Im normally a Watts fan but i did cringe at some of his efforts today especially when we needed him to stand up in one on one marking contests.

Dawes is absolutely filthy on himself on the official website:

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/video/2014-04-20/rd-5-chris-dawes-interview

Says he blew a lot of his chances.

Good to hear he was filthy on himself and so he should be.

They were very afl standard goals that should have been kick.

Hopefully he will make up for it next wk against the swans and kick a bag.

Interesting that Roos says he regrets subbing Tyson off. Any guesses who he probably wishes he'd subbed instead.

Could also tell read between the lines and tell he was unimpressed with the umpiring, especially the ridiculous Ablett free kick. That one stings. As Roosy says, he's a good enough player without being gifted free kicks inside 50 that would be ignored for 99% of other players.

I suggest we remove Watts from the banner at the top of the page.

l suggest you go and have a long hard look at yourself as a supporter, there were many more today who did probably worse than that

Good to hear he was filthy on himself and so he should be.

They were very afl standard goals that should have been kick.

Hopefully he will make up for it next wk against the swans and kick a bag.

He'd look like a right royal goose if he wasn't, given the way he sprayed JKH for that freak goal he did score last week.

I'm sure champion data would offer an "effective" tackle count somewhere in there vast array Titan. This is the number we really need to see.Agree, laying no tackles is a pretty damning stat regardless though.

43 in total this week vs 84 last week. Horrible result and about 23 below the league average and about the same below our own too!

No way you will win many games with those numbers. Turnovers are a massive part of scoring now, especially turnovers through the middle and back half. And if you're tackling is down almost 50% then you're really relying on your opponent to make a hec of alot of unforced errors. Good luck with that.

Most of our backline play was like watching scared rabbits in the headlights in that first half as well. The lack of risk taking, run and carry and quick ball movement by foot through traffic in that back half was a massive step backwards this week for mine and part of why we lost the match today.

As to why Dunny kept on persisting with the outlet or down the line kick to the right hand pocket or flank i'm at a loss. The number of times i saw Dawes 1 on 1 against Warnock in the middle of the ground and Dunn just ignored going there. Probably under team instruction, but hey, rules were meant to be broken at times. It was an obvious change up for mine and Dunn just refused to even consider it. We were way too predictable and only when the game was lost did Dunn finally decide to take a risk and roost a torp down the middle, which if my memory serves me well, may have resulted in a last minute goal lol. Alas too little....too late. If something isn't working over and over and the ball just keeps coming back, why the hec do we keep persisting with it? I'm not sure who the designated kicker should be. The highest effective disposal players in the back half are presently Pedo (when he's not playing forward...and i wouldn't play him forward) and Jetta who's just come back in and still finding his feet at AFL level.

Agreed - it's good to see people acknowledging that Watts was not the only disappointment today.

The 'effective tackle' thing is interesting - I vaguely recall reading Champion Data's definition of a tackle and I believe it involves something along the lines of an act which either earns you a free for holding the ball or stops a player from disposing of the ball effectively, or something like that. As in, I believe if the player you're tackling still kicks or handballs it, it won't count as a tackle. I might be wrong on that, but in essence I think the stat already is 'effective tackles'. What we could use, though, is a comparison between 'tackles' and 'tackle attempts': the amount of times we try to tackle but they slip through our attempts is too high.

The team count was far too low today - that's in part due to the players I've mentioned recording zero tackles, but it's also due to our positioning in stoppages and their ability to use pace to evade us. Carlton was good at neither of those last week. We can't expect our opponents to make it easy for us.

Agree on the backline - McDonald wasn't as confident to take the game on, possibly because he was being beaten more often in marking contests than he's used to.

Dunn's kicking out is incredibly frustrating, as is the team's in general. We've had these problems since Bailey, maybe even Daniher. Our 'plan' has always been to kick long to a contest on the boundary line. It's awful.

Interesting that Roos says he regrets subbing Tyson off. Any guesses who he probably wishes he'd subbed instead.

Could also tell read between the lines and tell he was unimpressed with the umpiring, especially the ridiculous Ablett free kick. That one stings. As Roosy says, he's a good enough player without being gifted free kicks inside 50 that would be ignored for 99% of other players.

That was a huge mistake.

Even though I'm sure you are referring to Watts, I'd have gone with Jetta. Regardless, I'd also have gone with Watts before Tyson. Subbing Dom off did not help us.

A few posts here have said Viney got 0 tackles today yet this example seems to contradict that?

Which brings me back to a thought I had earlier this week.

We generally accept the statistics presented on the web and in the paper etc to be a true account of what happened.

But who is to say that some stats (if not many) are not mistakenly attributed or missed completely by the statisticians.

I'm sure it's not a huge margin of error but this Viney example may be one of many.

mate, when he has the footy he is generally awesome.

Which goes back to my original comment. When he is left alone he is a very damaging footballer. The problem is when isn't left alone.

DID YOU ACTUALLY WATCH THE GAME TODAY??

WATTS WAS F U C K I N G HOPELESS!

SOFT!

WHY DO WE GET THESE WANKERS WHO WANT TO STICK UP FOR HIM.

IF I PLAYED LIKE THAT I WOULD FEEL LIKE I LET THE TEAM DOWN.

DID YOU READ WHAT I SAID IN MY POST?? IT IS CLEAR THAT YOU DIDN'T!!!!

DO YOU KNOW THAT TYPING IN CAPS ALL THE TIME IS REALLY ANNOYING AND MORE DIFFICULT TO READ?? IT ALSO MEANS THAT PEOPLE WON'T PAY AS MUCH ATTENTION TO WHAT YOU SAY, DESPITE YOU THINKING THE OPPOSITE!!

For the first time in a long time, we're starting to control the tempo of the game. Did it virtually all match last week and for the second half today.

Still lack the polish, the confidence and some players (injuries and list improvements) to capitalise on it, but it's 150 per cent better than the footy we served up last year.

On a different track, I wonder if when we get back Garland, we can drop McKenzie and get Jack Grimes to play his stoppage role?

Grimes seems to always take a tall(er) forward, and struggles.

I believe he may do better than Jordie in that role and win some footy of his own.

We need Nathan to play positive not negative football, and I get itchy all over watching McKenzie.

I don't know if it has been mentioned here before, but after a final quarter Melbourne goal (can't recall which one and I certainly won't be watching the replay to find out), both Nathan Jones and Jack Viney came from the field for a breather. This worried me, and my fears were realised with a Gold Coast goal immediately after. They are never both allowed to be off the field at the same time again.

Which goes back to my original comment. When he is left alone he is a very damaging footballer. The problem is when isn't left alone.

But it is footy, generally you aren't going to be left alone all the time. We can't wait for Watts to be left alone every now and then in a game to be good. He needs to learn how to play competitively in a contest.

It's undoubtedly the case that there are a stack of MFC supporters who can't stand Watts, even when he plays well.

Today he was abysmal and deserves criticism, but not in a vacuum. He was not the only player today to play poorly. He is copping an almighty serve from most of us, which mostly is warranted, but if people want to slam Watts, they should also consider looking at the others in our side who aren't playing well.

There's a difference between not playing well and embarrassing the jumper. Today the efforts he put in disgraced the jumper he wore. To get outbustled by a guy 20cm shorter in a marking contest, firstly losing front position and secondly losing the contest is inexcusable. That was just one example. The fact is he just doesn't put in enough effort and it doesn't even come down to putting his body on the line. It's just the way he attacks the footy with half hearted limp wristedness like he is having a kick in the park which drives me insane. You can't help it if you're not as skilled or talented as others but you can help not having the workrate and intensity any the contest. Imagine if Watts had just half the will of Nick Riewoldt who busts his guts until he spews.

Which goes back to my original comment. When he is left alone he is a very damaging footballer. The problem is when isn't left alone.

DID YOU READ WHAT I SAID IN MY POST?? IT IS CLEAR THAT YOU DIDN'T!!!!

DO YOU KNOW THAT TYPING IN CAPS ALL THE TIME IS REALLY ANNOYING AND MORE DIFFICULT TO READ?? IT ALSO MEANS THAT PEOPLE WON'T PAY AS MUCH ATTENTION TO WHAT YOU SAY, DESPITE YOU THINKING THE OPPOSITE!!

So when we play against a quality midfield who tackle hard and man up properly, are you saying that is an excuse for Watts to have a bad game.

But it is footy, generally you aren't going to be left alone all the time. We can't wait for Watts to be left alone every now and then in a game to be good. He needs to learn how to play competitively in a contest.

He was disgraceful today and the sooner he realises that performances like that give our club a reputation of being 'bruise free' the better.

So when we play against a quality midfield who tackle hard and man up properly, are you saying that is an excuse for Watts to have a bad game.

It feels appropriate at Easter.

There's a difference between not playing well and embarrassing the jumper. Today the efforts he put in disgraced the jumper he wore. To get outbustled by a guy 20cm shorter in a marking contest, firstly losing front position and secondly losing the contest is inexcusable. That was just one example. The fact is he just doesn't put in enough effort and it doesn't even come down to putting his body on the line. It's just the way he attacks the footy with half hearted limp wristedness like he is having a kick in the park which drives me insane. You can't help it if you're not as skilled or talented as others but you can help not having the workrate and intensity any the contest. Imagine if Watts had just half the will of Nick Riewoldt who busts his guts until he spews.

Yes Dr.Gonzo, he will never be a leader like Nick Riewoldt, he doesn't have the balls...yet.

Oh a new Jack Watts thread, let's see what people are talking about...

*reads posts*

Oh…ohh….ohhhh…

It feels appropriate at Easter.

Well why are you sticking up for him? He played like [censored].

That was a huge mistake.

Even though I'm sure you are referring to Watts, I'd have gone with Jetta. Regardless, I'd also have gone with Watts before Tyson. Subbing Dom off did not help us.

It probably was, I'm a big Tyson fan and was disappointed to see him subbed off today. I do understand the reasoning, he has been remarkable after coming off a couple of injury plagued seasons and for a kid who hasn't yet played 20 games. When Jones does a tagging job the opposition now tag Tyson, they are putting serious time into him. Interesting that Roos didn't start him on the ground today either.

Well why are you sticking up for him? He played like [censored].

Am I sticking up for his game today?

Jack was pathetic today

Watts didn't have the ball and was not given a free of course, he was off balance also

That was a huge mistake.

Even though I'm sure you are referring to Watts, I'd have gone with Jetta. Regardless, I'd also have gone with Watts before Tyson. Subbing Dom off did not help us.

Jetta would have been smart. Watts would have been making a statement.

He made a lot of comments alluding to the fact that turnovers don't bother him as much as players who just don't put in the effort. I'm getting a better understanding of Roos' ethos and decisionmaking every week. He persists with Terlich because, despite the shonky turnovers, there's always effort.

I've been saying the same thing about our list. I'd rather have a team of less skilled but harder working players, than one filled with skilled players that amble around with their head in the clouds. Terlich and Pederson still get games based on that mantra.

Oh a new Jack Watts thread, let's see what people are talking about...

*reads posts*

Oh…ohh….ohhhh…

ahahah i admit, i am leading the hypocritical charge today on it, but what i saw today just made me sad.

i'm slightly drunk, sad that we could have won but didn't, and just sad that i don't think i can defend the boy mentioned above anymore.

But tomorrow is a new day, and i'll probably "believe" in Watts again.