If Grimes played rounds 1 & 2 and the club got the 100 out of the way early would we still be having this conversation?

The Sydney game was the obvious inclusion if he was to play. 

With 8 rounds to go if the coaches have no intention of playing him regardless of the circumstances,do the right thing and put him out of his misery, by the looks of the photo he (Jack) believes he is a week to week chance.

 

 

3 hours ago, DavidNeitz9 said:

The Jack Grimes pity train is starting to get abit over the top, it's Chris Lamb all over again. The selectors pick the best side to win the match, emotion does not come in to it. How can people here honestly get so [censored], believe me, Roos leaves us in the dust when it comes to knowing what his players are capable of. Be disappointed because you like Grimes, i understand that but starting to dislike Roos because Grimes isnt getting a game is rediculous

The selection decisions are fine. Garlett back is handy, but he certainly didn't find form in the 2's. Reckon he's the sort of player that needed a kick up the bum, but will repay the faith on Sunday. He's a talented player. Grimes is too limited as a player and Clarry hasn't been as effective since his first 5 to 6 games. Give him a run in the 2's and he'll be back soon. Hoping Harmes converts his bounce back at VFL form to the big league. Kent and Kennedy in the gun again this week.

1 hour ago, M_9 said:

Pardon me for not reading all previous posts on this thread, but is it probable that Watts will continue as the relief ruckman? I don't have an issue with this, and it may even help develop his competitiveness. 

Seems Dawes will provide him some chop out too.

3 hours ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

if guess Roos was a bit off the money when he said Grimes would be a regular fixture in the side for the run home and that his VFL form was too hard to ignore.

Or maybe he Isn't BBP. He may well play on Sunday If JV doesnt get through. There might be more than one message being delivered In the pic up there.

Does anyone remember what happened at Adelaide when Blight took over? Almost immediately he got rid  of McDermot, McGuiness and one other bloke. Three great servants who bled for their club. Harsh, abrupt but VERYeffective. 

If these kind of decisions are to happen at Melbourne, and I can see similar conversations happening to Dunn and Garland along with Grimes, then I hope we do it with some grace, thankfulness and dignity. Grimes in particular deserves to depart with a high degree of club appreciation. 

I love grimes and trenners. I think we all do. They stood up and led during some horrible years when they shouldn't have had to. 

I can't argue with the ins and outs. 

Fact is, we need pace and line breaking. They must think Garlett and harmes have done enough. Garlett is an interesting one, I think the normal rules don't apply to him. He has enough runs on the board to come back in. He better chase and tackle though or he'll be dropped. And now he knows that is no empty threat

5 hours ago, DavidNeitz9 said:

. The selectors pick the best side to win the match, emotion does not come in to it. 

I think that has not been the case this year, with the side being picked for the future. Players with poor form but future potential, have clearly got games ahead of players with good form and perhaps limited long future potential.

Edited July 1, 20169 yr by Redleg

I didn't agree with dropping Oliver the first time. I think it is warranted this time. His form has dropped slightly, I think the VFL is a fair call. I am a big fan of the kid, but I think he can lift on his recent output.

It will be carnage.

4 minutes ago, bingers said:

It will be carnage.

For Adelaide? Yes. 

I would have had Grimes before a few others!

Glad to see him finally hopefully get a run!

45 minutes ago, picket fence said:

I would have had Grimes before a few others!

Glad to see him finally hopefully get a run!

I reckon you would have more grimes than most Pickett!!!

As far as I can see, the selections are all about pace, pace, pace.

There's a plan here.

JT and JG don't have any.

PS We've bleated ruthlessness for years....this could be it.

Is Viney in i heard he had hamstring tightness?? i'm not sure whether to take a punt on a weekend of good overcoming evil with my voted party in election + dees

Edited July 2, 20169 yr by johndemons

1 hour ago, jumbo returns said:

As far as I can see, the selections are all about pace, pace, pace.

There's a plan here.

JT and JG don't have any.

PS We've bleated ruthlessness for years....this could be it.

Yep i see it the same way. The game plan most clubs employ these days (or try to employ) needs players with pace, yes to attack, but more importantly to run back to cover the ball that gets over the high press.

You can cover 1 or 2 slow players (as the hawks do) but not too many more.

Was just saying to a mate last night when discussing who might go out that i feared it might be jt because of his lack of pace. He needs to be an inside mid in the vein of sam mitchell. However as my mate said he neefs then to get the ball 30-35 times a match.

1 hour ago, jumbo returns said:

As far as I can see, the selections are all about pace, pace, pace.

There's a plan here.

JT and JG don't have any.

PS We've bleated ruthlessness for years....this could be it.

I agree with that Jumbo. The problem is that the Crows also have some big bods/hitters through their mid rotations.

We have lost at least one potential big bod rotation (Trenners) and another mid fielder in Clarry. That's 2 down in the mid (big or not) and we haven't replaced those 2 with any genuine inside mids.

Trying to cover the outside of the Crows a bit more but giving up the inside a little?

Robbing Peter?

Might get worse if JV doesn't get up. Hopefully not.

 

23 hours ago, poita said:

Two real problems with this side at present:

1. The inconsistency of Kent / Harmes / Kennedy / Vandenberg. We can keep shuffling the deck chairs, but they can't all play in the same side because none of them perform properly more than once a month.

2. The inability of Dawes, Watts & Hogan to play together. Pedersen and Hogan complement each other much better, and Watts isn't forced into the ruck when Pedersen plays.

Grimes deserves his chance, and I would have played him ahead of Wagner anyway. Garlett would be lucky to play on form, but we need him in the side. Surely Jones is next in line for a chance after Grimes, but perhaps not this week. Hopefully we never see Michie again at this level.

I wanted Grimes 2 come in & Trenners 2 stay in. Not a fan of Matt Jones he always runs in2 trouble & not the best decision maker. Harmes fumbles a lot & Garlett goes missing 2 much as does Kent. 

17 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

I used to think that SWYL was the only one that wore a hair shirt on here, but you seem to as well and suck lemons at the same time, can I ask why you support a team who has a coach with less understanding of the game than yourself and players that are rubbish.........latent masochistic tendencies perhaps?

Sometimes a hair shirt is ingrained Saty and there's nothing anyone can do

Edited July 2, 20169 yr by Rusty Nails

Grimes is primed to have a big last two months if the list management strategy is to withhold him to give him hunger and make sure he really wants it when he gets his chance. It's a shame we haven't done it with more players instead of having a constant rotation of players who lose form after 1 or 2 (at most) solid games before falling out of form

 injury and extended vfl time might have also been a positive factor for Lamumba and Brayshaw to come back in the squad and have a big effect. Who knows, maybe having them in all year and having patchy form cold have really set them on a course of acceptance of that inconsistency like the others. They'll come back and earn it

Edited July 2, 20169 yr by johndemons

16 minutes ago, samcantstandya said:

I wanted Grimes 2 come in & Trenners 2 stay in. Not a fan of Matt Jones he always runs in2 trouble & not the best decision maker. Harmes fumbles a lot & Garlett goes missing 2 much as does Kent. 

Matt jones was in great form early in the year before getting injured. He gives us what we dont have - two way running and spread. His decision making is improving as he gets more experience - remember he has only played 55 games. 

Agreed, Harmes can be fumbly - but he is also one of our few mids who can be a genuine forward threat. 

Garlett and kent are small forwards. Small forwards always go missing first. 

All are better than JT and JG objectively.

43 minutes ago, Rusty Nails said:

I agree with that Jumbo. The problem is that the Crows also have some big bods/hitters through their mid rotations.

We have lost at least one potential big bod rotation (Trenners) and another mid fielder in Clarry. That's 2 down in the mid (big or not) and we haven't replaced those 2 with any genuine inside mids.

Trying to cover the outside of the Crows a bit more but giving up the inside a little?

Robbing Peter?

Might get worse if JV doesn't get up. Hopefully not.

 

Fair enough, big bodies....but, like all of us, they're ageing a little bit!

I think that Jones x2 in the middle, Vince for Scotty T and Garlett gets a run through there....

Get that clearance!

18 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

Grimes couldn't get a game in the defence or attack, so the decision was made to get him to play on the wing at Casey and let him develop in that role, if you listen to Roos he has improved, but obviously not enough to displace the two or three players who will play that role on Sunday.

Last year according to some on here he was a player who was not part of the team going forward, now we have posters clamouring for him to be included

We are developing Terlich as a high half forward at Casey, because again there is no place in defence, his last couple of games in that role, according to Justin Plapp, have been really good, you want to bring him into the team as well, and if so to replace who

If there is no role, or the incumbent is playing well, then it doesn't matter how well you are playing you don't get in, this is what we have been crying out for

I'm disappointed Grimes isn't getting a go but if he's not seen as in our best side or part of the future fine.

What I'm saying is that if that's the case the rhetoric from the club should reflect that.  It doesn't.  It's poor PR in my opinion.

In your effort to defend the club you've completely missed my point but thanks for the lecture anyway, I hope someone got something out of it.  I certainly didn't.

If Kent plays well we win IMO. He has been our barometer. He plays poorly in nearly every one of our losses. NOt sure if that is cause and effect but he needs to address it as a player.

2 hours ago, Vogon Poetry said:

I'm disappointed Grimes isn't getting a go but if he's not seen as in our best side or part of the future fine.

What I'm saying is that if that's the case the rhetoric from the club should reflect that.  It doesn't.  It's poor PR in my opinion.

In your effort to defend the club you've completely missed my point but thanks for the lecture anyway, I hope someone got something out of it.  I certainly didn't.

I am not defending the club, I wouldn't care if the club came out on the Thursday and said all the players were [censored] spuds and we don't stand a chance as long as the team comes out during the actual game and has a real hot go and gives itself a chance to win.

All this angst over a player that was written off over the summer on here, it smacks of hypocrisy

Me, I like Jack Grimes both as a person and a player, but if he isn't picked for the team, I live with it, they have their reasons

Edited July 2, 20169 yr by Satyriconhome
bloody smarfpheen

36 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

If Kent plays well we win IMO. He has been our barometer. He plays poorly in nearly every one of our losses. NOt sure if that is cause and effect but he needs to address it as a player.

Disagree with the first sentence, but agree with the third and fourth..