You'll have to excuse the old school quoting but I don't know how to do multi quotes on my phone. I'll try and address your post in it's entirety rather than take a small snippet and ignore the rest that doesn't suit your version of what you want to make out my position is. A number of times you made points in favour of those I already had."This is where I get frustrated. As a result of our discussion I went and looked at a replay of the first three quarters to see if in fact I'd got it completely wrong. I tried to focus, as far as I could, on who was playing on who and how they went. It's very hard on TV but you can pick up some things.
In the first Grimes seemed to play on Mayne from what I could see. Of course with rotations and the such this isn't a "24/7" thing but that's what I saw. Mayne was pretty much kickless in the first quarter as was Grimes."
As I said earlier I'm not sure who Grimes was playing on outside of the specific part I mentioned, when Freo turned the game in the second, because they seemed to be rotating on and off players a lot and it is hard to be sure on TV. You have even acknowledged this yet are happy to give him credit for keeping Mayne quiet although your not quite sure he was on him. It seems we both agree he offered no rebound.
"In the second I watch specifically for Walters and Grimes. Walters had two meaningful possessions in that quarter. One was when we turned the ball over in the centre when Pedersen dropped a regulation chest mark and Hill gathered the ball and speared a pass to Walters who goaled."
Walters had more than two possessions in the second but let's deal with the two you acknowledge were meaningful and that we seem to agree Grimes was on him at the time. The dropped mark happened in the middle of the ground. Grimes and Walters were not involved in the play where the turnover occurred so he couldn't be excused for setting up an attacking move which can kill a defender. They were both deep and although Walters had space to lead into Grimes was not even close enough to Walters to apply any pressure and Walters took the easiest of marks. Turnovers happen, especially for us, If Grimes can not keep up with him on the lead he should play in front or find another way, that was too easy for Walters.
"The second was when Hill again had the ball in the centre well clear and kicked to Walters who was corralled by Grimes but was good enough to gather the bouncing ball and get a really good pass away to Pavlich. It was really good play by Walters and I'd imagine Roos would suggest Grimes did the right thing in staying goal side of Walters and not letting the ball go over the back with Walters running into space and goal. Stinga really good forwards to this sort of thing. Rioli, Wingard, Gray, Ballantyne and Gartlett amongst others do it for a living. They do it on all opponents from time to time because they are exceptional footballers."
If that's what you thInk Roos would say then I don't think you know his style of play very well. He would say why did Grimes give Walters so much space and why was he not right on his hammer applying pressure. Again Walters lead Grimes to the ball by some margin so much so that it didn't matter that Hills pass to him was terrible. He had time to slow down, yes slow down, and gather the bouncing ball and turn Grimes inside out. Grimes didn't corrall him he got there too late, that why Walters slipped past him. In the end he did turn goal side and ran into space towards goal. What was special by Walters was the pass to Pav. The lack or pressure applied by Grimes was poor and I'm surprised that you think Roos would be at all happy with this play.
Your right though that's what good small forwards will do...but only if you give them the time and space to do that. It's why many go missing in grand finals. The good defenders apply this sort of pressure for a living.
"I get Grimes is the new DL whipping boy and I'm not arguing that he's flying and isn't under pressure for his spot. My belief is that people have predetermined ideas on players and when they watch a game they let these ideas frame how they see their performance. Grimes did nothing wrong in either of those pieces of play. Pedersen did and I'd imagine Cross did because again from what I could see he was tagging Hill. And in the second piece of play nobody mentioned that Pav's opponent didn't cover him and was instrumental to us losing the game."
Your first sentence here is not what you have been saying at all and is my main issue with you. You have been quick to tell all that anyone that thinks Grimes in not in the 22 that they are just plain wrong. Of course it's good you finally acknowledge there is pressure on his spot. Is surprising however you have come to that conclusion if his game is as solid as you say it is.
As for your line on having a predetermined idea of a player, my predetermined idea of Grimes is that he is a good player. But I am no longer able to reconcile that with his output. It's what I am actually seeing not what I hope to be seeing. As I have already mentioned he is a favourite of mine and I would love him to be in the best 22.
Pav was without a doubt another factor in Freos win. But if we take your approach with the first play then it was Walters gather up the ground to easily get around Grimes that was the issue and not the player supposed to be covering Pav...no wait that doesn't work for you does it...
"Another classic example is McKenzie's game. He basically didn't make a mistake. He kept his opponent goalless and didn't make a disposal mistake. He had one free kick awarded against him when someone handballed to his feet and he was tackled in gathering the ball and pinged. But if you read the comments after the game day thread you'd think he'd committed murder. He's not a creative player and never will be. We all know this and Roos knows it. Roos wants McKenzie to play his role which he did to perfection but he got no credit from the DL critics. Again I'm not arguing McKenzie is a first 22 player, I don't think he is but he does deserve credit for playing well. What we got was all the McKenzie haters using the game to say he's no good. That isn't what happened on the day."
You keep bring up McKenzie. I have already said he was not on in the second when we got done and I don't have an issue with him because if your not going to be a good user of the ball you better be bloody good at shutting down an opponent and I always have confidence he can do that. Sadly with Grimes I don't have this confidence in him anymore.
"With favourites and villains which we all have it's very hard to see their games in an unbiased way. Mo64 dislikes players and focuses on their mistakes to prove his point. He never mentions or perhaps sees the good things they do. I reckon Dunn is a very overrated player and I thought he was terrible but I didn't say so and when I watched the game again he did basically what Grimes and McKenzie did. He stopped his opponent and did little else."
As you only see Grime does no wrong.
"The only comfort we all have is it matters diddly squat what we think and those with much more knowledge than us will make the decisions."
Agreed. With Grimes stepping down from the captaincy those with the knowledge are aware his output is below par and are attempting to address it.
"We'll see what happens with Grimes. If he's as bad as you say there is no way Roos will pick him."
I think as a senior player and leader the spot in the 22 is his to lose. Some good performances in the next couple of games and he will be in. But he is on thin ice and needs to improve.
"Anyway whilst you think I ignore the evidence in front of me I'd suggest you are guilty of exactly that. But it doesn't actually matter a damn."
I think we can agree to disagree on the first sentence but agree on the last