Past Heath Grundy - Farewell Reg, retired 2019

[Mick Oxlong]

So the excuse given is that they wanted to reward the players who played well last week so couldn't find a spot for Reg. I can guarantee you if we were playing a Richmond, Collingwood or West Coast that wouldn't have been the case. This means that the match committee was guilty of underestimating Gold Coast today, and not surprisingly it filtered through to the players.

Well said!

 

[The King!]

when they pensioned off Okeefe or Super Ted both players looked cooked

Who honestly 2 weeks ago thought Grundy should be omitted?

 

[grimlock]

when they pensioned off Okeefe or Super Ted both players looked cooked

Who honestly 2 weeks ago thought Grundy should be omitted?

Starts with S and ends with M.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

when they pensioned off Okeefe or Super Ted both players looked cooked

Who honestly 2 weeks ago thought Grundy should be omitted?

When they bring up the stats during games we play it's usually Reg that is toward the top of klms covered. Our defence also has a hard earned reputation of dealing with most I50s but conceding less goals than any other for them. Defensive efficiency/ organisation. I'm under no illusion that Reg is a major factor in that. I wouldn't omit him and in my thinking id be keeping him into next year at least. Unceremonious dumping by a club where a player is not yet signed is more consistent with him going to another club for a two year contract when we've only offered one. We will regret this IMO. Hope I'm wrong

 

[Kirkswan]

When they bring up the stats during games we play it's usually Reg that is toward the top of klms covered. Our defence also has a hard earned reputation of dealing with most I50s but conceding less goals than any other for them. Defensive efficiency/ organisation. I'm under no illusion that Reg is a major factor in that. I wouldn't omit him and in my thinking id be keeping him into next year at least. Unceremonious dumping by a club where a player is not yet signed is more consistent with him going to another club for a two year contract when we've only offered one. We will regret this IMO. Hope I'm wrong

I agree with all of this 100%, when only looking at it in the context of Reg.

The problem comes about when we start talking about progression, depth etc. Currently are backs are: Lloyd, Mills, McVeigh, Melican, Maibaum, Grundy, Aliir, Smith, Rampe, Johnson, Marsh, O'Riordan, Cunningham, Newman, Ling and Stoddart. Those bolded have all proven they can play a role in best 22 at times this year, which is perhaps a bit harsh on Cunningham and Marsh. Johnson is tracking really well, and looks likely to play a role fairly soon. Only Newman to me looks likely to be traded/delisted. I know there's been talk of McVeigh being traded, but I just can't see it happening. I reckon he'll coach at the Swans.

So then, they need to figure out a way to get regular games into all these guys to enable them to continue to be the best back six. Supposing Lloyd leaves and Mills moves into the middle, that leaves our back line next year as Melican, Grundy, Aliir, Smith, Rampe and O'Riordan, which is great! But what about Johnson? And Maibaum?

Very difficult decision ahead. And I reckon they've been trying things out to help them figure what they're going to do.

And for anyone to suggest that Reg has not been aware of all this is just ridiculous! He has been a part of the Swans system for 10 years or more, and would have had discussions with all the coaches each year about his future. He would have a role in mentoring the young blokes, and would have been invited to provide his opinion on the what the future should look like. To talk about him being 'treated badly' is just trash talk imo.

 

[The King!]

I agree with all of this 100%, when only looking at it in the context of Reg.

The problem comes about when we start talking about progression, depth etc. Currently are backs are: Lloyd, Mills, McVeigh, Melican, Maibaum, Grundy, Aliir, Smith, Rampe, Johnson, Marsh, O'Riordan, Cunningham, Newman, Ling and Stoddart. Those bolded have all proven they can play a role in best 22 at times this year, which is perhaps a bit harsh on Cunningham and Marsh. Johnson is tracking really well, and looks likely to play a role fairly soon. Only Newman to me looks likely to be traded/delisted. I know there's been talk of McVeigh being traded, but I just can't see it happening. I reckon he'll coach at the Swans.

So then, they need to figure out a way to get regular games into all these guys to enable them to continue to be the best back six. Supposing Lloyd leaves and Mills moves into the middle, that leaves our back line next year as Melican, Grundy, Aliir, Smith, Rampe and O'Riordan, which is great! But what about Johnson? And Maibaum?

Very difficult decision ahead. And I reckon they've been trying things out to help them figure what they're going to do.

And for anyone to suggest that Reg has not been aware of all this is just ridiculous! He has been a part of the Swans system for 10 years or more, and would have had discussions with all the coaches each year about his future. He would have a role in mentoring the young blokes, and would have been invited to provide his opinion on the what the future should look like. To talk about him being 'treated badly' is just trash talk imo.

You cant know these conversations happened any more than others can know they did not.

Ted Richards spent a fair bit of time in the same System and he seemed shocked by the situation.

Whatever discussions happened they still publicly handled it poorly anyway which is the issue.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

I agree with all of this 100%, when only looking at it in the context of Reg.

The problem comes about when we start talking about progression, depth etc. Currently are backs are: Lloyd, Mills, McVeigh, Melican, Maibaum, Grundy, Aliir, Smith, Rampe, Johnson, Marsh, O'Riordan, Cunningham, Newman, Ling and Stoddart. Those bolded have all proven they can play a role in best 22 at times this year, which is perhaps a bit harsh on Cunningham and Marsh. Johnson is tracking really well, and looks likely to play a role fairly soon. Only Newman to me looks likely to be traded/delisted. I know there's been talk of McVeigh being traded, but I just can't see it happening. I reckon he'll coach at the Swans.

So then, they need to figure out a way to get regular games into all these guys to enable them to continue to be the best back six. Supposing Lloyd leaves and Mills moves into the middle, that leaves our back line next year as Melican, Grundy, Aliir, Smith, Rampe and O'Riordan, which is great! But what about Johnson? And Maibaum?

Very difficult decision ahead. And I reckon they've been trying things out to help them figure what they're going to do.

And for anyone to suggest that Reg has not been aware of all this is just ridiculous! He has been a part of the Swans system for 10 years or more, and would have had discussions with all the coaches each year about his future. He would have a role in mentoring the young blokes, and would have been invited to provide his opinion on the what the future should look like. To talk about him being 'treated badly' is just trash talk imo.

Teams of any code play to systems. Reserve grade players are exposed to those systems at training and in play so they can be cogs to replace an injured/ out of form player. You also have the interchange and 4 extra players so that a player can be exposed gradually to a system and cohesive unit through interchange use. Understand Reg being rested- he's 32. Dont understand at all being then left out for following game. It is incredibly destabilising to intentionally undermine your cohesive unit (in this case our defence) and there would need to be a very valuable reason. Possibilities are:

- they think his form isn't great (when most on BF think otherwise and Horse recently praised him as an an unrecognised stalwart of out defensive success). Don't see it

- he was carrying an injury but then they wouldn't have played him in reserves so no

- wanted to trial o'riordan but he isn't a cog that replaces reg. The other cogs have all been trialled and we know what they offer strengths and weaknesses

- match ups didn't suit. Perhaps someone more experienced than me could comment. I will say though Reg hasn't been dropped for ages based on match ups. He is a strong contested mark. I doubt it then

That is what led me to the contract stalemate. They likely took for granted he would do what swans wanted- one year. But if you are at cusp of retirement and can squeeze out an extra year you would want to. There is also the talk of a Moore recruitment (who wants to play defence and understand that's where we see him), the prospect of Blakey (who Horse has suggested may be better in defence in long run) and the progression of Maibaum. Against that is the fact we've always played departing players on merit.

I don't know the answers but I suspect most likely is what I've outlined. If it is he will likely stay in reserves so we'll find out soon enough

 

[Kirkswan]

You cant know these conversations happened any more than others can know they did not.

Ted Richards spent a fair bit of time in the same System and he seemed shocked by the situation.

Whatever discussions happened they still publicly handled it poorly anyway which is the issue.

Well, actually, I think that's incorrect.

You mentioned that Teddy seemed shocked, but was he shocked by Reg being dropped, coming to the end of his career or the speculation. And how much of all that were his words and in context. I have read the article, but not listened to the interview, however I will this arvo.

Listen to Parkers' interview yesterday or the day before, he talks about the reviews being done as a team, and players not involved in the game (ie specifically McVeigh and by inference Grundy) having input. He also made mention of the senior blokes mentoring the youngsters. Both Harley and Horse have said that the contracts will be discussed with the players at the end of the year. The strength and involvement of AFLPA would mean that very little is able to be a one sided decision these days, without previous discussion. The world has changed and the days of players being tossed out aside once their usefulness has ceased are long gone.

I disagree that it has been managed poorly, it literally hasn't happened yet. So we'll see what they do at the end of the year...

 

[Kirkswan]

Teams of any code play to systems. Reserve grade players are exposed to those systems at training and in play so they can be cogs to replace an injured/ out of form player. You also have the interchange and 4 extra players so that a player can be exposed gradually to a system and cohesive unit through interchange use. Understand Reg being rested- he's 32. Dont understand at all being then left out for following game. It is incredibly destabilising to intentionally undermine your cohesive unit (in this case our defence) and there would need to be a very valuable reason. Possibilities are:

- they think his form isn't great (when most on BF think otherwise and Horse recently praised him as an an unrecognised stalwart of out defensive success). Don't see it

- he was carrying an injury but then they wouldn't have played him in reserves so no

- wanted to trial o'riordan but he isn't a cog that replaces reg. The other cogs have all been trialled and we know what they offer strengths and weaknesses

- match ups didn't suit. Perhaps someone more experienced than me could comment. I will say though Reg hasn't been dropped for ages based on match ups. He is a strong contested mark. I doubt it then

That is what led me to the contract stalemate. They likely took for granted he would do what swans wanted- one year. But if you are at cusp of retirement and can squeeze out an extra year you would want to. There is also the talk of a Moore recruitment (who wants to play defence and understand that's where we see him), the prospect of Blakey (who Horse has suggested may be better in defence in long run) and the progression of Maibaum. Against that is the fact we've always played departing players on merit.

I don't know the answers but I suspect most likely is what I've outlined. If it is he will likeky stay in reserves so we'll find out soon enough

Are you saying we should give Reg a two year contract on the basis that he has been a stalwart player for us? I wouldn't be doing so, one year at a time. And if he is leaving because he can get a two year contract elsewhere, why wouldn't he? Why would you think we took it for granted? There is nothing in our recent history to indicate this?

 

[The King!]

Well, actually, I think that's incorrect.

You mentioned that Teddy seemed shocked, but was he shocked by Reg being dropped, coming to the end of his career or the speculation. And how much of all that were his words and in context. I have read the article, but not listened to the interview, however I will this arvo.

Listen to Parkers' interview yesterday or the day before, he talks about the reviews being done as a team, and players not involved in the game (ie specifically McVeigh and by inference Grundy) having input. He also made mention of the senior blokes mentoring the youngsters. Both Harley and Horse have said that the contracts will be discussed with the players at the end of the year. The strength and involvement of AFLPA would mean that very little is able to be a one sided decision these days, without previous discussion. The world has changed and the days of players being tossed out aside once their usefulness has ceased are long gone.

I disagree that it has been managed poorly, it literally hasn't happened yet. So we'll see what they do at the end of the year...

It has

He was named all week- pulled out at the last minute for mysterious reasons
then not reselected

then only acknowledged when asked that he had things to work on

That to me is the poorly managed part

Just have the guts to drop him properly not sneak him to the reserves.

The Ted stuff was merely saying that people with better insight than you and I can have (unfortunately) felt shocked by the move, internal current players will simply sprout the company line imo so they mean nothing much to this.

 

[Kirkswan]

It has

He was named all week- pulled out at the last minute for mysterious reasons
then not reselected

then only acknowledged when asked that he had things to work on

That to me is the poorly managed part

Just have the guts to drop him properly not sneak him to the reserves.

The Ted stuff was merely saying that people with better insight than you and I can have (unfortunately) felt shocked by the move, internal current players will simply sprout the company line imo so they mean nothing much to this.

What is wrong with naming him all week and then not playing him? Lots of clubs do this and it usually for strategic reasons, that can be understood in hindsight for those not in the know.

You're assuming that they knew he wouldn't be selected the following week, but there's no evidence to support this. You're assuming that this was a fully hatched plan to deceive the supporters, and I can't figure out where this comes from? 'Just have the guts to drop him properly not sneak him to the reserves' is just nonsense. He was dropped properly, and then the following week he was named in the reserves.

I think that you can trust the insiders at the club. People like Buddy, Stevie J and Cox all wanted to come here, and they wouldn't have if there was underhand, 'sneaky' behaviour going on. I get that a lot of fans don't like Horse, but what has Harley ever done to be not trusted? As Director of Footy, he would be involved in all of this, surely?

 

[Jewelsbon]

Well all I can say about Reggie and his treatment at the moment is that there are more questions than answers, but a few hints to the answers of those questions will be revealed when the team is announced tonight I think.

 

[scaryness]

That is what led me to the contract stalemate. They likely took for granted he would do what swans wanted- one year. But if you are at cusp of retirement and can squeeze out an extra year you would want to. There is also the talk of a Moore recruitment (who wants to play defence and understand that's where we see him), the prospect of Blakey (who Horse has suggested may be better in defence in long run) and the progression of Maibaum. Against that is the fact we've always played departing players on merit.

Of course he did.

FFS

 

[The King!]

What is wrong with naming him all week and then not playing him? Lots of clubs do this and it usually for strategic reasons, that can be understood in hindsight for those not in the know.

You're assuming that they knew he wouldn't be selected the following week, but there's no evidence to support this. You're assuming that this was a fully hatched plan to deceive the supporters, and I can't figure out where this comes from? 'Just have the guts to drop him properly not sneak him to the reserves' is just nonsense. He was dropped properly, and then the following week he was named in the reserves.

I think that you can trust the insiders at the club. People like Buddy, Stevie J and Cox all wanted to come here, and they wouldn't have if there was underhand, 'sneaky' behaviour going on. I get that a lot of fans don't like Horse, but what has Harley ever done to be not trusted? As Director of Footy, he would be involved in all of this, surely?

Im not suggesting they deceived supporters, I do not think they give a * about supporters re selection and that is perfectly ok.

Its not nonsense though we will just have to agree to disagree, I think naming him and making him a late out looks pretty sus and the explanation for that was not poor form? then what changed all week, as he suddenly had things to work on (without playing a game after 250 plus high level games) it all looks suspicious. Then Aliir re signs? points to Reg being told he is done to me. I do not like that.

My guess is Reg would of played v North if the contract issue had not of come up.. im just throwing it out there you will say its nonsense, that perfectly fine.


Liking and disliking Horse has nothing to do with this issue in the slightest. What has Harley done not to be trusted? I dont know, what has he done to be trusted?

I think it was handled poorly for a player who didn't deserve to be dropped in the first place, I love the club but wont blindly say everything it does is wonderful, and they certainly play like a few have their noses out of joint over some issues (again speculation which you will say is rubbish)

I can also see where you are coming from, honestly I do, just disagree.

 

[skipper kelly]

My opinion is the club thought Reg wasn't needed last week as it was a walk in the park. Turned out it wasn't and the club got burnt.

If he is not back this week then my theory is wrong.

 

[The King!]

My opinion is the club thought Reg wasn't needed last week as it was a walk in the park. Turned out it wasn't and the club got burnt.

If he is not back this week then my theory is wrong.

But then why play him in the Neafl ?

 

[skipper kelly]

But then why play him in the Neafl ?

To give him a game. Whoever we picked was going to beat GC, wasn't it. The club obviously thought so.

It's only my theory anyway.

 

[The King!]

To give him a game. Whoever we picked was going to beat GC, wasn't it. The club obviously thought so.

It's only my theory anyway.

Could be plausible, may well be correct

V Norf- genuine late out thinking nah not needed
V Suns- lets not worry but give him a run
v Essendon- bring back as he is best 22

Then the issue of course is the club being arrogant

 

[skipper kelly]

Could be plausible, may well be correct

V Norf- genuine late out thinking nah not needed
V Suns- lets not worry but give him a run
v Essendon- bring back as he is best 22

Then the issue of course is the club being arrogant

Absolutely. Longmire called it not ready emotionally. I call it something else. A bit harsher word than you used.

 

[TheMase]

Of course he did.

FFS

I haven’t seen these comments by Horse personally. Be interested in the article.

 

[The King!]

Absolutely. Longmire called it not ready emotionally. I call it something else. A bit harsher word than you used.

Not ready emotionally sounded like something from a marriage counselling session

 

[Angry Red Bull]

I haven’t seen these comments by Horse personally. Be interested in the article.

Don't think it was an article but rather a conversation cited between Blakey snr and Horse about his best position either on Blakey thread or the draft thread.......and no I'm not going to try and find it to identify who made the quote.

 

[Kirkswan]

Im not suggesting they deceived supporters, I do not think they give a **** about supporters re selection and that is perfectly ok.

Its not nonsense though we will just have to agree to disagree, I think naming him and making him a late out looks pretty sus and the explanation for that was not poor form? then what changed all week, as he suddenly had things to work on (without playing a game after 250 plus high level games) it all looks suspicious. Then Aliir re signs? points to Reg being told he is done to me. I do not like that.

My guess is Reg would of played v North if the contract issue had not of come up.. im just throwing it out there you will say its nonsense, that perfectly fine.


Liking and disliking Horse has nothing to do with this issue in the slightest. What has Harley done not to be trusted? I dont know, what has he done to be trusted?

I think it was handled poorly for a player who didn't deserve to be dropped in the first place, I love the club but wont blindly say everything it does is wonderful, and they certainly play like a few have their noses out of joint over some issues (again speculation which you will say is rubbish)

I can also see where you are coming from, honestly I do, just disagree.

I agree we will have to agree to disagree, and I too love the club, but not to the point of blindly agreeing with everything it does or thinking it never makes mistakes. Last week clearly proves that they do...

 

[MC Bad Genius]

Surely he gets named this week, right? Surely?

 

[The King!]

I agree we will have to agree to disagree, and I too love the club, but not to the point of blindly agreeing with everything it does or thinking it never makes mistakes. Last week clearly proves that they do...

Sorry mate didnt mean to imply you did follow it blindly (if you took it that way)