35 minutes ago, Generation dee said:

Laughable. Absolutely Laughable. Unless something has changed since I last watched him (8 weeks) as well as spoke to him, he is a lean, slightly built player. Doesn't matter if he is 5 foot or 6 foot, he is not hardened, never has been and never will be. 

Not really. Rory Sloane is a hardened body He is 182cm and 78kms. Grimes is 187cms and 84 kgs. Jack Gunston looks thin but is strong. There is plenty like that.

And BTW lots of players look lean in the flesh and younger than you think.

 

Article on FB via sport news, Grimes concedes his days at Melbourne are done and is looking for a new club".

 

All over.

Just now, Bombay Airconditioning said:

Article on FB via sport news, Grimes concedes his days at Melbourne are done and is looking for a new club".

 

All over.

Providing a link to this article would be handy.

11 minutes ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

Article on FB via sport news, Grimes concedes his days at Melbourne are done and is looking for a new club".

 

All over.

If they wouldn't take him for free last year he's going to struggle to find another club after 0 AFL games this year.

However, I hope he does and wish him very well.

Edited June 20, 20169 yr by Moonshadow

2 hours ago, jnrmac said:

Not really. Rory Sloane is a hardened body He is 182cm and 78kms. Grimes is 187cms and 84 kgs. Jack Gunston looks thin but is strong. There is plenty like that.

And BTW lots of players look lean in the flesh and younger than you think.

 

Sloane hasn't been 78kg since he was drafted. If you're going to use stats to back up your misconceptions, at least grab some recent ones. 

Footy wire has sloane at 83kg, Grimes at 84. As well as 183cm vs 187. If grimes was such a hardened body who didn't lose one on one's as easily as he does, he would be in the team. Unfortunately, he isn't, he does lose one on one's and that's why he's not in the team.

5 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

Providing a link to this article would be handy.

Happy to do so, serious question, how do I do it? I've tried posting photos before and I came unstuck. I have the link currently saved on Facebook so if you could instruct me I can do it straight away.

Just now, Bombay Airconditioning said:

Happy to do so, serious question, how do I do it? I've tried posting photos before and I came unstuck. I have the link currently saved on Facebook so if you could instruct me I can do it straight away.

Is it an article on a news site?  If you go there, just copy the URL and paste here as a post.  Should work fine.

8 minutes ago, Generation dee said:

Sloane hasn't been 78kg since he was drafted. If you're going to use stats to back up your misconceptions, at least grab some recent ones. 

Footy wire has sloane at 83kg, Grimes at 84. As well as 183cm vs 187. If grimes was such a hardened body who didn't lose one on one's as easily as he does, he would be in the team. Unfortunately, he isn't, he does lose one on one's and that's why he's not in the team.

You are arguing something different to what I said. But feel free to rabbit on.

And yes I did make the mistake of quoting Wiklipedia on his weight and height but my point is valid.  Rory is a hardened body and he shorter and weighs less than Grimes.

I take it you don't disagree with that assertion but simply would prefer to ignore it and focus on somethiog else?

 

 

11 minutes ago, Moonshadow said:

If they wouldn't take him for free last year he's going to struggle to find another club after 0 AFL games this year.

 I agree with that, and as people know I haven't been the biggest fan of Jack Grimes over the years, I wasn't posting this to run it  in purely to put it out there .

2 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

You are arguing something different to what I said. But feel free to rabbit on.

And yes I did make the mistake of quoting Wiklipedia on his weight and height but my point is valid.  Rory is a hardened body and he shorter and weighs less than Grimes.

I take it you don't disagree with that assertion but simply would prefer to ignore it and focus on somethiog else?

 

 

No, you're arguing with a pointless comparison. I can do it too. Daisy Thomas that contested ball winning, hardened body, is 185 and 84. 

You're literally arguing for the sake of it. Grimes, in all his 98 games is a lot of things, however, hardened body is not once.

12 minutes ago, Generation dee said:

No, you're arguing with a pointless comparison. I can do it too. Daisy Thomas that contested ball winning, hardened body, is 185 and 84. 

You're literally arguing for the sake of it. Grimes, in all his 98 games is a lot of things, however, hardened body is not once.

Obviously I disagree.

http://www.sportingnews.com/afl/news/afl-insider-grimes-looking-to-move-on/1hxp1x9vasjf415fphvnz89fc8

 To be honest I should've read the article before posting, a mate from Melbourne alerted me to it, going on to say Grimes concedes he's cooked at the Dee's. Having now read the article there's no more substance to it than anything that we post on here.

Just now, Bombay Airconditioning said:

http://www.sportingnews.com/afl/news/afl-insider-grimes-looking-to-move-on/1hxp1x9vasjf415fphvnz89fc8

 To be honest I should've read the article before posting, a mate from Melbourne alerted me to it, going on to say Grimes concedes he's cooked at the Dee's. Having now read the article there's no more substance to it than anything that we post on here.

I thought that may have been the case as it hadn't been picked up by any of the major sites.  If he can't crack the side soon though you would assume his days are numbered.

5 hours ago, Wiseblood said:

I thought that may have been the case as it hadn't been picked up by any of the major sites.  If he can't crack the side soon though you would assume his days are numbered.

Well, I'll put it another way and say that no matter how well Grimes plays at Casey, he won't get another game. Same applies to Terlich, Dunn, and possibly Garland.

Frankly, I don't agree with this, but 9 times emergency in 13 rounds with no games is a farce.

Jetta and Matt Jones were also "cooked" at Melbourne, as was Michie. All got another chance to redeem themselves.

Grimes is doing everything he can at VFL level, yet isn't getting a game. I am not sure why, as he is better than Jones and Michie, and has as many credits as Jetta did when dropped to the rookie list. 

I guess as with everything in life, some people get multiple chances to prove themselves, and others don't. A real shame, as Grimesy probably deserves better. 

Spot on Jaded, I'm very surprised he hasn't been given a chance in 2016

Matt Jones got a few games, Garland got a few games, surely it's Grimes' turn! The guy can run and mark, and he built up some nice form at the back end of last season. 

The fact is Grimes & Roos don't see eye to eye. Haven't from the day Roos came into the club. Half way through last year he had conceded he was gone at season end, with a year to run on his contract & no takers in the trade period he stayed on. He has known from the start of the year that his time at the MFC is up. His hoping to get his 2 games to get to 100... Unless something has changed in the last 6 months, Jack won't be at the dees next year which is disappointing considering everything his been through & grew up a die hard dees fan..

Edited June 20, 20169 yr by JV7

48 minutes ago, JV7 said:

The fact is Grimes & Roos don't see eye to eye. Haven't from the day Roos came into the club. Half way through last year he had conceded he was gone at season end, with a year to run on his contract & no takers in the trade period he stayed on. He has known from the start of the year that his time at the MFC is up. His hoping to get his 2 games to get to 100... Unless something has changed in the last 6 months, Jack won't be at the dees next year which is disappointing considering everything his been through & grew up a die hard dees fan..

Let's hope there is still enough sentimentality left in footy that they get Jack to 100 games. He well and truly deserves that

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-06-28/former-captain-grimes-may-look-elsewhere-for-opportunities?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=RSS+feed%3A+AFL+Latest+News

However, McConville said that although he remained hopeful the door could open anytime soon he was aware his client was in a tough situation..."Obviously, I'm concerned Jack hasn't played all year and has been fit and healthy," McConville said..."I am concerned that his future at Melbourne looks limited."

I am feeling uncomfortable at Jack's predicament.  Too many times named in the squad only to find himself playing at Casey.  It must be a see-saw of emotions for him each week.  That he still goes out there and is among the best at Casey speaks volumes about his character.

I am at the stage that unless the club has a genuine intent to play him they should leave him out of the squad.  To do otherwise is looking cruel. 

Edited June 28, 20169 yr by Lucifer's Hero

LH...totally agree.  We still play funny buggers at times. Dont like it

On 6/20/2016 at 10:20 PM, Akum said:

Well, I'll put it another way and say that no matter how well Grimes plays at Casey, he won't get another game. Same applies to Terlich, Dunn, and possibly Garland.

Frankly, I don't agree with this, but 9 times emergency in 13 rounds with no games is a farce.

You may find he gets a sneaky couple of games in. That would nicely bring his total to 100 and therefore access to any future progeny. Would be silly of the club not to do it given he is so close. Howe miraculously managed to get to exactly 100 last year as well, even though he probably should have been dropped on a few occasions. Funny how that worked out. 

1 hour ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-06-28/former-captain-grimes-may-look-elsewhere-for-opportunities?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=RSS+feed%3A+AFL+Latest+News

However, McConville said that although he remained hopeful the door could open anytime soon he was aware his client was in a tough situation..."Obviously, I'm concerned Jack hasn't played all year and has been fit and healthy," McConville said..."I am concerned that his future at Melbourne looks limited."

I am feeling uncomfortable at Jack's predicament.  Too many times named in the squad only to find himself playing at Casey.  It must be a see-saw of emotions for him each week.  That he still goes out there and is among the best at Casey speaks volumes about his character.

I am at the stage that unless the club has a genuine intent to play him they should leave him out of the squad.  To do otherwise is looking cruel. 

Jack would know when he is being named that he is unlikely to play. They pick their 22 then have that extended bench/emergencies. Every player in that 25 knows what is happening before it is officially announced. I would think jack has not once been told he would be playing. Aside from the other week he may possibly have been told 'you will play if viney doesnt get his hand right'.

Currently Jack is playing better than all other VFL players going for his role so he is an emergency every week. If someone gets ill he might get his chance, and i think if he does he will his best to take it. No point removing him from the 25 only to have someone else come in for the ill player.

I'm resigned to Grimes leaving at the end of the year and am sure that someone will pick him up.  I do think however that we would be somewhat negligent if we didn't give him a few games to make certain that there's no place for him in the team.  I know he's had '98 chances' but there is talent there and he's been performing well at VFL level; I would hope we were absolutely 100% sure before we let him go as a FA for, what will eventually be, no return on investment.

22 minutes ago, ArtificialWisdom said:

Jack would know when he is being named that he is unlikely to play. They pick their 22 then have that extended bench/emergencies. Every player in that 25 knows what is happening before it is officially announced. I would think jack has not once been told he would be playing. Aside from the other week he may possibly have been told 'you will play if viney doesnt get his hand right'.

Currently Jack is playing better than all other VFL players going for his role so he is an emergency every week. If someone gets ill he might get his chance, and i think if he does he will his best to take it. No point removing him from the 25 only to have someone else come in for the ill player.

Without checking every game, Jack has found himself playing at Casey nearly every week (even tho named on the extended bench or the 'final' 25) and has not often made it to be the game day emergency so if someone falls ill he does not get the spot.

I just think the clubs approach is wearing thin.