I know we would all love to see Jarryd play, but we may just get a good thing out of him not being here.
If he is out for 4 or 5 games, it may give Sandow and Roberts time to gel better, if we happen to win 2 or 3 of these games, the boys learn that they can win without Hayne. When Hayne comes back he knows that the boys can win without him and more importantly that there are two playmakers that can actually bring plays together, releasing pressure off Hayne and letting him do his thing.
It may just be the blue and gold running through my veins that is affecting my judgement, but I have hope that out of something bad we may just gain something great!
Thoughts?
Replies
Like I said I know we would all love to see Jarryd play, but I just think we may get some good out of it.
Would also prefer to see him not play until he is confident in that leg and fighting fit. Would like him healthy for a long time rather than coming in and out with injuries, we don't want him to turn out like Hodges, in for 2 out for 5.
When Hayne went down it hurt!
I was right there! He scooped the ball up and took off! it gave me hope, the kind of hope you get when your wife says honey can you could to the bedroom...
When Hayne went down, the hope faded... and i walked into the bedroom only to be asked to go the kitchen and get an aspirin!
Its not a good thing!
I know how you were feeling, one minute I was up cheering, all I was waiting on was in a few seconds seeing Hayne put the ball down over that white line, the next minute I was swearing and I may have just had a couple of tears in my eyes (or it could have just been dusty.)
wow I like to know your wife! My GF says (sometimes) not tonight dear I've a headache...or...GET OFF ME!
I understand that. I would even just go for quick and effective service first and see how that works.
I hate getting into the MK debate cause his defence keeps us in matches sometimes but when he touches the ball the most we just need quality from it.
I see your point, but on the other hand, Hayne being out might mean Sandow and Roberts over-play their hand, leading to errors and/or poor judgment of which play to choose. With Hayne NOT out, we might have seen all three playmakers effectively taking the pressure off of each other, allowing each of them to be selective about their play options. With three of them exercising good options, because on average they don't feel pushed to over-play things knowing the other two are around to try things as well, we could have seen the healthiest attack from the team in about, oh, two years. Remember, we still lack a strike ball-runner in the forwards and a strike ball-runner in the centers (W Tonga was very quiet against the Warriors), or any other creative player. So it's not like having an Inglis/Hodges in the backs, or a Taylor/Williams in the forwards, who you can just throw too with a teeny bit of room and they make a play on their own. Nor like we have a Smith at rake or a ball-playing forward. Sandow and Roberts will have to create attack all on their own. Rather than having perfected things by the time Hayne returns, making Hayne a bonus, they could be down on confidence having pushed too many passes, fluffed too many kicks, got creamed going for one too many runs.
Overall, it probably would be better for everyone if all three playmakers were running around together. It's no coincidence that most top 4 sides have 3 legit playmakers.
Totally agree, just trying to see the light at the end of the tunnel, and hope Sandow and Roberts find their way without Hayne.
Someone just has to get in Matt Keatings ear before every game and tell him he isn't cameron smith.
agreed!!
I think they have a better chance of winning with Hayne out than Hindy short or long term.
However I do not see it being a good thing unless we get the 2 points each week, anything less will be seen as a failure and teams will start to really focus and punish our vulnerabilites.
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next