Undeeterred

1 hour ago, leave it to deever said:

What?

Why the need to start an entire thread with the sole purpose of hanging [censored] on a player? It's mind numbing.

Talk about this in the post-match, or the contracts thread, or any of the other threads that exist to talk about what might happen to players post-season.

But it's not great to push this barrow that you've already done to death on the post-match thread, knowing that it will generate lots of bandwagon vitriol from the rest of the forum.

6 minutes ago, rjay said:

No he's not, he can actually play...

And?

My point stands.

Give it a rest, Christ.

19 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Suggesting they might go out was not because they had 'bad' games.  It was in the context of the first sentence in the post: having 'fresh' players for the upcoming short breaks and long i/state trips and to rotate in Brayshaw and/or Oliver during that 3 weeks especially as Casey have a bye next week.

Fair enough.

I don't think they'll bring in Oliver or Brayshaw on the basis of being 'fresh'.

They might bring them in because they make the team better, but the current coaching team seems to think that, say a Harmes or Kennedy type on a six day break is better than an ANB, Michie or Newton type coming off a VFL game. 

Just seems to be what they are thinking.

Admitting selection mistakes in the media is far more palatable than admitting the players you've got waiting to come in aren't good enough, it seems to me.

Wagner is out for a month, people.

Some of these suggested changes are nuts.

Trengove is not a like for like for Dawes and no way that change gets made.

Harmes/Kennedy/Kent all played really good games yesterday. 

Harmes was down back for a good part of the day and actually looked really good.

Kent attacked the ball and provided run. He also played the role of storming off the back of the square and collecting a hand off on the way through and, when it worked, it looked really dangerous.

Kennedy cracked in all day and was good. A couple of missed shots are no reason to drop him.

I'd be surprised if there were many changes, really. Nobody stands out in the VFL, other than Grimes, and it will only be a question of whether they want to get in any of Brayshaw, Oliver or Lumumba. I doubt they will.

1 hour ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

Sounds pretty childish to me. I think Roos and Co would be keeping Grimes more in the loop than what we are guessing at is going on.

Oh, of course. I was being a little bit facetious, but agree that he will know exactly what's going on.

While his form is good, they probably see him as a safe pair of hands in the event of a late change, but not really good enough to give him a game consistently, or even at all.

1 hour ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

Roos said in a press conference last week that when Grimes comes back in he wants him to stay in. He obviously doesn't want to drop him after a game or two. If he were dropped again, then that would be it for Grimes. Sent to the VFL for a sustained time to find some form and get his confidence up.

Not sure it is doing his confidence much good to be constantly getting 25 touches and seeing almost every other candidate for a promotion go up past him.

They're holding him back just long enough for his form to tail off (because he surely can't stay in good form the entire season) then they won't have to put him in, because his 'form doesn's justify it'

10 minutes ago, DeeZee said:

Hand balling to a guy under severe pressure then causing a turnover rather than kickng it inside fifty and having a chance at a shot on goal seems to be our biggest problem.

Dawes isn't the answer, Pedo or Hullet are much better options, but once Weideman starts getting games and developing his body, Salem and Brayshaw come back in and another pre season into Oliver, we will win games like this.

The problem was that Adelaide pushed back really hard, and we didn't have anyone to kick to.

So many peanuts on the MCC wing were screaming 'just kick it', then when we did, it often went straight down the Adelaide players throat because they were 5 on 3, or 4 on 2. 

And Jesse Hogan wasn't working hard enough to get in front. Too often when that kick came, he was sitting too far back from the kicker, on his heels, not providing that target,

2 minutes ago, Sylvia Saint said:

I don't mind losing games like today as the effort was clearly there. Adelaide are a chance for the flag and we matched them for 75% of the game, so we're not that far off.

Jayden Hunt is the find of the year, certainly for this club and maybe even league wide (in the mix at least). Is there any use for an ageing Lumumba past this season? Hunt plays like Harry did when he was All Australian.

I like the new Jack Watts. I like him a lot. He'll never justify the #1 pick but he's now a certainty to at least finish in the 'reasonable' category like Fraser and Johnstone. He might even end up better at this rate.

I like to think that the coaches know better than us, but at the same time I think the fans get it right most of the time. For that reason, I'll be absolutely staggered if Dawes is retained next week. I have this sneaky suspicion he will be. He has never been dropped at Melbourne.

TMac can defend but how many goals does he cost us offensively with his horrid disposal? I want him to stay but lets not pay him the world. He's B-grade at best, they're easy enough to find.

Freo in Darwin is a nightmare proposition. We'd annihilate them at the G but in the Northern Territory it's a flip of the coin. We've never beaten Ross Lyon. Unlike today I'll be seriously [censored] off if we lose and get carved up by Riewoldt the following week. Must win at least 1 of the next 2. 

I'd love Lumumba to go back to the roll Hunt is playing now (which is Lumumba's role) and for Hunt to roll through the midfield. I think he's the speed we need on the outside, that we're hoping Billy Stretch and Matt Jones would be. 

A nice clean handpass from Dom Tyson or Nate Jones, and he'd be off.

That goal today where he took off on Jenkins and was inside 40 in a heartbeat was just sensational.

6 minutes ago, Ted Fidge said:

Today was a very entertaining game where the better side won, by about the right margin considering the difference between the sides.

Let's not forget that AFC are a well drilled side and worked their game plan better than we did.

When we got the ball they crowded us (as every side knows to do) and did it very well. That is what forced the handball handball handball high floating kick sequences that we saw.

And when they got a turnover, they always got a man or two loose. Very quickly. Really, they were good to watch to see how they did it. That's what we should aspire to.

Those goals at the start of the third were the deciding factor. To win this game we needed to get in front early and stay there, to force them to play catch up. If they got in front, it was going to put awful pressure on our leaky defence, who, as it turned out, lived up to expectations and let through too many easy goals.

Instead, they got the jump on us twice, once in the first quarter, and again in the third. Easy walk in goals that can kill confidence.

What was our response? It was pretty good. We didn't drop our bundle in the first, kept the margin manageable, and fought back. Scintillating second quarter. That's why we come to the footy. At the twenty minute mark of the second quarter, the scores had exceeded the full time scores of the previous night's unwatchable game between two "Big Snore" clubs.

We turned the tables on them and forced them off their game. (Just couldn't do it for long enough.)

In spite of their superior execution of game plan, in spite of the c0ck ups and turnovers, forced errors, blind kicks, Tracc invisible, OMac overwhelmed, Kent/Bugg/Kennedy/Harmes off their game, etc etc, there we were, right in it against one of the premiership favourites. I call that encouraging.

Twenty minute mark of the last, we were still in it.  Needed a mighty effort, one to keep the footy journos w@nking themselves for a week, but still do-able. Because these days we have the scoring fire-power to pull it off.

Which brings us to ...

Dawes. Fewest possessions of any player on the ground. Someone said he is a "defensive forward". This must be a new thing in footy. Like a cricketer being a non-scoring batsman. Or a non-wicket-taking bowler.

Fact is he has always been that rarest of things, a key forward who can't mark the ball. Today he even had trouble getting into the marking contest. Let alone getting his mitts on it.

It really is like playing one short.

We all know Pedo is the key forward that John West rejected. But he at least takes some marks. He at least kicks some goals. He at least brings the ball to ground so our mids and small forwards have a chance of grabbing it. He's not the future. He'll never get better than he is now. But he's a better option than Dawes, every week.

What about TMac? He's becoming a whipping boy. Frustrating as hell. He can do beautiful things in defence. But for every good thing he does, he seems to nullify it (and very soon after, it always seems) with a horrible error. We've seen enough to know that that is what he brings. He isn't going to get better than he is now. Frost may have passed him. But we still need another KPD if we want to be a top side.

But that's the thing. TMac can do good things.

Dawes seems not to do anything much.

Spot on.

Well, at least we aren't Richmond.

18 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

When did Grimes talk about jumping ship?

Pretty massive article this week with extensive quotes from his manager.

Still, as usual olisik drawing a long bow.

31 minutes ago, Pirlo said:

 

 

 

 

Came because this was the first google result for "Dermott Brereton [censored]", stayed for the brilliant Roos bashing before our 'demolition' of the Power. Oh 2013, we couldn't have known.

That is gold.

What a bump.

54 minutes ago, Return to Glory said:

Parking inspector?

 

Well he's not a proofreader.

6 minutes ago, Moonshadow said:

I see now....

We are big enough to give games away to VFL players who in all likelihood will not be with us next year. Let's give some to Terls while we are at it.

Lets get his name on the locker door, and make sure that his yet unborn children will have the option to play at MFC. This is important.

We aren't going to play finals this year so what does it matter that we finish off well. It's sentiment and pity that are important here. We don't want him to feel disappointed when he's cut in October. After all, Grimesy has been a good servant to the team and would want to play games he otherwise wouldn't have.

We've seen what the cutting of Junior did to the club and because we are part of the MFC inner sanctum and team moral is so low we know for sure it will do the same if Jack is cut from the list on 98. I refuse to believe we offered him around at the end of last year with no takers. Nope, never happened. It's worthy of microwaving my membership over.

He's been killing it at VFL level and like ANB will surely do it at senior level. After all, he's done it so many times in the past. His disposal, speed and body shape have improved so much this year. Oh, wait.....

Sheesh.

I don't mind Jack getting more games if he has form (tick), has dramatically improved his disposal and speed (unlikely), and is in the mix to be part of our team next year (we don't know, but very doubtful). Sure it would be nice for him to get to 100, even to 200 if he warrants further selection. He has been a great club man and is well liked by all, including me. But let me put it this way... IF Goodwin and Roos had a chat with Grimsey and confirmed he would not be at the club next year, but they would make sure he gets given 2 games so he can get his name on a locker door, do you think he would leave satisfied? I'd hope he'd tell them to put the team's development above his individual games tally. 

Overly sarcastic and extremely short sighted. 

Who is suggesting giving games away? 

How about this scenario - the new game plan actually suits him, which is why he is cutting up the twos. What have we to lose by giving him a few games (based on form) to show us whether that's true?

Or how about this scenario - the way we handled McDonald, Green and others, while playing favourites with kids, had a huge hand in creating an extremely disgruntled playing group. Look how well that went down in the aftermath.

And do you seriously think they'd have told him he's not going to be there next year? Sure - just make him emergency every week and have him stew for months and months about how his career is about to be ended. You've got to be joking - that's about as sure a recipe for personnel issues as there is ever likely to be.

2 hours ago, ProDee said:

That's because there's less pressure and more time to execute.

I don't think he has a future at the club, but I'll be very disappointed if he doesn't get to 100 games and take his rightful place on the no.31 locker.

I wouldn't have had this view 10 years ago, but the older I get the more I realise that life is all about relationships and not many have had to endure the circumstances unwittingly thrust upon Jack.  When he should have had a relaxed mindset and been working on his own game his head would have been in a spin as he was dealing with issues surrounding the club while also trying to be a role model for teammates.  None of this was conducive to good football and making him a better player.

I agree that the team and club are the big picture, but I also don't believe that either are compromised by getting Grimes to 100 games.  If anything, it's the opposite.  And it won't be a "hollow" milestone.  His teammates will make sure of that.  

When history looks over its shoulder it won't remember how he got there, it will just read Jack Grimes 100 games for the Melbourne Football Club.  In my view the club needs to ensure it happens.  

Hear, hear. 

People forget the lingering effect of trampling on Junior McDonald and others, instead of handling the situation with a bit of sensitivity.

People also forget that players are human, and when players are treated harshly, they have a lot of mates in the 40 odd left behind, who in turn get shirty with the administration.

12 hours ago, Moonshadow said:

I disagree strongly.

Jack Grimes is very limited as a modern footballer. His strength is an ability to read the ball and that he's a reasonably good mark for his size. His disposal is very poor... almost unacceptable, he isn't quick and he gets pushed around easily. Love the guy's persistence and heart, but his card was marked as soon as Hunt and Wagner showed form. With Salem and H set to come back at some point (hopefully) and Vince and NJones perhaps spending more time across half back as they age, we have no spots left. He's not a prospective key back so cannot be compared to the Mac bros. Nev Jetta improved all his deficiencies to become a valuable small back, not such a different role from what Jack could have become. For better or worse, speed and precise rebound across half back have become king, and we have too many turn over merchants as it is. 

Stuck on 98. There's little room for sentimentality in AFL these days.

The big question is how do we know that he can't perform under the new game plan?

It's being played in the VFL, and he's clearly smashing it, so why don't we ditch our preconceptions and see if he can manage it at AFL level?

Who knows, he might even turn out to be the quick, hard running wingman we need quite badly.

How will we know, unless we try?

3 hours ago, nutbean said:

And this is revisionism as well. He did not have two awful seasons before he left us. The truth is probably somewhere in between. 

His play might have been in the middle somewhere, but maybe let me say that the value he provided as against what he should have been providing was awful.

9 hours ago, KingDingAling said:

We did offload him for too cheap. We could have - and should have - tried to get more. He is having a great year. He was also good value for our club. Sad to see really. I don't like watching him play quality football for another club - especially Collingwood.

This is revisionism at best. He had two awful seasons before he left us and we got exactly what he was worth. Some would say we got overs, given his only ability is marking. He's dreadful otherwise.

52 minutes ago, McQueen said:

Lachie Neale re-signed with Freo.

Is that confirmed? They were talking last night about how important it was to get his signature

2 hours ago, defuture15 said:

I have been told by a person close to Lachie that he is wanting to come to the city of melbourne. I havent followed him but believe that he was a number 1 pick.

Would he fit in with our needs?

LOL. You peanut.

10 hours ago, hells bells said:

I did a ladder predictor today and we took North's spot in the 8.

Admittedly we won 7 games after the bye but I'd love to make it at North's expense.

That's interesting - I did one and West Coast in 8th were three games clear of Port in 9th...

That would be supremely boring.

9 hours ago, SaberFang said:

How does this work in other sports? What exactly can clubs trade? Draft picks for later in the year?

The issue with most sports is that players can't block trades made by their team.

NBA players get shipped all over the place up to the trade deadline, which is a couple of months out from the playoffs. They can literally play for New York one night, be on a plane, and be suiting up in LA a couple of days later.

European football, for example, has transfer windows where there is a specific period in which players can be transferred, whether pre and early season or mid season. 

The common denominator with these other sports is that clubs effectively own the right to manage their players and the players can't stop those rights being bought and sold.

This is the kind of thread someone starts because they are bored at work and have to generate a non-existent problem to talk about.