Corrie fans are asking if there's the possibility that if Amy isn't really the fruit of Steve's loins then could she be the daughter of Wally? You remember Wally, don't you?
No, not that Wally, this Wally.
Wally Bannister (played by Bernard Cribbins) was Blanche's boyfriend and appeared on Corrie between May and October 2003. When Tracy found out that her gran's new fella had a bob or two, a posh house and a swimming pool, she had a fling with him too. So, if Wally and Tracy did the deed back in 2003, and Tracy got pregnant by him, that would make little Amy around, oh, the right age now, being born in February 2004. So, yes, it could be possible that Wally is Amy's dad.
Come on, Corrie writers, give us all a chance to laugh at Tracy Barlow and make this story happen. And while you're at it, please, please, please make Steve the real dad of Beth's son Craig while you're on. It's something we've discussed here before on the Coronation Street Blog.
Follow the Coronation Street Blog on Twitter and Facebook
14 comments:
I like your reasoning and agree it would be a good laugh to see Tracy exposed as a Granny boyfriend-stealing jerkbag! Then Amy and her milk affliction could leave the Street with Tracy, in search of Wally... or did he die? Seeing Steve end up with Craig, now that would be an equally entertaining moment leading to more complications with Beth/Kirk.
Wally was touted as a possible father to Amy way back in 2003. However, Roy Cropper went to see Wally, and Wally told him that although he had slept with Tracy, he couldn't have gotten her pregnant. He had contracted mumps as a teenager and had been sterile ever since.
I remember Wally the rich old bloke with the big house with the swimming pool where he turned out to be the gardner. Tracy even shagged her gran's boyfriend - nice. I dont really see the point in establishing Amy's paternity now all this time has gone past, we hardly ever her anyway. A non story in my opinion, that would just cause upset.
As far as Wally's mumps is concerned, this isn't necessarily a barrier to the story. Wally may only have been CLAIMING this, to avoid any further entanglement with Tracy. Alternatively, mumps can give rise to SUBfertility rather than total INfertility, so maybe Wally had just been unlucky up until then? It only takes one swimmer to go the distance :o)
Frosty: the "point" is that Corrie needs a constant stream of storylines drawn from its character base, of which Wally, Amy, Tracy and Steve are an established part. The strength of a story idea is in the dramatic effects it would have on all concerned, and this idea ticks all the boxes for me.
Nora - never mind the blog, you should be on the Corrie story committee at ITV with ideas like this. Just what we need! Top stuff.
Ooh, well remembered about the mumps story, njblas! But yes, as Digger John says, he could have been lying to get him out of being implicated by Tracy for her baby. I'd love it to be him, I really would, leaving Steve free from all obligations of the scheming cow.
If we're to expand this story amongst ourselves, writers having neither the wit nor wisdom, let's look at what happens afterwards. One way or another, Wally turns out to be the father but is long dead and has no estate for Tracy to be interested in. Steve goes through his repertoire of gurns and realises he is off the Tracy hook. He still feels like Amy's dad, though, and that leads to a whole lot of new possibilities.
I'd love to see Bernard Cribbins in Corrie again - he was brilliant last time around.
Wally had told Roy Cropper that he and his wife had wanted children but had never been blessed with them - due to his sterility. Again, this could be ret-conned or simply ignored - so many long established facts are these days! I would be in favour of any storyline which would lead to the evil robot known as Tracy being removed from our screens. Bring her back in a few years and ask Dawn Acton - the REAL Tracy - to return to the part. She always played her as a human being with faults, and made her believable - something Kate Ford has never, ever been able to achieve.
I think this would be a pointless story. There is far more potential drama in Steve being tied to Tracy through their daughter - and it's a situation lots of people find themselves in, saddled to an ex they hate - than there is in a minor guest character being her dad. It's a good job the fans don't take over as the story suggestions, and casting ideas, are often rubbish.
I'm not keen on this line of plot. We're so used to Steve being tied to this millstone named Tracy. But on the other hand, if the writers actually did go for this line, then why do we have to search for a Wally? Tracy's loose morals should have gotten in bed with plenty of men whose pockets appeared full... so Amy's dad could be anybody -- the writers could go back and invent someone... but I agree with Frosty and a few of the others, I doubt this storyline will work...
They wouldn't neccesarily have to have someone by name all they would need is the DNA test to prove Steve isn't the father and Tracy wailing and moaning that as Steve has been acting as Amy's father he is her father and still try to bleed him for every penny he has.
But then that would be too similar to the Michelle, Ryan and Alex situation that they keep ignoring so it probably wouldn't fly.
I agree that Dawn Acton should have been brought back as Tracy I always thought that she could do bitchy more believably than Kate Ford.
The last thing we need is any more of these silly storylines. Tracy has never expressed the slightest doubt that Amy is not Steve's, never mind Wally's mumps. It would be like Michelle's ridiculous baby swap and Betty owning the Rovers all over again. This is meant to be the story of life in an ordinary northern backstreet not Fantasy on't Cobbles
"It's a good job the fans don't take over as the story suggestions, and casting ideas, are often rubbish." - Phil Collinson, is that you?? Sounds like the negative nellies posting against this are the writers/producers of the show! Let's not consider this "silly story" because the other storylines over the past two years have been far more plausible and fascinating for sure. Good heavens people, unclench, it was only being tossed around for a bit of a laugh!
Wally did say that however after Roy got Wally to admit he slept with Tracey, Roy told Wally she was pregnant and then he looked stunned and said "i never touched her" and it cut to commercial and only after the commercial did he have the mumps story. So why would he suddenly be in shock and deny touching her?
Post a Comment