Jarrad Grant - was he ever a chance as a KPP?

[Scorlibo]

So I was thinking the other day when looking at Grant running along the wing delivering to Stringer inside 50 at Williamstown - 'why isn't Grant playing inside 50 like Stringer?'. I mean, we drafted the guy as a key position forward, he played all his junior footy as a KPF, why isn't he being played as a KPF? So I've done some research into his 50 games of footy and where he's been named each game. I couldn't find data on one game, but of the other 49:

He was named at...
FP - 29 times.
Interchange - 13 times.
HFF - 5 times.
CHF - 1 time.
FF - 1 time.

I know where a player is named on the field doesn't directly correlate with what their instructions are on game day, but still, I find these numbers damning for the coaching staff and our development of younger players.

When Grant was drafted there was so much hype around him stating that he wanted to be the focal point of the forward line. His primary strength was marking and contested marking. In 50 games he's been named just ONCE as the full-forward, apart from anything else this must be detrimental to his confidence, and he seems like a confidence player. Even at Williamstown he seems to be named as a FP or HFF most games. Why has this happened?

[LostDoggy]

I backed him to win the Coleman last year...not sure what I was thinking :)

In a perfect world, totally cleared out forward line, one on one now I'd like to see that...but the world just isn't that easy.

[Sedat]

For our needs at the time and the stated objective of drafting for a future FF, he was a terrible choice by someone whose drafting history on talls is questionable at best. His height is slightly under par for a KPF but that's not the issue with him - it is the fact that he doesn't play like a KPF, and he never has either at this level or in the VFL. Add to the fact that he still remains slightly thinner than a preying mantis 5 years after being drafted, safe to say he won't ever be strong enough to compete one-on-one as a key forward. He'll obviously never be the stay at home key forward, but also as the quick and hard leading forward he's not tall enough or aerobically fit enough and will never get separation on the Toovey type of defenders that he would inevitably be matched up against. Just a very poor selection at the time based on the reasons he was drafted for.

None of this is to say that he doesn't have some good tricks, but I fear we won't be seeing these tricks at senior AFL level for us.

[Scorlibo]

His height is slightly under par for a KPF but that's not the issue with him - it is the fact that he doesn't play like a KPF, and he never has either at this level or in the VFL.

Because he's never been played as a key position player - that's the point. You only have to look at his TAC cup stats to recognise that he was a fine KPF when drafted. The 'not big and strong enough for AFL' calls will inevitably come because he's a different sort of player, but it's not like he used his strength and size at TAC cup level, he was just better in the air than his opponents and probably still is, but that's still not the role we're asking of him.

[Sedat]

Because he's never been played as a key position player - that's the point. You only have to look at his TAC cup stats to recognise that he was a fine KPF when drafted. The 'not big and strong enough for AFL' calls will inevitably come because he's a different sort of player, but it's not like he used his strength and size at TAC cup level, he was just better in the air than his opponents and probably still is, but that's still not the role we're asking of him.
I'd suggest he hasn't been allowed to play in this way once he started playing at senior level. At junior level, his lack of strength wouldn't have been exposed, which allowed him to take a lot of contested grabs against similarly sized opponents. In the VFL and AFL he simply doesn't have the core strength or the ability to separate from opponents who are stronger and just as quick.

[Cyberdoggie]

Grant is a bit of a Josh Hill type. Can look alright in a good side as the third or fourth option, but he's never going to be the main man.

[lemmon]

Its a good point you raise, I think the most telling stat would be how many times he's been used as a forward 50 target (the stat that demonstrates the reliance on guys like Fev and J Riewoldt in the past)...unfortunately its proving difficult to find

[Greystache]

Because he's never been played as a key position player - that's the point. You only have to look at his TAC cup stats to recognise that he was a fine KPF when drafted. The 'not big and strong enough for AFL' calls will inevitably come because he's a different sort of player, but it's not like he used his strength and size at TAC cup level, he was just better in the air than his opponents and probably still is, but that's still not the role we're asking of him.

How many times are you going to ignore people saying he HAS played full forward at VFL level, and with the way VFL level works he's on numerous occasions been the sole target up forward. He wasn't able to have any impact, simple. He wasn't strong enough to hold out opponents, he didn't work hard enough to provide multiple leads and be a leading target, and he eventually resorted to standing in the goal square calling for the long bomb which his physically stronger opponent usually just brushed him aside in the marking dual.

So I'll say again, he has been played at full forward.

Grant is a classic example of the skinny key forward who can carve up junior footy by having more talent than the average kids and not having his weaknesses exploited. When these types come up against opponents who are just as talented but physically more capable they really struggle to cope.

[Mofra]

KPP or not isn't the issue - it's the fact he never 'makes the play' at senior level, he's reactive.
It's one reason I see him primarily as a crumber - making opportunity after someone else was the target of an inside 50

[Hot_Doggies]

Question has to be asked, how has Grant's ball drop become so bad. It has never been perfect, but the top of the ball is at 1 o'clock approaching 2. This lead to shanks and poorly flighted kicks. He has daily professional coaching for 5yrs, staggering really.

[Bulldog4life]

Question has to be asked, how has Grant's ball drop become so bad. It has never been perfect, but the top of the ball is at 1 o'clock approaching 2. This lead to shanks and poorly flighted kicks. He has daily professional coaching for 5yrs, staggering really.

That is one of the many reasons why I like Jake Stringer. A forward who is a good kick for goal.

[bornadog]

KPP or not isn't the issue - it's the fact he never 'makes the play' at senior level, he's reactive.
It's one reason I see him primarily as a crumber - making opportunity after someone else was the target of an inside 50

This is how we should play him.

He has had two pretty good games at Willi the last two weeks. We know he has pace, and has kicked 30 plus at senior level. If he can keep the intensity up like he has been at VFL level, he will be promoted to the seniors.

[Nuggety Back Pocket]

How many times are you going to ignore people saying he HAS played full forward at VFL level, and with the way VFL level works he's on numerous occasions been the sole target up forward. He wasn't able to have any impact, simple. He wasn't strong enough to hold out opponents, he didn't work hard enough to provide multiple leads and be a leading target, and he eventually resorted to standing in the goal square calling for the long bomb which his physically stronger opponent usually just brushed him aside in the marking dual.

So I'll say again, he has been played at full forward.

Grant is a classic example of the skinny key forward who can carve up junior footy by having more talent than the average kids and not having his weaknesses exploited. When these types come up against opponents who are just as talented but physically more capable they really struggle to cope.

Grant was very lucky to survive the cut IMO at the end of last year. The same could be said of Veszpremi who I would hope can show us something against a strong Geelong defence. Whilst both players have performed well at Williamstown the past two weeks you would have to question the quality of the opposition given the huge margins in each game.

[Greystache]

Grant was very lucky to survive the cut IMO at the end of last year. The same could be said of Veszpremi who I would hope can show us something against a strong Geelong defence. Whilst both players have performed well at Williamstown the past two weeks you would have to question the quality of the opposition given the huge margins in each game.

The reality is he probably was, but he's the type of player clubs tend to hold onto longer in the hope they'll one day come good. Usually they don't, but they seem to tease that they will and that keeps clubs interested. A player with more obvious limitations like being short or slow who'd produced what Grant has the past 2 years would have probably been moved on.

[Cyberdoggie]

This is how we should play him.

He has had two pretty good games at Willi the last two weeks. We know he has pace, and has kicked 30 plus at senior level. If he can keep the intensity up like he has been at VFL level, he will be promoted to the seniors.

So he should be played as a small forward or in the position as one?

By that i mean he's not going to take the spot of the 2 key talls, so he's going to have to be counted as a small in the like of Dickson, Gia, Dahl or Higgins.

I think Grant could offer us something playing a more mobile role but he has to be able to offer more run and carry and maintain the defensive aspects. My doubt is that he doesn't seem to get involved in the game enough as Mofra said, more so when others play him in.

Ideally if they could play him further up the ground at Willy that would be a good experiement.

[Scorlibo]

How many times are you going to ignore people saying he HAS played full forward at VFL level, and with the way VFL level works he's on numerous occasions been the sole target up forward.

How many times? I wasn't aware that I'd ignored anyone. There's no need for that tone, Greystache. I don't get to see the VFL every week, so I'll have to take you on your word that he has been given ample opportunity there as a marking target. The game I watched two weekends ago suggested that he was being played predominantly up the ground, delivering to inside 50 targets.


He wasn't able to have any impact, simple. He wasn't strong enough to hold out opponents, he didn't work hard enough to provide multiple leads and be a leading target, and he eventually resorted to standing in the goal square calling for the long bomb which his physically stronger opponent usually just brushed him aside in the marking dual.

Sounds pretty much like Jones every week in the AFL. What young KPF doesn't have this occur?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTzC3IeNT_g

If you watch that video I think you'll understand the difference between Grant then and now. The difference isn't that he's weaker in the contest now, there's still evidence of that even in his highlights video. The difference is that then he had the license, it was his role, to fly for the football. He knew he was the target and it was his job to clunk it. This doesn't happen now, the amount of times I've seen him wait down for crumbs at AFL level is ridiculous.

[Greystache]

Sounds pretty much like Jones every week in the AFL. What young KPF doesn't have this occur?

The difference is when Jones goes back down to VFL level he tears them apart. He IS the target you're saying Grant should be. Grant may want to be, Jones is.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTzC3IeNT_g

If you watch that video I think you'll understand the difference between Grant then and now. The difference isn't that he's weaker in the contest now, there's still evidence of that even in his highlights video. The difference is that then he had the license, it was his role, to fly for the football. He knew he was the target and it was his job to clunk it. This doesn't happen now, the amount of times I've seen him wait down for crumbs at AFL level is ridiculous.

I've seen that video 100 times, kids playing kids.

Most of the kids in that video are probably playing D grade amateurs now. None of them are taller, stronger, or just as talented as Grant. The draft is littered with kids who couldn't step up to playing against evenly matched opponents.

[Scorlibo]

The difference is when Jones goes back down to VFL level he tears them apart. He IS the target you're saying Grant should be. Grant may want to be, Jones is.

I've seen that video 100 times, kids playing kids.

Most of the kids in that video are probably playing D grade amateurs now. None of them are taller, stronger, or just as talented as Grant. The draft is littered with kids who couldn't step up to playing against evenly matched opponents.

Using that logic you can't tell anything from a player's junior career.

Does Jones dominate VFL when he goes back there? I don't recall him receiving BOG or kicking massive bags. I would wager that Grant would clunk just as many and more grabs as Jones given the same opportunity. Saying that Jones IS the target is so premature. What has he done at AFL level realistically? He's been able to take some good grabs... on the wing! He's invariably disposed of the ball awkwardly, occasionally marked the ball inside 50 to everyone's (including his own) surprise, and, even more rare, kicked multiple goals. All this while knowing that so long as he keeps on 'trying' that his sub-10 disposal games will keep him holding down the most important position in our forward line. Grant has never even had a tiny sliver of this treatment and it's crap.

Sometimes it pays to accept responsibility for the failures of your own system, and that's what needs to be done at our club. First and easiest person to blame is the head recruiter, but the talent and confidence they come in with make up only half the story.

He's been named on a HFF for Williamstown.

[comrade]

KPP or not isn't the issue - it's the fact he never 'makes the play' at senior level, he's reactive.
It's one reason I see him primarily as a crumber - making opportunity after someone else was the target of an inside 50

Grant should look at Steve Milne as an example. To survive, he needs to buy in defensively and become that defensive, crumbing forward we desperately need. He doesn't need to be the main target, he doesn't need to kick big bags. If he can jag a few and lay multiple I50 tackles, he has done his job. He's more than fast and talented enough to fulfill this role. Is the attitude there?

Key forward is not his go.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Good discussion.

I think some valid points have been raised. I've been a fan of Grant's from the start, for mine he has more talent than most of our list but unfortunately I don't think his mental application is where it needs to be and for this reason alone, he's struggling to make an impact.

[lemmon]

Good discussion.

I think some valid points have been raised. I've been a fan of Grant's from the start, for mine he has more talent than most of our list but unfortunately I don't think his mental application is where it needs to be and for this reason alone, he's struggling to make an impact.

Wish he could lift his running capacity (which I'm sure isn't solely physical), look at what a weapon Justin Westhoff has become for Port

[jeemak]

As we saw with Hall in the side, and some other supporting dangerous players for the opposition to man up on Grant can be an effective forward, providing the ball can be moved forward with reasonable precision and pace.

I gave up on him being a KPF pretty much as soon as I saw him play. Like I've said in another thread, his go will be playing as a third or fourth target capable of stretching the taller third string tall forwards for pace, or the second string medium sized forward for height and leap.

He definitely has a future in the game, and will in my mind be a useful forward for a side with a more complete forward structure than what we currently have. I fear we won't persevere with him for two or so years longer to await the side to be competent enough to use the ball effectively going forward, which is a condition upon which he will thrive.

He's the only player we have on our list that's kicked six goals in a game at the highest level, or ten at the second highest level.

It's easy to look at his effort, and in some ways that's fair enough. Though when your team's not very good, it can be bloody difficult playing the role Grant does, with the body he has. There's not many footballers of his type in the game, let alone footballers of his type that are consistent week in, week out.

[Greystache]

Using that logic you can't tell anything from a player's junior career.

Does Jones dominate VFL when he goes back there? I don't recall him receiving BOG or kicking massive bags. I would wager that Grant would clunk just as many and more grabs as Jones given the same opportunity. Saying that Jones IS the target is so premature. What has he done at AFL level realistically? He's been able to take some good grabs... on the wing! He's invariably disposed of the ball awkwardly, occasionally marked the ball inside 50 to everyone's (including his own) surprise, and, even more rare, kicked multiple goals. All this while knowing that so long as he keeps on 'trying' that his sub-10 disposal games will keep him holding down the most important position in our forward line. Grant has never even had a tiny sliver of this treatment and it's crap.

Sometimes it pays to accept responsibility for the failures of your own system, and that's what needs to be done at our club. First and easiest person to blame is the head recruiter, but the talent and confidence they come in with make up only half the story.

He's been named on a HFF for Williamstown.

I've seen them both play at Williamstown numerous times, I've seen where they've played, and how they've performed. You've admitted you haven't. but still you contradict me and tell me what's really happened. You're not looking to discuss the issue, you're looking to tell everyone how it is.

All you're looking to hear is Grant is superstar full forward that's waiting to explode if only someone smart enough was around to give him a go, and you're basing this all on a YouTube video of highlights from under 18's and where his name appears on the team sheet.

For at least the 3rd time. Grant has been given extended runs at full forward and doesn't look even close to being able to play that role, I can't possibly make that any clearer, I simply can't. The coaching staff are playing him in other roles to try to help him have an AFL career, if they weren't doing that he'd be back playing local football by now.

[LostDoggy]

I've seen a few clips of Grant in the VFL. I've seen him play at AFL level. I wish he would be what we want him to be, but I personally have seen no improvement from him. Jones, on the other hand. I have seen a slight improvement in his game. In that he is contesting, making some good leads, his kicking has improved slightly.

[1eyedog]

I've seen a few clips of Grant in the VFL. I've seen him play at AFL level. I wish he would be what we want him to be, but I personally have seen no improvement from him. Jones, on the other hand. I have seen a slight improvement in his game. In that he is contesting, making some good leads, his kicking has improved slightly.

I have not seen any improvement from Jones, actually there's a pretty good basis for me to argue that he has regressed from my visual observations. His most important lesson at this stage of his career is positioning and he simply has not grasped this.

[SonofScray]

Against popular opinion I feel that Grant can play, he has goal sense and tends to get on the board in the game he plays. I'm not sure we value that ability enough, or we overlook it because his physical profile doesn't match the perception of a white knight KPF.

He's a weird cat. Very laconic. Surly. Not the sort of traits our club and the fans find endearing. We like hard nosed, workman like, honest players of varying ability. He is none of those. Yet, from what I observed last year he was working on a stronger defensive game and a more physically robust attack on the ball. Some weeks the stats reflected it, others the effort either waned or went unrewarded.

Id like to see him end up playing that forward pocket role in a similar vein to Milne at the Saints. Provided the work rate is up and there is a target making something happen he an mop up quite well.

[Scorlibo]

I've seen them both play at Williamstown numerous times, I've seen where they've played, and how they've performed. You've admitted you haven't. but still you contradict me and tell me what's really happened. You're not looking to discuss the issue, you're looking to tell everyone how it is.

Greystache, just because my opinion contrasts with yours doesn't mean I'm not discussing the issue. You were the one who took the aggressive tone to start with and tried to shoot down the thread.

I don't have to have been at the game to know that:

- In the 4 times I could find Grant's name in the VFL teams in 2012 he was named at CHF, HFF, FP and HBF.
- This year he's been named on the HFF twice and on the bench once.
- He played the majority of the 2010 and 2011 seasons in the AFL, I've already given the stats for team names with his AFL career.
- Which leaves 2008 and 2009 as the years you must be referring to when he had ample opportunity to prove himself as the full forward! His first two years! Unless by 'extended runs at full forward' you mean that he was given a run there for a quarter every so often?

If we compare Jones to Grant at AFL level last year:

Jones played 12 games as a key forward. Grant played 13 games predominantly coming off the bench, occasionally being named as the sub.

Disposals: Jones 9.0, Grant 13.2
Marks: Jones 3.4, Grant 4.4
Goals: Jones 0.8, Grant 0.9
Tackles: Jones 1.6, Grant 2.5
Disposal Efficiency: Jones 58.9%, Grant 73.5%
Marks inside 50: Jones 1.0, Grant 0.8

If we compare their best years (Jones' 2011, Grant's 2010):

D: 9.8 vs 13.5
M: 4.8 vs 5.4
G: 1.0 vs 1.4
T: 1.9 vs 2.4
%: 60.2 vs 75.6
Mi50: 1.4 vs 1.6

The numbers speak for themselves - Grant has done more as a key target (still not much, admittedly), despite not being played as a key target.


All you're looking to hear is Grant is superstar full forward that's waiting to explode if only someone smart enough was around to give him a go, and you're basing this all on a YouTube video of highlights from under 18's and where his name appears on the team sheet.

No, I'm suggesting that Grant is now very, very unlikely to be anything, and I'm suggesting it's the fault of the club for not properly facilitating his development in the specialist position he was drafted for.


For at least the 3rd time. Grant has been given extended runs at full forward and doesn't look even close to being able to play that role, I can't possibly make that any clearer, I simply can't. The coaching staff are playing him in other roles to try to help him have an AFL career, if they weren't doing that he'd be back playing local football by now.

You tell me that I'm not discussing the issue and then come out with this? This is your opinion, Greystache, it's not fact - what I'm providing you with are facts, the fact that he has barely been named at FF in four years, the fact that in important key forward stats, he has outperformed Jones, despite not having played as a key forward. You can't expect everyone to bow down to you because you keep on bleating the same line.

[Greystache]

I don't have to have been at the game to know that:

- In the 4 times I could find Grant's name in the VFL teams in 2012 he was named at CHF, HFF, FP and HBF.
- This year he's been named on the HFF twice and on the bench once.

Honestly if you're basing everything you believe on where a player is named on a team sheet I can't be bothered spending any more time on this.

[westbulldog]

Grant has ability but perpetually looks disinterested a la Josh Hill. Trade.

[Scorlibo]

Honestly if you're basing everything you believe on where a player is named on a team sheet I can't be bothered spending any more time on this.

You honestly don't think that's important? Do you think Jack Riewoldt or Tom Hawkins became great AFL forwards because they were told by the coach, "we're going to play you on a HFF, but don't worry you'll get a run through FF/CHF at some point"? You have to show some faith and tell a player that the position's his.

FACT: Grant has been named once at full-forward in 50 outings for the bulldogs. I have seen every one of these matches. That's an accurate account of his time at FF, and an accurate account of the faith we've shown in him as a FF.

FACT: Since becoming a regular in the AFL side, when he's played VFL, he's been named elsewhere also.

I can't comment on whether or not he's been played at FF within games, I'll take you on your word that he has, but clearly not as much and with not as much preference as whichever bloke's been actually named as the FF! :rolleyes:

[bornadog]

Against popular opinion I feel that Grant can play, he has goal sense and tends to get on the board in the game he plays. I'm not sure we value that ability enough, or we overlook it because his physical profile doesn't match the perception of a white knight KPF.

He's a weird cat. Very laconic. Surly. Not the sort of traits our club and the fans find endearing. We like hard nosed, workman like, honest players of varying ability. He is none of those. Yet, from what I observed last year he was working on a stronger defensive game and a more physically robust attack on the ball. Some weeks the stats reflected it, others the effort either waned or went unrewarded.

Id like to see him end up playing that forward pocket role in a similar vein to Milne at the Saints. Provided the work rate is up and there is a target making something happen he an mop up quite well.

I am with you on this, he isnot a KP player. He has showed us he can play football, he just needs to concentrate for 4 quarters and get involved.

[wimberga]

Whilst Grant does have the talent to be a player for us and we can argue his opportunities all day or all night, the fact is that if he is buying into BMac's mantra, we will find a spot for him. If he isn't, I fear this could be his last year with us.

The fact he has still not got a look in so far this year given our injuries to the forward line suggests that its more than what he is doing on the field. I'm trying to not make any character assumptions on Grant as I have never met nor had any experience with him. What I will say is that I am a firm believer that the culture and beliefs Macca is putting in place will make us a better team, but to be part of that on game day, you have to be part of it every other day too.

[ratsmac]

To me I haven't seen too much from Grant demanding to be a kp player. If that is the position he wants to play, he should play like he is in that position from the pocket. The way teams structure up these days, they virtually start down the spine anyhow.
With the comparison with Grant and Jones, since the departure of Barry Hall Jones has taken the oppositions best defender. This is something that Grant is definitely not up to. If he were, he would of been beating lesser defenders by now. Jones can at least make a contest in a 1 on 1.
Grant is clearly not a KPP imo, but he can be a useful third tall. Until Grant can bring consistency to his game he will be consistently overlooked I'm afraid. Macca likes a certain type of player and body shape and I think Grant doesn't fit the bill.
I'd love to see Grant come on as a quality AFL player, but his time is running out. It's the games where he goes completely missing is why is is still at VFL level.
It's good to see he still has support behind him though.

[LostDoggy]

Jones looking good so far tonight ;)

[1eyedog]

Jones looking good so far tonight ;)

Really? Flashy yes, good marking yes but his style of play is unsustainable. Sorry but I know most will disagree with me but he will do what he did last night 2-3 times a year, the rest of the time it simply will not work to try to take speccies all night. He needs to lead and position, he used his talent last night to clunk those marks but he has a lot to learn still about how to play a true forwards role before I'm convinced.

[LostDoggy]

Really? Flashy yes, good marking yes but his style of play is unsustainable. Sorry but I know most will disagree with me but he will do what he did last night 2-3 times a year, the rest of the time it simply will not work to try to take speccies all night. He needs to lead and position, he used his talent last night to clunk those marks but he has a lot to learn still about how to play a true forwards role before I'm convinced.

Your joking? Only thing he needed to improve on last night was his tank.

[FrediKanoute]

I think the Grant situation is symptomatic of the way we have failed to develop players.

The guy has talent - good mark, pace and a pretty decent football brain. His application has been an issue from the start.....remember the Stingray?

I think also that there is a place for him in the team. He offers more I think than Cordy does (and I rate Cordy)as a forward. With Jones beginning to emerge, Murphy playing forward, I would sooner a guy like Grant in the forward line because he is genuinely difficult to match up.

People forget he has played 50 senior games and a fair few of them have been pretty good. He needs to be playing more though and I think that he wont be with us much longer. Shame.

[whythelongface]

I have not seen any improvement from Jones, actually there's a pretty good basis for me to argue that he has regressed from my visual observations. His most important lesson at this stage of his career is positioning and he simply has not grasped this.

I think that Jones has improved significantly this year. The mere fact that he has bagged two lots of four goal games is an improvement in itself, however there are many areas that I believe Jones has improved in, these being:

- forward pressure when he doesn't have the ball;
- his groundwork an example was on Saturday night where he had three Geelong players near the boundary line and managed to force the ball out for a throw in;
- he is starting to lead more towards the ball carrier.

Granted he still has plenty of improvement left in him in particular reading the flight of the ball, however I believe he has improved significantly already this year.

[Mofra]

I think also that there is a place for him in the team. He offers more I think than Cordy does (and I rate Cordy)as a forward. With Jones beginning to emerge, Murphy playing forward, I would sooner a guy like Grant in the forward line because he is genuinely difficult to match up.
TBH I prefer Cordy, simply because Ayce can impact a contest when he doesn't get a possession (which he often does.

Cordy is cake (well, lets be honest - he's batter and has a good 20-30 games before he's really going be an AFL player) but Grant is icing. Cordy allows Roughy to stay at FB and I believe he will make it as an R2 in time. Grant is at the crossroads at Willy.

Interesting that Vez gets so much heat for his lack of tank yet Grant's tank rarely rates a mention.

[EasternWest]

Interesting that Vez gets so much heat for his lack of tank yet Grant's tank rarely rates a mention.

I'm not sure that's true. I recall his lack of conditioning being mentioned quite a bit. The difference is that Vez's fitness is appalling for an AFL player.

My own personal opinion is that Grant gets some lenience because he has shown that he can play, whereas Vez, despite obvious talent, has shown nothing.