wallace as a guy, he always gives more than 100% but he just doesn't seem to have enough in attack. And his running game is not much good as he doesn't have the speed/agility. His short kicking game is solid.

It's ok having Wallace if Lockyer is around, as Lockyer shoulders alot of the responsibility. The salary cap says you cannot be strong across the whole team. My concern comes in next season, when Lockyer is replaced by someone like Norman (who could end up an excellent player but I don't think in the short term.)

Stop worrying about next year, there's no point. We are a good club, I'm sure there is people more qualified than us working out this problem at the moment.

 

[user_nat]

Stop worrying about next year, there's no point. We are a good club, I'm sure there is people more qualified than us working out this problem at the moment.

More qualified than us? I'd like to meet such a person!

 

[Mr Fourex]

Last night I saw a player willing to take on the line, sometimes managed an off-load, and sometimes didn't. He took the pressure off Lockyer by drawing in two-three defenders.

That's a fair enough statement........

The rest of your panty twist about what you perceive as "whinging" was to be expected.

If honestly appraising players upsets you so much why do you come in to read threads like this?

 

[skaines]

Sandow may have talent, but lacks the brain to put it to good use,
McCrone has a good running game, but his passing and kicking are absolutely dreadful, as is his defense.
Walsh had a good year on the back of very dominant performances by his forwards, a luxury Wallace barely had in years. Very weak defensively though.
The same goes for Hornby, who leaves most of the organising and kicking to Soward anyway. Wallace plays next to the great Lockyer, and still takes more initiative than Hornby.

The common point all those HB's have, is a strong forward pack, that dominated most of their opponents and allowed their halves the time to breathe and think (well, except Sandow that is :crazy.

Wallace has had to play most games behind a dominated pack, and that makes a lot of difference when you're not as gifted as a Lockyer, Thurston or Marshall.


Maybe not purposedly, although like many others, you focus on his failing, but ignore what good he does and the circumstances that make it so much tougher for him!

Well its fairly hard to focus on his good points when he had few.

He still has a few of them, but has improved greatly, especially in his kicking.

He needs to learn when to run and when to pass, numerous times he waists tackles when close to the line, with basic 1 up hits into the oposition line.

 

[GoTheBroncs]

Stop worrying about next year, there's no point. We are a good club, I'm sure there is people more qualified than us working out this problem at the moment.

Don't be concerned about the future? That's an interesting approach to building a football team. Looking towards the future is exactly why QLD have won 5 in a row. And Mal already has a four year blue print for after this season.

I'm glad that you have faith that the club is taking care of next year. But all I've heard from the club is that they're not going to sign someone and it will be Norman/Hunt to replace Lockyer. Sorry but that has me concerned. I hope you are right!

 

[whykickamoocow]

Hopefully it clicks, because if Wallace could fix that aspect he'd reclaim his position as one of the best halves in the game - a title he had 2-3 years ago.[/QUOTE]

I have to agree with AU. The service from dummy half is blunting Wallace and Big Petes above comment kinda proves his point. Pete your right Wallace was better 3 years ago but that's because he was getting better service from Ennis then what he currently gets from Maccabee or Hunt. Both need to learn to pass from the ground. Better still shift Wallace to 9 and Hunt to 1/2.

 

[GoTheBroncs]

Wallace to 9 and Hunt to 1/2.

What do other guys think about this? Wallace looked pretty sharp when he went to dummy half a couple of times in the game. And he definitely has the defence for it.

 

[Dazzat]

That's a fair enough statement........

The rest of your panty twist about what you perceive as "whinging" was to be expected.

If honestly appraising players upsets you so much why do you come in to read threads like this?

Last time I checked, picking apart your playmaker when your team is on top of the ladder, and has just won seven on the trot is a sure sign of whinging.

For many of you, until Wallace plays several man-of-the-match performances you'll continue in the same vein and miss the party ... WE'RE LEADING THE COMPETITION AND PLAYING GREAT FOOTBALL.

I have a very good reason for backing Wallace. As a fan I watched the team struggle to find a halfback since Alfie's retirement. Shaun Berrigan, Shane Perry, Scott Prince, Berrick Barnes, Paul Green, Ben Ikin, Ben Walker, Brett Seymour ... etc etc.

A string of failed experiments, misadventures, injuries, poachings, and good intentions gone wrong.

After waiting so long, I'm stoked that the team has a solid halfback, who has proven his ability on numerous occasions. I believe he's in the top half-a-dozen halfbacks in the competition, and I am happy with that. Because as we've seen in recent years, you don't need the No. 1 half to win a competition.

Many fans, however, place their halfbacks on a plane of expectation no one will ever attain to. Sad ...

 

[Mr Fourex]

What do other guys think about this? Wallace looked pretty sharp when he went to dummy half a couple of times in the game. And he definitely has the defence for it.

Been thinking it for a while ....... I think Wallace would make an excellent 9. I actually gained some hope last night that Griffin was thinking it as well. When Hunt 1st came on I noticed Wallace going to dummy half alot.

Wallace as hooker -

• Defence is strong enough.
• Can kick out of dummy half
• Short passing game and his "limited" half/organisational skills could be valuable
• He's quick enough or at least faster than Mc & Hunt

More plus's than minus's

 

[Mr Fourex]

Last time I checked, picking apart your playmaker when your team is on top of the ladder, and has just won seven on the trot is a sure sign of whinging.

No it's not. It's discussing how the team performed......warts and all.

When honestly appraising something, one has to look at the good points as well as the bad. If you choose to only highlight the positive and disregard the negative ......then you are IMHO hindering your opportunities for growth and improvement.

For many of you, until Wallace plays several man-of-the-match performances you'll continue in the same vein and miss the party ... WE'RE LEADING THE COMPETITION AND PLAYING GREAT FOOTBALL.

I'm not looking for MOTM performances. I am only looking for a glimpse of creativity. Something .....ANYTHING. I swear if on one of the numerous times when the play broke down with the ball in his hands last night, if he had of chosen/organised a different play...ANY play......a grubber through or a kick behind the line FFS ........ I would/will sing his praise from the roof tops.

Fact is .......we had them on their own line for 2/3 of the 2nd half and we failed to deliver the knock out punch. They were defending well........but they were on the ropes. We can't keep expecting Lockyer to do it.

I have a very good reason for backing Wallace. As a fan I watched the team struggle to find a halfback since Alfie's retirement. Shaun Berrigan, Shane Perry, Scott Prince, Berrick Barnes, Paul Green, Ben Ikin, Ben Walker, Brett Seymour ... etc etc.

A string of failed experiments, misadventures, injuries, poachings, and good intentions gone wrong.

I feel your pain ......as I too have watched with frustration the struggles in the half department we have gone through since Alfie left .

I was over joyed with Wallace's first season with us.

He's been disappointing ever since he suffered a ruptured testicle.

After waiting so long, I'm stoked that the team has a solid halfback, who has proven his ability on numerous occasions. I believe he's in the top half-a-dozen halfbacks in the competition, and I am happy with that. Because as we've seen in recent years, you don't need the No. 1 half to win a competition.

Many fans, however, place their halfbacks on a plane of expectation no one will ever attain to. Sad ...

A solid halfback. Stop the presses!!! We finally agree.

Now if Peter Wallace apologists like you, would describe his football performances as such, then I doubt there'd be too much left to argue about.

btw......you make it sound as though your settling. I for one think we are too good a club to want to settle for a "solid" player playing one of the most/more pivotal roles in our chances for success or failure. As you are quick to point out.....we have got by without a "star" half before, but it might pay you to remember we have always had a quality PLAYMAKER in Alf, Walters and Lockyer

Please try and remember that Lockyer is NOT going to be there next year.

I like others are looking to Peter Wallace to fill that void.

He has shown he can't ........

 

[AuDragon]

I'm not looking for MOTM performances. I am only looking for a glimpse of creativity. Something .....ANYTHING. I swear if on one of the numerous times when the play broke down with the ball in his hands last night, if he had of chosen/organised a different play...ANY play......a grubber through or a kick behind the line FFS ........ I would/will sing his praise from the roof tops.

So you're saying he didn't do any of that?
Or didn't he do enough of that?

Or, as is more likely, you just ignored the times he did, and focussed on the times he was caught with the ball, never minding how he got in that position...?