Jump to content

Featured Replies

 

Unless Goody is playing ducks and drakes it sounds like Brodie won’t be playing this week either in the forward line or as a second ruck to give Max a chop out 

In fact Goody almost intimated that he won’t be seen again unless there is an “opportunity” in the forward line - i.e. injury or loss of form to current lineup 

We all know not to take Goody’s pressers at face value, but jeez you wouldn’t be feeling too confident hearing that if you were Grundy  

Edited by demoncat

 

Gawn has missed what 3 games?, with 3 x 10 day breaks around the bye, I'm sure the club would've managed him accordingly. We only have 4 games left and then he (and everyone else) get another week off. He won't be rested, he's hit top form. They can manage his TOG also.

Edit: there you go, Goody thinks the same.

Edited by SFebes

Grundy won't play cause we won't want the media scrutiny of having to drop him again next week 

Edited by adonski

 

I think it's a mistake not playing Grundy - Goldstein and Xerri physically will work over Max and JVR to their detriment.


It certainly doesn't sound like we're playing Grundy this week.

If North play two rucks, my concern isn't Gawn as much as it is JVR, who we're going to be asking to compete in centre bounce ruck contests against someone like Xerri. Do we really need to be throwing our most promising young KPF into ruck contests like that?

Having said that, someone has to be dropped to bring Grundy in and there's no obvious option.

1 hour ago, titan_uranus said:

It certainly doesn't sound like we're playing Grundy this week.

If North play two rucks, my concern isn't Gawn as much as it is JVR, who we're going to be asking to compete in centre bounce ruck contests against someone like Xerri. Do we really need to be throwing our most promising young KPF into ruck contests like that?

Having said that, someone has to be dropped to bring Grundy in and there's no obvious option.

I would have managed Max this week and rucked Grundy basically the whole game.

His chop outs could be provided by JVR on boundary throw ins, in our F50.

Grundy would get a breather when the ball was in our forward line.

Echoing the above concerns about not bringing in Grundy against 2 professional rucks in Goldy and Xerri.

I'm not saying we're going to lose this game in the slightest, but the last time we played 1 ruckman vs the oppo's 2 ruckman was against Essendon which coincided with clearly our worst performance of the year. 

Having said that:

1) Port and Brisbane only play 1 ruck and Collingwood might elect to play with just the one if they don't want to continue with Cox. There's bigger fish to fry than a round 20 game in Hobart V North and worrying about 2 rucks.

2) It will be an absolute media circus if we bring in Grundy for one game just to face off with a 29 gamer in Xerri, only to once again drop him.

 

 

  

 

 
4 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

 

2) It will be an absolute media circus if we bring in Grundy for one game just to face off with a 29 gamer in Xerri, only to once again drop him.

 

Who cares!  We should do what is best for us and stuff the media.

7 hours ago, drysdale demon said:

Fair Dinkum, Grundy's mum isn't ordering him home. Jackson was out of contract, Grundy is contracted for another few years and the MFC have complete control over his future.

You seem one of the ones on this site who falls for anything that the mdia scribes come up with.

Hahaha you're funny one.

So now you use the excuse that Jackson wad out of contract? Yet, like what you're doing in this thread, you were happy to jump down anyone's throat aggressively last year who suggested he was going home.

Being contracted means absolutely nothing now days. Hundreds of players get traded while under contract in today's caper.

Though,not surprised you haven't worked this out yet..


15 minutes ago, sue said:

Who cares!  We should do what is best for us and stuff the media.

The club is doing what's best for us by keeping Grundy in the VFL. You don't flirt with form regardless of the opposition.

And I'm sure Max wouldn't accept being rested when he's fully fit and in incredible form. His competitiveness is what makes him great.

 

Edited by mo64

4 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Hahaha you're funny one.

So now you use the excuse that Jackson wad out of contract? Yet, like what you're doing in this thread, you were happy to jump down anyone's throat aggressively last year who suggested he was going home.

Being contracted means absolutely nothing now days. Hundreds of players get traded while under contract in today's caper.

Though,not surprised you haven't worked this out yet..

Aggresively?, all I have stated is that Grundy won't be traded. The MFC are not going to trade him, end of story.

In the unlikely event that he did ask for a trade they will hold him to his contract as he is a required player.

Feel free to believe the garbage coming out of the media and any other person who wants to throw their 2 bobs worth in, you do it well.

8 minutes ago, drysdale demon said:

Aggresively?, all I have stated is that Grundy won't be traded. The MFC are not going to trade him, end of story.

In the unlikely event that he did ask for a trade they will hold him to his contract as he is a required player.

Feel free to believe the garbage coming out of the media and any other person who wants to throw their 2 bobs worth in, you do it well.

You actually don't know that 😅

But sure, keep believing in your own fantasy world of yours.

Nah.. I haven't taken into consideration what the media say one bit. In fact I've openly said that I'll be extremely surprised if he asks for a trade.

But you can't absolutely rule it out which you've done so adamantly. It's actually silly. In this current caper any contracted player can be traded because contracts aren't worth anything now days.

If Grundy requested a trade to further better his football then the club won't stand in his way, especially if they think they'll get a semi decent compensation in return and relief cap space to go for a target that will further strengthen our playing list more then what 600k ruckman at VFL level can do.

It would be a mutual decision between club and player.

I am of the opinion that Grundy is doing ok, but the club want to get a bit more out of him. It's his first full season in a while so they are resting him and trying to poke him a little to get aggressive again so he's full speed when back.

We bought him to be a ruck. I just think we want to be efficient with interchanges. I don't think he's actually competing with petty for a spot 

20 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

If Grundy requested a trade to further better his football then the club won't stand in his way, especially if they think they'll get a semi decent compensation in return and relief cap space to go for a target that will further strengthen our playing list more then what 600k ruckman at VFL level can do.

It would be a mutual decision between club and player.

As you say it has to be mutual and in this instance it wouldn't be, just as has happened to some players in recent years.


If Brodie wants to go, we should ask him to commit to 2024 with us and if he still wants to leave then we will facilitate a trade.

In terms of 2023, it is too late/risky to start trialling forward setups that include Grundy for significant periods of the game, but after a full pre-season the combination could be workable. 

I imagine his first preseason was predominantly focused on working with the midfielders, rather than as a part of the forward line (and the Essendon game showed the Grundy-backline connection was wanting).

Not sure why anyone seems to be worried about Gawn & JVR against the Roos. It seems to me like a relatively risk free opportunity to test JVR against a decent ruck opposition. Gotta find out if he’ll be up to the task against quality opposition in the finals.

I still think Grundy will have a part to play in the run at a flag.

4 minutes ago, Mach5 said:

Not sure why anyone seems to be worried about Gawn & JVR against the Roos. It seems to me like a relatively risk free opportunity to test JVR against a decent ruck opposition. Gotta find out if he’ll be up to the task against quality opposition in the finals.

I still think Grundy will have a part to play in the run at a flag.

This is a good point mate and I suspect they want to trial one ruck against two and North is the perfect time to try it, given North's ability.

When it was obvious that Jackson was off we made the play for Grundy

So we can either hold Grundy to his contract (my preferred view) or we trade him out and get ourselves another ruckman (which is a must because if we don't bring in another ruckman, it will be Gawn on his own with maybe 1 or 2 years of prime production left)

So unless we can get hold of another decent ruckman as back up to Gawn, I'd say we will simply declare Grundy as a required player and hold him to his contract

It's not as if Grundy is being offered an $8Million contact elsewhere like Jackson was.  That's not happening and other clubs will almost certainly want him cheap.  So why sell him cheap?  That's not good for business

He's a keeper, all things considered and as others have said, he's got a good chance of being in the team in September anyway (but not right now)

Edited by Macca


I think this is the third week in a row that Brodie has been named on the extended bench or as an emergency.

Can't imagine it's for anything other than cover for Max in case of a last minute injury or such.

 
26 minutes ago, rpfc said:

He’s Schrödinger’s Brodie…

I recently heard about a new young adult novel in which Schrodinger’s cat and Pavlov’s dog team up together and get into all sorts of whacky adventures.

Just the perfect birthday present for my nine year old niece I thought, and so dropped into the local bookshop to buy a copy for her.

The owner said my description rang a bell, but he wasn’t sure if it was there or not.


Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

Featured Content

  • CASEY: Collingwood

    It was freezing cold at Mission Whitten Stadium where only the brave came out in the rain to watch a game that turned out to be as miserable as the weather.
    The Casey Demons secured their third consecutive victory, earning the four premiership points and credit for defeating a highly regarded Collingwood side, but achieved little else. Apart perhaps from setting the scene for Monday’s big game at the MCG and the Ice Challenge that precedes it.
    Neither team showcased significant skill in the bleak and greasy conditions, at a location that was far from either’s home territory. Even the field umpires forgot where they were and experienced a challenging evening, but no further comment is necessary.

    • 4 replies
  • NON-MFC: Round 13

    Follow all the action from every Round 13 clash excluding the Dees as the 2025 AFL Premiership Season rolls on. With Melbourne playing in the final match of the round on King's Birthday, all eyes turn to the rest of the competition. Who are you tipping to win? And more importantly, which results best serve the Demons’ finals aspirations? Join the discussion and keep track of the matches that could shape the ladder and impact our run to September.

    • 216 replies
  • PREVIEW: Collingwood

    Having convincingly defeated last year’s premier and decisively outplayed the runner-up with 8.2 in the final quarter, nothing epitomized the Melbourne Football Club’s performance more than its 1.12 final half, particularly the eight consecutive behinds in the last term, against a struggling St Kilda team in the midst of a dismal losing streak. Just when stability and consistency were anticipated within the Demon ranks, they delivered a quintessential performance marked by instability and ill-conceived decisions, with the most striking aspect being their inaccuracy in kicking for goal, which suggested a lack of preparation (instead of sleeping in their hotel in Alice, were they having a night on the turps) rather than a well-rested team. Let’s face it - this kicking disease that makes them look like raw amateurs is becoming a millstone around the team’s neck.

    • 1 reply
  • CASEY: Sydney

    The Casey Demons were always expected to emerge victorious in their matchup against the lowly-ranked Sydney Swans at picturesque Tramway Oval, situated in the shadows of the SCG in Moore Park. They dominated the proceedings in the opening two and a half quarters of the game but had little to show for it. This was primarily due to their own sloppy errors in a low-standard game that produced a number of crowded mauls reminiscent of the rugby game popular in old Sydney Town. However, when the Swans tired, as teams often do when they turn games into ugly defensive contests, Casey lifted the standard of its own play and … it was off to the races. Not to nearby Randwick but to a different race with an objective of piling on goal after goal on the way to a mammoth victory. At the 25-minute mark of the third quarter, the Demons held a slender 14-point lead over the Swans, who are ahead on the ladder of only the previous week's opposition, the ailing Bullants. Forty minutes later, they had more than fully compensated for the sloppiness of their earlier play with a decisive 94-point victory, that culminated in a rousing finish which yielded thirteen unanswered goals. Kicks hit their targets, the ball found itself going through the middle and every player made a contribution.

    • 1 reply
  • REPORT: St. Kilda

    Hands up if you thought, like me, at half-time in yesterday’s game at TIO Traeger Park, Alice Springs that Melbourne’s disposal around the ground and, in particular, its kicking inaccuracy in front of the goals couldn’t get any worse. Well, it did. And what’s even more damning for the Melbourne Football Club is that the game against St Kilda and its resurgence from the bottomless pit of its miserable start to the season wasn’t just lost through poor conversion for goal but rather in the 15 minutes when the entire team went into a slumber and was mugged by the out-of-form Saints. Their six goals two behinds (one goal less than the Demons managed for the whole game) weaved a path of destruction from which they were unable to recover. Ross Lyon’s astute use of pressure to contain the situation once they had asserted their grip on the game, and Melbourne’s self-destructive wastefulness, assured that outcome. The old adage about the insanity of repeatedly doing something and expecting a different result, was out there. Two years ago, the score line in Melbourne’s loss to the Giants at this same ground was 5 goals 15 behinds - a ratio of one goal per four scoring shots - was perfectly replicated with yesterday’s 7 goals 21 behinds. 
    This has been going on for a while and opens up a number of questions. I’ll put forward a few that come to mind from this performance. The obvious first question is whether the club can find a suitable coach to instruct players on proper kicking techniques or is this a skill that can no longer be developed at this stage of the development of our playing group? Another concern is the team's ability to counter an opponent's dominance during a run on as exemplified by the Saints in the first quarter. Did the Demons underestimate their opponents, considering St Kilda's goals during this period were scored by relatively unknown forwards? Furthermore, given the modest attendance of 6,721 at TIO Traeger Park and the team's poor past performances at this venue, is it prudent to prioritize financial gain over potentially sacrificing valuable premiership points by relinquishing home ground advantage, notwithstanding the cultural significance of the team's connection to the Red Centre? 

    • 4 replies
  • PREGAME: Collingwood

    After a disappointing loss in Alice Springs the Demons return to the MCG to take on the Magpies in the annual King's Birthday Big Freeze for MND game. Who comes in and who goes out?

      • Like
    • 528 replies