So what did all the romantics do before RDB made the 31 jumper legendary?

Before RDB and #31 there was a war and believe it or not, there was no televesion and few newspaers. News spread slowly. Romantics pre RDB therefore are very private, have passed away or don't follow DL but if they are still living you can bet they revere #31 and everything it stands for!

Before RDB and #31 there was a war and believe it or there was no televesion and few newspaers. News spread slowly. Romantics pre RDB therefore are very private, have passed away or don't follow DL but if they are still living you can bet they revere #31 and everything it stands for!

Son of a MFC player and deceased war hero who went on to be a champion of the club and the Game.

Coached North and Carlton to multiple GF victories.

If that is not the stuff of legend I don't know what is.

IMHO No.31 will be THE number at the MFC for quite some time yet.

Forget Richmond's #17 or Hawthorn's #23 - Melbourne's #31 is the most revered number in football. The fact that it means nothing to some of our younger posters is all the more reason to roll it out again - to keep it where it belongs.

I don't think 31 'means nothing'. I just disagree entirely with the notion that an existing player should change numbers mid-career solely because of Barrassi. It's ludicrous.

Putting a new player in 31, or any other number with a famous past wearer, and talking about Barrassi is OK (I don't like they way we sometimes hype it up, but I don't mind giving a player a number and talking about its heritage). But taking an existing player and giving him 31 because of who used to wear it, on the logic that 31 is important to Melbourne and as such we have to put an important current player in it, is stupid. If we're all so wrapped up in the importance of numbers and who wears them, wouldn't we want Grimes to make 16 the next 31?

Player X comes to club. X is given a number. X plays his career in that number. X retires. That is how it should be done, with literally no exceptions.

If Grimes is happy to wear #31 then all power to him. With any luck he'll end up playing far more games in #31 than #16 anyway

FWIW i think Cotchin is a dog for bucking tradition and staying in #9 rather than respecting the previous captains who did the club thing

If Grimes is happy to wear #31 then all power to him. With any luck he'll end up playing far more games in #31 than #16 anyway

FWIW i think Cotchin is a dog for bucking tradition and staying in #9 rather than respecting the previous captains who did the club thing

As far as I'm concerned, what number you wear should be your decision and not your club's. Sure they can say "no you're not changing," but they shouldn't be able to say "no you have to change." What if you're the umpteenth so-and-so Smith in your family to wear number 37. Why should you have to ruin that tradition just for the sake of your club? I know which tradition I'd value more.

As far as I'm concerned, what number you wear should be your decision and not your club's. Sure they can say "no you're not changing," but they shouldn't be able to say "no you have to change." What if you're the umpteenth so-and-so Smith in your family to wear number 37. Why should you have to ruin that tradition just for the sake of your club? I know which tradition I'd value more.

So your problem is not with tradition...

The player always has some say but it's not their number - they're the clubs.

When Tynan was given 40-whatever - that wasn't his choice. And when we said - how about 23? - he would have jumped at the chance.

I think we are taking this one example and making it seem like a recurring problem.

To be honest I don't like it.

I hate the musical chairs nature of jumpers these days, I'm of the opinion you get given a number and should do your best to make something out of it. The higher the better, you can potentially create a legacy for that number and better yet buck the trend.

For Grimes to scrap 16 at this stage of his career just totally dumps on that number to try and improve one that was last worn by Scully.

I have a jumper with the number 16 on it because of Grimes.

Mild annoyance at this number change probably doesn't do it justice.

To be honest I don't like it.

I hate the musical chairs nature of jumpers these days, I'm of the opinion you get given a number and should do your best to make something out of it. The higher the better, you can potentially create a legacy for that number and better yet buck the trend.

For Grimes to scrap 16 at this stage of his career just totally dumps on that number to try and improve one that was last worn by Scully.

This club have reallocated numbers often since before the first World War, nothing new there.

Jack jumped at the honour of wearing the famous number 31 as I suggest most of the playing group would have given the opportunity.

I don't believe his acceptance de values the number 16 at all.