I'm guessing Penrith were worse this week than last? That's saying something. I haven't watched and don't intend to now.
We were even worse in defence, and our attack... Well it was stumbling before the last hurdle instead of at it this time. Side to side all night long.
No structure. Humble & Walsh weren't the concern. It's those outside backs. Walsh just needs someone outside him who is very creative and create something out of nothing. Will help him immensely.
Walsh just needs someone to do everything for him and he'll be good, yeah? He's average, and he'll only ever be average, bar a few games here and there. That being said he is a much better choice than Austin. Walsh mainly just needs to stop being a pussy and run the ball more. In summary Walsh is a 'problem', but not 'the problem'.
Yeah, I've lost hope in him now tbh. He's a solid FGer and a great organiser but it stops there. He has a good running game too when he uses it, just seems scared to get belted. Reckon someone like Reynolds would be perfect alongside Walsh. (Josh that is)
Not sure when but he should not be an automatic pick. Winterstein hasn't been bad and Fai Fai Loa showed he should be in the team.
He will be though. I don't think there's any point even discussing it really. Graham will be in the team if fit, and no amount of actual logic will change that.
Cronk Thurston Cherry-Evans are all quite far ahead, then you'd have a few others that were more int he category of 'arguably' ahead like Reynolds, then you'd have a few below like Keating, Robson etc.
Well, exactly. There are only four starting halfbacks who are definitely better than Walsh. The rest all fall into one group where it basically depends on the needs of your side, form, structure etc as to which one will be better for you. And then after that we have Keating.
I'd say it's more than 4, just that those 3 stand out far above him, and no one sane would deny it. There's quite a few more who are 'close' enough to him for 'sane' people to argue about who is better.
Yeah exactly, but if you replaced him with anyone who wasn't Cronk, Cherry-Evans, Pearce or Thurston (who doesn't even play halfback anymore) then you wouldn't be getting someone clearly better, or really improving the team. You've got a mid-range first grade halfback. The problem I guess lies in the fact that you're pairing a mid-range halfback with a poor five-eighth. Even when you had Coote there you were pairing a mid-range halfback with an entirely unproven five-eighth. Most teams do have at least one of their halves who is better than Walsh (Thurston, Carney, Cronk, Cherry-Evans, Pearce, Marshall, Foran, Mullen and Campese when fit are all conclusively better than Walsh IMO and you probably wouldn't find many people arguing Walsh was better than Maloney or Johnson either) so the problem isn't with Walsh as much as it is with Walsh being your best halves option in general. He should probably be a support act for a good running five-eighth.
