How typically Melbourne Brodie Grundy

[Deestar9 1,609]

12 hours ago, John Crow Batty said:

Brisbane Lions won 3 flags with second string ruckman Clark Keating who was understudy to Beau McDonald. Undersized Keating didn’t play much during the regular season but starred and dominated finals in their flag years including the GF’s. Joke going around at the time was that Brisbane saved Keating during the regular season to keep him fresh for finals.

It’s interesting listening to Max on the podcast (the one mentioned on Demonland) re the rucks. He said that Oscar was one of the hardest ruckman to play against and that Bris had the best  2nd & 3rd back up rucks in the comp. He didn’t think the loss of Oscar would be a huge difference..

[Bring-Back-Powell 14,813]

Certainly played some good games for Sydney, but it felt as though his win over Gawn in opening round may have inflated his season somewhat.

A player on his salary and stature should've comprehensively beaten a player of Fort's level.

 

 

[dpositive 1,663]

I thought Grundy was brought in to give Max a chop out.

Max is unique and plays his own style game which the rest of the team benefit from. He leads from the front and players respond.

If we had used Grundy to give Max a break we may have nor only freshened Max up and perhaps extended his playing life but might also have developed some different options for our players who would have had to adapt to the different style that Grundy bought. This different style would have also made it more difficult to analyse  for opposition coaches.

WE just failed to use the options that Grundy provided and it was a good outcome that he left.

I have said many times that Goodwin needs to use the total squad, rather than focus on our best 22 favourites, use the depth and build options.

[SthSea22 616]

Grundy had no influence on the GF apart from hit outs on paper

 

Did not go forward at all and failed to get any clearances

[Ethan Tremblay 30,845]

The MCG is simply too large for the Swans one-way running midfield to play on. Their lack of mids, who are unwilling to defend, were well and truly exposed. 

[Watson11 2,240]

On 28/09/2024 at 20:01, Earl Hood said:

Ummh Brody was actually their best player, not that that is saying a lot. Won the hit outs and at 3 quarter time he was leading the Swans for disposals. He did his job. As did Jordan. 

His game was solid except for the end of the second where he had a direct hand in all 6 quick Brisbane goals (3 turnovers and conceding 3 really bad centre clearances that directly led to goals). The first 2 goals in that run were the worst, leaving Daniher alone inside 50 for a goal, then being monstered by Daniher at the next CB who kicked it to Ah-chee for a goal.

So it probably doesn’t matter what he did for the rest of the game.  That period killed the game as a contest.

 

 

[The Taciturn Demon 483]

On 29/09/2024 at 10:52, whatwhat say what said:

i was amazed when he took a mark on the half back flank in a pack yesterday

Me too. That's damning.

[praha 11,240]

I've mentioned earlier in this thread that Gawn has badly inflated our perception of a ruck's output. Grundy isn't a matchwinner nor a dominating force but he had height and body depth where we are lacking. In my view, the Gawn Grundy 1-2 could have been like the Jolly and Ball combo at Sydney in 2005. They had their impact ruck in Jolly and Ball as the around-the-ground backup. If Grundy didn't want to play second fiddle that's fine but I think people are trying to understate his impact unfairly because he doesn't dominate like Gawn does. I still reckon he would have had a better chance to win a flag by staying course at Melbourne than leaving.

[Robbie57 2,020]

The GF gave me some hope. 

First I like Brody, seems a class person. His game in the GF was not stellar nor is he ever going to win a GF for them. 

What Sydney lacked was a class (or fit) tall forward and their mids couldn't run both ways and defend. I agree the ground size exposed them. 

The lessons for us are simple we need our mids back in form or some fresh blood there that can run all day like Lachie Neil and crew.  And we need a dangerous tall forward. Over time we need a refresh on half back. 

Address the first two issues and we are in the hunt.

 

[layzie 33,791]

1 hour ago, Robbie57 said:

The GF gave me some hope. 

First I like Brody, seems a class person. His game in the GF was not stellar nor is he ever going to win a GF for them. 

What Sydney lacked was a class (or fit) tall forward and their mids couldn't run both ways and defend. I agree the ground size exposed them. 

The lessons for us are simple we need our mids back in form or some fresh blood there that can run all day like Lachie Neil and crew.  And we need a dangerous tall forward. Over time we need a refresh on half back. 

Address the first two issues and we are in the hunt.

 

All great points. I've gone a bit hard on Grundy after this game but there's no doubt the midfield just didn't show up and they had nothing out of their tall forwards to even give them a chance. Inside 50s were pretty even at 49-51 but scoring shots doubled 15-30 in Brisbane's favour. Obviously there was a lot of messy delivery but they were unable to trap it in there as well. 

As for Grundy, when it comes to this performance and his other grand final performance in 2018 he tended to do two things: 1. Over do the grappling and little holds 2. Tap a bucketload of ball down to opposition mids. The 2nd can be a chicken and egg scenario and people can talk about opposition sharking and poor midfield all they want but I'm expecting a bit more from a ruckman as highly paid as him in this game. As mentioned earlier by someone else it was the 3 horrible centre clearances he played a part in during the second that tilted the game towards Brisbane. He did not make up for it with his around the ground game either, apart from that 1 contested mark at HB. 

In the end as we all knew last year, he's a ruckman pure and simple. He's not the kind you can send forward to take a grab when all other forwards are failing and he does pick and choose when to track back. If this is going to be the case then he would want to do his main job quite well, not just ok. 

[deegirl 1,577]

4 hours ago, The Taciturn Demon said:

Me too. That's damning.

At the time I said ‘that’s his one overhead mark for the day’ 😂

[mo64 5,872]

3 hours ago, praha said:

I've mentioned earlier in this thread that Gawn has badly inflated our perception of a ruck's output. Grundy isn't a matchwinner nor a dominating force but he had height and body depth where we are lacking. In my view, the Gawn Grundy 1-2 could have been like the Jolly and Ball combo at Sydney in 2005. They had their impact ruck in Jolly and Ball as the around-the-ground backup. If Grundy didn't want to play second fiddle that's fine but I think people are trying to understate his impact unfairly because he doesn't dominate like Gawn does. I still reckon he would have had a better chance to win a flag by staying course at Melbourne than leaving.

The game has changed from 2005. There were unlimited interchange rotations back then, so it wasn't imperative for a 2nd ruck to have some credentials as a forward. Plus Jason Ball started his career as a key forward at the WCE. He kicked 48 goals in a season at WCE. Both Ball and Jolly could take contested marks. Grundy can't.

The Grundy experiment was bound to fail.