Roast You didn't trade Sam Hayes, maybe not so muppetty after all

Remove this Banner Ad

Maybe mid way through the year he did something off the field that effected his place in the team.

Maybe he has already told the club he is gunna request a trade.

I say play Teakle
I'm not sure what's happened but it does appear that Hayes will never appear for Port at AFL level again. Teakle and Visentini are the future.
 
I’m not sure they’ve been harsh on Sam. He got a solid lot of games. He was good in aspects and deficient in others. I suspect the players also have a say in this.

Playing Teakle in front of him in the ruck last night is understandable- do we need to see more of Sam in the ruck or do we need to see more of what he can do around the ground?

Sam has a decision to make re Port and re what he achieves. He is highly skilled and can make it but will need to improve lots of aspects of his game. Contrast him to any of the young rucks going around. His tap work is better but if you can’t support your midfielders at the contest, provide marks around the ground or kick a goal or two, you aren’t good enough for ruck work. Sam doesn’t have the tank and, maybe, the attitude and instinct for this element of his game, yet.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Well of course Hayes wouldn't get tackled from behind. That requires actually getting involved in play after the ruck contest.

We lost 47-82 against Geelong with Hayes, oh they didn't have Stanley. Won hit outs 40-36, but we also lost the clearances by 11.

This time without Hayes we lose 94-106. Get smashed in hitouts, but lose clearances 36-38. Although we actually won centre square clearances 16-12.

But somehow adding Hayes would be an improvement...
The idea is to win the game, not the hitouts or the clearances. So yea Hayes would probably help with winning the game.
 
Hayes was doing great hitout wise.

Might not of been doing enough around the ground... But that would of come.. as he started to build confidence and starting to feel like he belongs.

I'm a big believer that if Dixon was in the team giving Hayes a rest every now and then Hayes would of been better off.
 
As I posted elsewhere...

Lost to Freo by 8 points
Lost to Melbourne by 14 points
Lost to Geelong by 12 points

I wonder how many of those games we might have won if we had not conceded the rucks? Against Freo we lost the ruck contests 51-22, against Melbourne we lost 32-17 and yesterday we lost 47-19. I feel sure Sam Hayes would have made a difference to those stats but of course the question is would he have been as effective around the ground as Dixon or Finlayson? I would like to have seen as try to find out.

All three of those sides played two genuine ruckmen.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

As I posted elsewhere...

Lost to Freo by 8 points
Lost to Melbourne by 14 points
Lost to Geelong by 12 points

I wonder how many of those games we might have won if we had not conceded the rucks? Against Freo we lost the ruck contests 51-22, against Melbourne we lost 32-17 and yesterday we lost 47-19. I feel sure Sam Hayes would have made a difference to those stats but of course the question is would he have been as effective around the ground as Dixon or Finlayson? I would like to have seen as try to find out.

All three of those sides played two genuine ruckmen.
Does anyone honestly think we’d have lost anything around the ground playing Hayes instead of McEntee against Geelong? If so could you please transfer me $10000 so I can transfer $100 million from Nigeria, I’ll give you $1 million for the help.
 
No!

muppets GIF
 
I’m as big of a Hayes hater as you will find, but has clearly one of the best players for the magpies the last 2 weeks. Although I don’t think he has a future clearly should had been selected this week. Either has off field issues or the club/Sam has made a decision to move him on at seasons end

There is no reason not to play him if he is in good form
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Roast You didn't trade Sam Hayes, maybe not so muppetty after all

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top