2 minutes ago, The Big Sauce said:

I know for a fact that Simon Goodwin really rates him. He'll be around for a while so get off his back and get used to him. 

Good call. I'm sure when any random punter asks a incoming coach about a player, he'll give a brutally honest answer instead of offering vague platitudes.

On 7/9/2016 at 0:29 PM, AdamFphlebeb said:

I personally wouldn't go that far.

Why not?

Bugg's disposal is as unreliable as Grimes'. Grimes is a better mark. Grimes is as good if not better defensively. 

Why is Grimes not as good as Bugg? 

6 minutes ago, Jaded said:

Why not?

Bugg's disposal is as unreliable as Grimes'. Grimes is a better mark. Grimes is as good if not better defensively. 

Why is Grimes not as good as Bugg? 

 

Bugg exhibits poor disposal, but doesn't panic in the same way and seems a much smarter player.

Grimes is a hard worker, but I'm yet to hear anyone refer to him as an intelligent footballer (not the same as person).

23 minutes ago, Mach5 said:

 

Not at all, just shows a much higher regard for the ability of Salem, Oliver and Brayshaw, which I wholeheartedly share.

Appreciate his efforts, but M Jones and Grimes likewise have obvious limitations that will see the aforementioned three youngsters supersede them sooner rather than later, thankfully.

Supporters should never be asked to apologise for being excited at having better options waiting in the wings, for wanting players in the side that are more likely to bring success.

And if those players don't?

12 minutes ago, The Big Sauce said:

I know for a fact that Simon Goodwin really rates him. He'll be around for a while so get off his back and get used to him. 

M Jones is highly rated by all the coaches, for his work ethic and willingness to carry out his role, hence why he was brought straight back after a quick tune up in the VFL after injury

Nothing is guaranteed, but they are better players. What's your point?

Or are you just blindly jumping to the defense of any MFC listed player as per usual? I thought you may have actually become apoplectic at the prospect of having to choose one over another.

2 minutes ago, Mach5 said:

Nothing is guaranteed, but they are better players. What's your point?

Or are you just blindly jumping to the defense of any MFC listed player as per usual? I thought you may have actually become apoplectic at the prospect of having to choose one over another.

No, I just don't write anybody on or off, those that do, normally end up eating humble pie, not my favourite taste, I support the 22 that go on the field each week, Matt Jones played well on Saturday, will it keep him in the team this week, who knows?

Just now, Satyriconhome said:

No, I just don't write anybody on or off, those that do, normally end up eating humble pie, not my favourite taste, I support the 22 that go on the field each week, Matt Jones played well on Saturday, will it keep him in the team this week, who knows?

So basically you don't have any sort of opinion, just blind faith in the football dept to select the best 22 and to vociferously argue against any perceived slight on a listed player.

I think the young three are better than M Jones & Grimes. Either you're saying that's wrong because you think the opposite, or you're basically just objecting to someone having an opinion that isn't blind cheerleading.

What is it? You think Grimes & M Jones are better than Brayshaw, Oliver & Salem? Or are you clutching your pom-poms?

23 minutes ago, Mach5 said:

So basically you don't have any sort of opinion, just blind faith in the football dept to select the best 22 and to vociferously argue against any perceived slight on a listed player.

I think the young three are better than M Jones & Grimes. Either you're saying that's wrong because you think the opposite, or you're basically just objecting to someone having an opinion that isn't blind cheerleading.

What is it? You think Grimes & M Jones are better than Brayshaw, Oliver & Salem? Or are you clutching your pom-poms?

As I have explained before but I'll do it again, every player on an AFL list,  in my opinion, has the potential to be an AFL standard player, some to a higher standard than others,  there are others that show potential but peeter out, injury cruells some, poor development can also stymie.......for the last few years MFC has seen all these examples.

I just don't feel the need for the constant comparison between players both in the same team and in the opposition, coz last time I looked it required 22 of them playing as a team for 4 quarters to a really good standard, to give a chance for a win, sure you need a few of the higher standard players, but you also need the role players who work their arses off as well, I place Matt Jones in this category

I go along and as long as each player has a crack, I come away satisfied, I have never seen a player in all my 39 years of watching footy that hasn't ducked his head once, shirked a contest coz they were knackered, misplaced a kick or handball, missed an easy shot or tackle etc etc................(some of the old 'heroes' now commentating who keep bemoaning skills better make sure there are no skeletons lurking in the video closet)

1 hour ago, Jaded said:

Why not?

Bugg's disposal is as unreliable as Grimes'. Grimes is a better mark. Grimes is as good if not better defensively. 

Why is Grimes not as good as Bugg? 

I'd agree with Mach5 here, Jaded. I'm not Bugg's biggest fan, but he understands the new Melbourne a lot better than Grimes does. Unfortunately, Jack spent too much time under Neeld as a pup and it has meant he's struggled to shift gears.

10 minutes ago, AdamFphlebeb said:

I'd agree with Mach5 here, Jaded. I'm not Bugg's biggest fan, but he understands the new Melbourne a lot better than Grimes does. Unfortunately, Jack spent too much time under Neeld as a pup and it has meant he's struggled to shift gears.

So the fact that Grimes has embraced the new game plan being coached down at Casey (which is supposedly the same as the AFL Team), and played it so consistently well that he forced his way back in to the AFL team, means nothing then?

14 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

So the fact that Grimes has embraced the new game plan being coached down at Casey (which is supposedly the same as the AFL Team), and played it so consistently well, that he forced his way back in to the AFL team, means nothing then?

I said '[Bugg] understands the new Melbourne a lot better than Grimes does'.

Just watched the replay and can't understand all this angst for M Jones?...

Aside one absolute howler he played really well. Working both ways his work rate was as good as anyone's on the ground and the majority of his possessions went where they were intended

I think Matt Jones just earn't himself a deservedly one year contract.

Pretty sure i read somewhere he was number 1 for GPS numbers at the Maroochydore camp.

Just now, AdamFphlebeb said:

I said '[Bugg] understands the new Melbourne a lot better than Grimes does'.

And I said Bugg went out and Grimes came in, obviously they had an understanding.

What is the new Melbourne, the idea is still to get the ball down the field and kick it through the big sticks and stop the opposition doing the same

2 hours ago, Dees 64 said:

My BAD  180  

Love Matt ,  he always give best , but he will be left behind, once Salem, Brayshaw, Oliver become standard ins. 

 

 

2 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

My favourite part of Demonland, the assumptions about players, yes agreed all 3 have shown promise, and as long as they continue the promise they should give themselves a chance of being regulars, same as Matt Jones is doing now

I can see where 64 is coming from.

IMO Salem, Brayshaw and Oliver will have (probably and hopefully far) higher ceilings than Matt, but at the moment Matt fills a rôle and fills it to the coach's expectations.  But I suspect that when the aforementioned gain some experience, and match fitness, they will pass him by......provided that the coaches see them offering total commitment, which I believe they will show.

But....good teams need depth with hard working (fairly) dependable players who can be absolutely relied upon to give their all, and do what is asked of them. 

48 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

And I said Bugg went out and Grimes came in, obviously they had an understanding.

What is the new Melbourne, the idea is still to get the ball down the field and kick it through the big sticks and stop the opposition doing the same

The new Melbourne is trying to move the ball on as quickly as you can. We're trying to be a fast transition side. That means being able to make quick, efficient decisions under pressure. Grimes has never been good at that. Look at a guy like Frost who hasn't been tarnished by years of Neeld football. In his first few weeks down back he'd take a mark and already be running out of defence. Occasionally, he'd turn it over, but as we've seen across the last fortnight or so, he's started to eradicate those errors. Watching Grimes play, his first instinct is to go back over the mark and look down the line for an option. This is a clear hang over from the Neeld days. That said, I thought he got front and centre and into the right position last night a number of times. So he's getting to the right positions now, which is great, but with ball in hand I still question him.

1 minute ago, AdamFphlebeb said:

The new Melbourne is trying to move the ball on as quickly as you can. We're trying to be a fast transition side. That means being able to make quick, efficient decisions under pressure. Grimes has never been good at that. Look at a guy like Frost who hasn't been tarnished by years of Neeld football. In his first few weeks down back he'd take a mark and already be running out of defence. Occasionally, he'd turn it over, but as we've seen across the last fortnight or so, he's started to eradicate those errors. Watching Grimes play, his first instinct is to go back over the mark and look down the line for an option. This is a clear hang over from the Neeld days. That said, I thought he got front and centre and into the right position last night a number of times. So he's getting to the right positions now, which is great, but with ball in hand I still question him.

The new Melbourne, hopefully will learn when to move quickly and when to steady it down, we have players, supposedly with better skills than Grimes who play on too quickly at the moment due to inexperience and we turn it over, we did it again on Saturday but fortunately Fremantle are not in a position to punish us like teams such as Adelaide and Hawthorn can. Grimes has been reprogrammed, but it still means sometimes he uses his 99 games experience and knows when not to pull the trigger

10 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

The new Melbourne, hopefully will learn when to move quickly and when to steady it down, we have players, supposedly with better skills than Grimes who play on too quickly at the moment due to inexperience and we turn it over, we did it again on Saturday but fortunately Fremantle are not in a position to punish us like teams such as Adelaide and Hawthorn can. Grimes has been reprogrammed, but it still means sometimes he uses his 99 games experience and knows when not to pull the trigger

I agree.

2 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

As I have explained before but I'll do it again, every player on an AFL list,  in my opinion, has the potential to be an AFL standard player, some to a higher standard than others,  there are others that show potential but peeter out, injury cruells some, poor development can also stymie.......for the last few years MFC has seen all these examples.

I just don't feel the need for the constant comparison between players both in the same team and in the opposition, coz last time I looked it required 22 of them playing as a team for 4 quarters to a really good standard, to give a chance for a win, sure you need a few of the higher standard players, but you also need the role players who work their arses off as well, I place Matt Jones in this category

I go along and as long as each player has a crack, I come away satisfied, I have never seen a player in all my 39 years of watching footy that hasn't ducked his head once, shirked a contest coz they were knackered, misplaced a kick or handball, missed an easy shot or tackle etc etc................(some of the old 'heroes' now commentating who keep bemoaning skills better make sure there are no skeletons lurking in the video closet)

Invoke football communism.

Every player gets the same money. Rotate them equally to give them all a go.  

Hell lets get rid of the scoreboard we cant have any of the lads feeling down about losing.

7 minutes ago, Stretch Johnson said:

Invoke football communism.

Every player gets the same money. Rotate them equally to give them all a go.  

Hell lets get rid of the scoreboard we cant have any of the lads feeling down about losing.

Indeed. 

Winning is a low priority for this individual. 

2 hours ago, AdamFphlebeb said:

I'd agree with Mach5 here, Jaded. I'm not Bugg's biggest fan, but he understands the new Melbourne a lot better than Grimes does. Unfortunately, Jack spent too much time under Neeld as a pup and it has meant he's struggled to shift gears.

 Why don't we give Grimes more than one game to make that call?

Being coached by Neeld didn't stop Jones, Watts, TMac etc from adjusting their game. 

Just now, ProDee said:

Indeed. 

Winning is a low priority for this individual. 

If the individual is me you are referring to, if we develop the players properly,  if we have guys in the team who play their role to a consistently high standard etc etc then winning will come, it is just that I have other things in my life more important than footy, so the need to get wins as fulfillment is not as strong as others.

I just go along knowing that at present, if we have a real crack for 4 quarters we give ourselves a chance of winning, I am not that bothered who is in the 22, the Footy Dept sorts that out, and the cream always rises to the top eventually anyway

2 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

If the individual is me you are referring to, if we develop the players properly,  if we have guys in the team who play their role to a consistently high standard etc etc then winning will come, it is just that I have other things in my life more important than footy, so the need to get wins as fulfillment is not as strong as others.

I just go along knowing that at present, if we have a real crack for 4 quarters we give ourselves a chance of winning, I am not that bothered who is in the 22, the Footy Dept sorts that out, and the cream always rises to the top eventually anyway

This is rubbish. Sport is about winning. Why else have we stuck with our beloved rabble of a football club for 50+ years of almost complete ineptitude? Is it in the hope of all 22 players having a "real crack for four quarters" regardless of the result? 

No, it's in the hope that we'll see our club win a premiership, it's in the hope that all we've suffered through will be worth it in the end.

3 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

If the individual is me you are referring to, if we develop the players properly,  if we have guys in the team who play their role to a consistently high standard etc etc then winning will come, it is just that I have other things in my life more important than footy, so the need to get wins as fulfillment is not as strong as others.

I just go along knowing that at present, if we have a real crack for 4 quarters we give ourselves a chance of winning, I am not that bothered who is in the 22, the Footy Dept sorts that out, and the cream always rises to the top eventually anyway

 

The need to get wins is not strong because you get your jollies from pretending you're mates with the players. End of.

Ha my God..."Winning is not important.." Satyr and his little social outing 

Yeah i have loved watching the Demons get owned by every other club. It's just a great way to spend a weekend...

Clown