Changes vs GW$ (R21): Grimes, Salem in; JKH, Bail out

[Djcjdees]

Pretty small sample size. Against Brisbane we looked worse, against the Hawks we looked okayish but maybe he'd have been smart enough to stand the goal line and we wouldn't have conceded so many easy over-the-back goals. I'd have him in for Matt Jones.

Maybe, but maybe not. I put those down to the fact the backline had been changed a bit and it showed with the lack of organisation. So yes, Grimes being there would most likely help with that, sure. Comparing Grimes and Matt Jones is a bit unfair on Jones. Granted Jones has been in the system for a while now, but Grimes is a senior player. Inclined to give Jones a bit more leeway because of the run and pace he provides too. He has been fairly ordinary bar one or two games though.

 

[Dez!]

It's only that part I'm disagreeing with.

I think you are way too harsh on Dunn (comfortably in our top 4 or 5 for BnF surely) and Jetta (been among our most consistent since he earned a spot). I take your point about the backline having no decent kicks, but most others have another string to their bow. Grimes doesn't in my opinion.

Grimes is one of our best defenders, he's rarely been beaten at all this season.

I'm simply following the criteria you set.

McDonald shits himself under pressure and does more than he's capable of, coupled with being a s**t kick.
Dunn is a good kick but an insanely stupid one.
Frawley is a decent kick who thinks he's a better kick than he is.

It's all well and good to say drop Grimes but give me a better alternative, you could possibly get a better kick but from what we've got he won't be able to defend a chair which Grimes can defend very well (also can defend players as well as chairs)

 

[Krujan]

Grimes is one of our best defenders, he's rarely been beaten at all this season.

I'm simply following the criteria you set.

McDonald shits himself under pressure and does more than he's capable of, coupled with being a s**t kick.
Dunn is a good kick but an insanely stupid one.
Frawley is a decent kick who thinks he's a better kick than he is.

It's all well and good to say drop Grimes but give me a better alternative, you could possibly get a better kick but from what we've got he won't be able to defend a chair which Grimes can defend very well (also can defend players as well as chairs)

If Grimes played for a top 4 team like Hawthorn or Geelong in particular, he'd be one of the first picked each week. Playing a negating role in defence for a bottom 4 team is not easy when the ball in your defensive half more often than not. He's a quality player, who will look a lot better once the whole team improves IMHO.

 

[Klyntonius]

Maybe, but maybe not. I put those down to the fact the backline had been changed a bit and it showed with the lack of organisation. So yes, Grimes being there would most likely help with that, sure. Comparing Grimes and Matt Jones is a bit unfair on Jones. Granted Jones has been in the system for a while now, but Grimes is a senior player. Inclined to give Jones a bit more leeway because of the run and pace he provides too. He has been fairly ordinary bar one or two games though.

That wasn't meant to be a comparison of players and whilst I see where you are coming from, if we're picking our strongest team (as we should) to play this weekend then I think Grimes currently is better than Jones. To compare them, both are poor decision makers and users of the ball but I think Jones run and carry (his strength) is negated by the negatives far more than Grimes ability to read the play and shutdown his opponent.

 

[Gysberts2Bate]

The moral of the story is that everyone on our list sucks and we're really just splitting hairs.

 

[Theseventhhamster]

The moral of the story is that everyone on our list sucks and we're really just splitting hairs.

The moral is that Grimes is held to standards completely unique to him by barking mad people with confirmation bias issues.

 

[Captain Jack]

If Grimes played for a top 4 team like Hawthorn or Geelong in particular, he'd be one of the first picked each week. Playing a negating role in defence for a bottom 4 team is not easy when the ball in your defensive half more often than not. He's a quality player, who will look a lot better once the whole team improves IMHO.

This is one of our biggest problems I think. It's not just Grimes - probably most of our team falls in this category of "would look better in a good team". Exceptions would be Jones, Vince, Tyson, Dunn (this year), maybe Frawley Jetta and Jamar as well. Everyone else is out of their depth.

 

[Cannon82]

This is one of our biggest problems I think. It's not just Grimes - probably most of our team falls in this category of "would look better in a good team". Exceptions would be Jones, Vince, Tyson, Dunn (this year), maybe Frawley Jetta and Jamar as well. Everyone else is out of their depth.

Everyone falls into that category, don't they? I'm racking my brains over players who look shitter in better teams. Quinten Lynch? Col Sylvia?


Shannon Byrnes?

 

[Captain Jack]

Everyone falls into that category, don't they? I'm racking my brains over players who look shitter in better teams. Quinten Lynch? Col Sylvia?


Shannon Byrnes?

Yes ok ok, my point is we have very few players who can hold their own in a s**t team. Look at Hawthorn's team from the weekend and you would find twice as many.

 

[Cannon82]

Yes ok ok, my point is we have very few players who can hold their own in a s**t team. Look at Hawthorn's team from the weekend and you would find twice as many.

Really? Name one.

It's distinguishing the guys who can play a bit but are being brought down to a terrible level vs the guys who are actively contributing to making us a diabolical side. I guess we should be thankful that Jordie McKenzie and co are so bad... how many budding Chad Fletchers are lurking on our list?

 

[Klyntonius]

Yep, we've had very few building block players in recent times but lots of mortar guys to fill in the gaps, hence we've crumbled so much.

 

[Djcjdees]

The moral is that Grimes is held to standards completely unique to him by barking mad people with confirmation bias issues.

Grimes is held to different standards than Matt Jones. This is what I said. Anyway, it's no use arguing with someone who is only interested in playing the man

 

[Theseventhhamster]

Grimes is held to different standards than Matt Jones. This is what I said. Anyway, it's no use arguing with someone who is only interested in playing the man

You weren't saying he was secretly dropped?

 

[Djcjdees]

You weren't saying he was secretly dropped?

I didn't refer to you as barking mad or whatever you said, that's for sure. I didn't imply any great conspiracy, just that no one seemed to notice any injury and he was absent from the team the week after having a pretty ordinary game and making a big mistake late on against Port. Before you get all upset that I'm singling him out, he wasn't the only one. But surely I'm not barking mad or suggesting that it wouldn't be the first time that a player has been listed as injured to avoid having to drop him? regardless, nothing I said warranted being called anything really.

 

[Theseventhhamster]

You posted crazy stuff so I'm assuming you're crazy. No big deal, plenty of crazy people here. It is a fan forum.

 

[Demon 16]

I reckon djcjdees thought has some merit.

Grimes is certainly one of our best defensive players, but there is no doubt that we are struggling with transitioning the ball out of defence.

I wouldn't think Roos has a long term view that excludes Grimes - but it wouldn't shock me if he wanted to try some different things out at half back towards the end of the year and told the skipper he can take a couple of weeks rest, rather than play at Casey.

 

[Theseventhhamster]

Seems strange that the odd guy out would be the best rebounder of all the defenders or that we'd play plonkers rather than move Grimes or one of the other guys out of the back six temporarily or give him a rest with general soreness. It's a silly conspiracy theory.

 

[stabler]

As someone who has lived through various (insert flavour of the month, prospective number 1 draft pick name here) "Cups", can I suggest we do a complete 180 degree turn on what we normally do in these situations..

If GWS have truly thrown in the towel for season 2014 as it appears they have, and are directing all their efforts to sinking lower on the ladder, then why don't we embrace the situation and use it as an opportunity to just belt the absolute shizen out of them.

It might be meaningless and some may say 'detrimental' to our long term prospects, but if GWS have decided to go down this road, one WE have gone down many times unsuccessfully before, then lets give them a bloody great kick along. Then hopefully they will feel the indignity of it all and the embarrassment of selling their soul for an unproven kid.

Im sick of the final few rounds of each season being an internal emotional conflict as a supporter not caring if we win or lose. I say we go for the soft kill and make it as brutal and as bloody as possible. We can take Brayshaw at pick 3 and keep our dignity and GWS can have Petracca and a prolapsed rectum after we destroy there asses on the G.

 

[Dez!]

As someone who has lived through various (insert flavour of the month, prospective number 1 draft pick name here) "Cups", can I suggest we do a complete 180 degree turn on what we normally do in these situations..

If GWS have truly thrown in the towel for season 2014 as it appears they have, and are directing all their efforts to sinking lower on the ladder, then why don't we embrace the situation and use it as an opportunity to just belt the absolute shizen out of them.

It might be meaningless and some may say 'detrimental' to our long term prospects, but if GWS have decided to go down this road, one WE have gone down many times unsuccessfully before, then lets give them a bloody great kick along. Then hopefully they will feel the indignity of it all and the embarrassment of selling their soul for an unproven kid.

Im sick of the final few rounds of each season being an internal emotional conflict as a supporter not caring if we win or lose. I say we go for the soft kill and make it as brutal and as bloody as possible. We can take Brayshaw at pick 3 and keep our dignity and GWS can have Petracca and a prolapsed rectum after we destroy there asses on the G.

I think everybody is in favour of belting the s**t out of them.

 

[Cannon82]

I think everybody is in favour of belting the s**t out of them.

Yep, just not sure we have a forward line capable of belting the s**t out of a styrofoam cup. If we score 100+ points you'd put your money on Tyson, Cross and Vince contributing 5 or 6 goals. When's the last time we had a forward kick more than 3 goals - Clark? Or is my memory playing tricks?

We have to beat Shiel, Patton, Greene, Ward in the middle and man up on Boyd, Patton, Tomlinson, Smith up forward. I reckon we'd be marginal favourites at home but it's a game we could just as easily lose (without having to tank).

 

[Theseventhhamster]

Our best forward is now healthy. Bring him in.

 

[MAXIMUM GRUNDAGE]

Yep, just not sure we have a forward line capable of belting the s**t out of a styrofoam cup. If we score 100+ points you'd put your money on Tyson, Cross and Vince contributing 5 or 6 goals. When's the last time we had a forward kick more than 3 goals - Clark? .

Round 23 last year against the Bulldogs - Watts kicked 4.

Last time one player kicked 6 goals or more in a match for us? Have there been any since Russ Robertson's 7 on the QB match 2007?

 

[Klyntonius]

Yep, just not sure we have a forward line capable of belting the s**t out of a styrofoam cup. If we score 100+ points you'd put your money on Tyson, Cross and Vince contributing 5 or 6 goals. When's the last time we had a forward kick more than 3 goals - Clark? Or is my memory playing tricks?

We have to beat Shiel, Patton, Greene, Ward in the middle and man up on Boyd, Patton, Tomlinson, Smith up forward. I reckon we'd be marginal favourites at home but it's a game we could just as easily lose (without having to tank).

We are sooooo Mr Burns (but without the money)!

 

[stretcharmstrong]

As someone who has lived through various (insert flavour of the month, prospective number 1 draft pick name here) "Cups", can I suggest we do a complete 180 degree turn on what we normally do in these situations..

If GWS have truly thrown in the towel for season 2014 as it appears they have, and are directing all their efforts to sinking lower on the ladder, then why don't we embrace the situation and use it as an opportunity to just belt the absolute shizen out of them.

It might be meaningless and some may say 'detrimental' to our long term prospects, but if GWS have decided to go down this road, one WE have gone down many times unsuccessfully before, then lets give them a bloody great kick along. Then hopefully they will feel the indignity of it all and the embarrassment of selling their soul for an unproven kid.

Im sick of the final few rounds of each season being an internal emotional conflict as a supporter not caring if we win or lose. I say we go for the soft kill and make it as brutal and as bloody as possible. We can take Brayshaw at pick 3 and keep our dignity and GWS can have Petracca and a prolapsed rectum after we destroy there asses on the G.

I like Brayshaw better anyway!

 

[Deemanding]

Round 23 last year against the Bulldogs - Watts kicked 4.

Last time one player kicked 6 goals or more in a match for us? Have there been any since Russ Robertson's 7 on the QB match 2007?

Thinking really hard about this one - I recall Clark, Sylvia, Green, Dunn, Jurrah all kicking 5 in a match at some point. But not more than 6. And even in some of our 'good' games usually the goals were pretty spread out.

Heck, even Jamie Bennell once kicked 4 in a game