Before deciding what to do with Watts the question which need to be asked is this: What, if anything, is going to make him a better player? We all know it's about his hardness and willingness to take on the contest, but where is he going to learn it? I don't see how he improves these aspects of his game by playing at Casey. The slower pace of the game will allow him to get away with the style of play he brings to the seniors, so I can't see him getting better. On the other hand, he seems to be making extraordinarily slow progress in the seniors. It seems to me he needs a "hardness coach". We may have one - that might be exactly what Brett Allison and Brad Miller are doing - but, so far, it's not showing results.

Personally, I'd leave him in the seniors and have him in the middle every time Cross is there.

As to the other players, I see no reason to play Byrnes. There's no future benefit and he adds nothing now. I thought Jetta was again poor. Bail seemed poor, but he's got some credits in the bank for earlier performances this year.

So, perhaps it's time for Byrnes to be retired to play the remainder of the year at Casey and Jetta to go back. Perhaps Garland, Riley or Clisby could come in.

No, best 22.

If there is a player at Casey better than Byrnes, that can play his role and is in better form - absolutely.

Otherwise, Byrnes can keep his spot and the players at Casey can continue to learn the right habits and earn their spot.

No, best 22.

If there is a player at Casey better than Byrnes, that can play his role and is in better form - absolutely.

Otherwise, Byrnes can keep his spot and the players at Casey can continue to learn the right habits and earn their spot.

Or continue to stagnate and await delisting at the end of the season.

Edited April 27, 201411 yr by Django

No, best 22.

If there is a player at Casey better than Byrnes, that can play his role and is in better form - absolutely.

Otherwise, Byrnes can keep his spot and the players at Casey can continue to learn the right habits and earn their spot.

I would have thought JKH or Salem could play his role and another harder mildfielder - Riley, Kent or McKenzie - could come in for Byrnes

Putting work into the guys may be a better option .

Terlich- no kicking to 50/50 in the back half unless you are certain you can pull it off , if you choose to and dont your out.

Bail- Find the form you had to weeks ago against the blues. he had 8 tackles on the weekend.

Georgiou- keep it up work hard and hurt the opposition

Jetta- some good signs build on that

Byrnes- 4 tackles 1 goal 2 may save his skin but I would tell him he needs to have a bigger impact and its his last chance to prove himself in the ressies. Dropped.

Watts- A big heart to heart- discuss confidence work rate and aggression. Put together some footage of jacks efforts that we want him to use as a starting point and pump him up. work rate - kill .He plays again.Id use Hird as a reference point also.

Howe- Work rate defensive running . Confidence.

Out Byrnes

In Toumpas as sub

I'm a Watts lover, but bloody hell he is making it hard for me to continually defend him.

If he were to remain in the team this week, which I personnaly don't think he or Howe should, I would have him play 30-40% of the game in the ruck. He's got a leap, he's got height, he's got the smart "touch" where he can put the ball to the advantage of a teammate.

Will it open him up for potential injury? No, I don't believe so, and even if you do, what's the worst that can happen in a ruck contest that couldn't happen in any other contest around a ground?

Playing ruck demands physical contact, there's nowhere to hide, you have to hit bodies and wrestle, and most importantly for Jack, your body will get hit and you will be wrestled against.

If Cam Pederson can prove to be an effective 2nd ruck, then I'm sure Watts can. I know who I rate higher out of those two, although the gap is fast diminishing.

I would have thought JKH or Salem could play his role and another harder mildfielder - Riley, Kent or McKenzie - could come in for Byrnes

If there is a suitable, in-form replacement. Absolutely.

But remove him for the sake of removing him mirrors the sentiment that led us to having a generation of kids that never earned their spots and were gifted games.

Outs:

Terlich - can't fault his endeavour but the turnovers kill us

Ins:

Strauss/Clisby/Toumpas - 1 of these to either take Terlich's position down back or start as Sub and allow Salem to start the game

Terlich -too many turnovers and poor defensive efforts. I think he tires himself trying and is super hard at it but I've seen more than enough

In: Clisby

What exactly did Clisby or Strauss do on Sunday at Casey that justifies them replacing Terlich in Melbourne's backline?

Terlich had 3 'clangers' on Saturday night (behind Viney with 6 and equal with Pedersen, Dunn and Matt Jones, all with 3). However, overall he had 16 possessions, with a DE of 81.2% (ranked 3rd). He also had 8 marks (ranked 2nd) and 6 tackles (ranked 4th).

Supporters let 'clangers' cloud their judgement about players, probably because when they happen they are so prominent. The rest of the work he does, which is most of it, is very good and I doubt Roos will want him dropped, including for the example he sets.

What exactly did Clisby or Strauss do on Sunday at Casey that justifies them replacing Terlich in Melbourne's backline?

Terlich had 3 'clangers' on Saturday night (behind Viney with 6 and equal with Pedersen, Dunn and Matt Jones, all with 3). However, overall he had 16 possessions, with a DE of 81.2% (ranked 3rd). He also had 8 marks (ranked 2nd) and 6 tackles (ranked 4th).

Supporters let 'clangers' cloud their judgement about players, probably because when they happen they are so prominent. The rest of the work he does, which is most of it, is very good and I doubt Roos will want him dropped, including for the example he sets.

I think you are right, they are just so obvious that you cringe but it clouds a lot of his good work. If he gets dropped it won't be because of clangers it would be more likely defensive positioning. Roos didn't look happy about him letting McGlinn out for an easy...

As for his overall kicking, he is trusted with some of the kick in duties so the FD must rate him.

Why is everyone saying Georgiou will get rubbed out. Budgies fart with more impact than his strike on Buddy. What a joke!

I think it comes from a long history of following MFC.

It seems whenever the tribunal / MRP look for a scapegoat or someone on whom to make a new statement, it is one of ours. And after all, the "victim" was that fine upstanding example to all young aspiring players, indeed all young citizens, Buddy!

Trengove vs Dangefield was a classic example. Never before had there been a suspension let alone a citing for a sling tackle yet he gets, what, 3 weeks as I recall. Was lot Grinter vs Wallace the first video referred suspension? Allen Jakovich was the first and possibly only player suspended for wrestling.

We have been the whipping boy for far too long......that is why some here are worried.

Edited April 28, 201411 yr by monoccular

If there is a suitable, in-form replacement. Absolutely.

But remove him for the sake of removing him mirrors the sentiment that led us to having a generation of kids that never earned their spots and were gifted games.

...except...has Byrnes "earned" his games??

I'm a Watts lover, but bloody hell he is making it hard for me to continually defend him.

If he were to remain in the team this week, which I personnaly don't think he or Howe should, I would have him play 30-40% of the game in the ruck. He's got a leap, he's got height, he's got the smart "touch" where he can put the ball to the advantage of a teammate.

Will it open him up for potential injury? No, I don't believe so, and even if you do, what's the worst that can happen in a ruck contest that couldn't happen in any other contest around a ground?

Playing ruck demands physical contact, there's nowhere to hide, you have to hit bodies and wrestle, and most importantly for Jack, your body will get hit and you will be wrestled against.

If Cam Pederson can prove to be an effective 2nd ruck, then I'm sure Watts can. I know who I rate higher out of those two, although the gap is fast diminishing.

I too defend Watts.

His efforts of late are indefensible. If he is not injured, he needs to play at Casey. If he is injured he needs to be rested. Watts would be killed in the ruck, his strengths are as an outside player. You can't hide in the ruck, he would be pushed out of the way as he has virtually no strength below his waste and not a lot above either. Sam Jacobs would kill him. Gawn in Watts out.

Edit: As third man up he may be ok.

Edited April 28, 201411 yr by ManDee

What exactly did Clisby or Strauss do on Sunday at Casey that justifies them replacing Terlich in Melbourne's backline?

Terlich had 3 'clangers' on Saturday night (behind Viney with 6 and equal with Pedersen, Dunn and Matt Jones, all with 3). However, overall he had 16 possessions, with a DE of 81.2% (ranked 3rd). He also had 8 marks (ranked 2nd) and 6 tackles (ranked 4th).

Supporters let 'clangers' cloud their judgement about players, probably because when they happen they are so prominent. The rest of the work he does, which is most of it, is very good and I doubt Roos will want him dropped, including for the example he sets.

I'm ambivalent about Terlich. On the one hand he shows great courage and reasonable ball nous so he regularly gets to where the ball is. Once he has it in hand, though, it's a bit of a lottery as to what he'll do next. If he was a 19 year old in his second year I think we'd be happy with his progress. Perhaps we mark him harder because he's older.

However, I'm not convinced he plays tight enough to be a defender. I'd like to see him tried as an on-baller. He's got pace, his kicking is generally OK (apart from the occasional howler) and he has shown he knows where the goals are. Perhaps Clisby or Strauss can take his defensive spot and he could move up the ground and replace Byrnes (with JKH or Salem effectively moving to Byrnes role).

What exactly did Clisby or Strauss do on Sunday at Casey that justifies them replacing Terlich in Melbourne's backline?

Terlich had 3 'clangers' on Saturday night (behind Viney with 6 and equal with Pedersen, Dunn and Matt Jones, all with 3). However, overall he had 16 possessions, with a DE of 81.2% (ranked 3rd). He also had 8 marks (ranked 2nd) and 6 tackles (ranked 4th).

Supporters let 'clangers' cloud their judgement about players, probably because when they happen they are so prominent. The rest of the work he does, which is most of it, is very good and I doubt Roos will want him dropped, including for the example he sets.

My problem with Terlich is he is such a mixed bag - you get very good and very bad and his bad seems to be under relatively little pressure and therefore stands out like a sore thumb.

Firstly - he never has a quiet game. He is always involved. He has no problem finding the ball and his bravery cannot be questioned and thats a good thing. He is prepared to run and make an option which is another good thing . Some of his decision making and skill execution can be criticised

My other gripe is he seems sometimes to be standing too far off his player and he gets burned on the lead. I know that some of the delivery coming into opposition forwards would make it impossible for any back to defend but too many times he isn't even close to making a contest.

...except...has Byrnes "earned" his games??

He has a career of earning them to fall back on.

I take your point but if we were to say that only those that have earned a game play a game - we would be selecting 15 blokes every week.

I have always been doubtful of Terlich but he is growing on me - I don't think he should be dropped. As Roos said in the presser he is willing to put up with poor disposal if they show defensive effort.

Terlich is good because he has attacking flair - something Georgiou lacks.

Possible outs:

Georgiou - no attacking side to his game

He rarely gets beaten and is not there for his attacking ability. He is one who is not under threat as far as I am concerned a typical no fan fair get the job done Roos defender

What exactly did Clisby or Strauss do on Sunday at Casey that justifies them replacing Terlich in Melbourne's backline?

Terlich had 3 'clangers' on Saturday night (behind Viney with 6 and equal with Pedersen, Dunn and Matt Jones, all with 3). However, overall he had 16 possessions, with a DE of 81.2% (ranked 3rd). He also had 8 marks (ranked 2nd) and 6 tackles (ranked 4th).

Supporters let 'clangers' cloud their judgement about players, probably because when they happen they are so prominent. The rest of the work he does, which is most of it, is very good and I doubt Roos will want him dropped, including for the example he sets.

Read my entire post (which was posted about 10hrs before Casey played)and don't cut and paste in isolation, I have Garland coming in as another defender, as I also said can't fault Terlich's endeavour but his turnovers are hurting us. I believe we need to find someone who can set up play from the backline and IMO Clisby and Strauss are better than Terlich at doing that. Toumpas once he develops is also an option but think he needs to continue in the VFL for a while.

Frawley could provide some rebound from the backline as another option but is currently required up forward, it's all about opinions and throwing things around a bit

What exactly did Clisby or Strauss do on Sunday at Casey that justifies them replacing Terlich in Melbourne's backline?

Terlich had 3 'clangers' on Saturday night (behind Viney with 6 and equal with Pedersen, Dunn and Matt Jones, all with 3). However, overall he had 16 possessions, with a DE of 81.2% (ranked 3rd). He also had 8 marks (ranked 2nd) and 6 tackles (ranked 4th).

Supporters let 'clangers' cloud their judgement about players, probably because when they happen they are so prominent. The rest of the work he does, which is most of it, is very good and I doubt Roos will want him dropped, including for the example he sets.

Some good points and better stats than I was expecting. As others have said it is his defensive positioning which when compared to the likes of T Mac is poor. The clangers he makes also tend to be under no pressure whatsoever, and those are the ones that really hurt.

One way or another we need to set up with elite ball users off half back. It is a consistent theme with all the really good sides. This rubbish of kicking it out on the full under no pressure has to end. Not just talking about Terlich specifically.

What exactly did Clisby or Strauss do on Sunday at Casey that justifies them replacing Terlich in Melbourne's backline?

Terlich had 3 'clangers' on Saturday night (behind Viney with 6 and equal with Pedersen, Dunn and Matt Jones, all with 3). However, overall he had 16 possessions, with a DE of 81.2% (ranked 3rd). He also had 8 marks (ranked 2nd) and 6 tackles (ranked 4th).

Supporters let 'clangers' cloud their judgement about players, probably because when they happen they are so prominent. The rest of the work he does, which is most of it, is very good and I doubt Roos will want him dropped, including for the example he sets.

No, there are certain 'noisy' posters on here who bang on and on and on and on, till most believe what they are saying is true, it's and old effective way of communication, facts never come into their thinking, they decide Player A is a liability, and until they get everybody in agreement they continue to bang on and on

For Terlich being replaced, there is a question mark over Clisby defensive efforts if you read the comments from the previous two Casey games and Strauss played on a wing this weekend, yes Terlich makes mistakes but he is still young "AFL experience wise", doesn't matter what your age is, same with Pedersen, there is upside in both of them, they have the endeavour and workrate, the more games they play, the confidence will rise and with that the decision making

As for Watts, I am as horrified as anybody with his insipid effort on Saturday, but he is not the first and certainly won't be the last high draft pick who has taken a while to actually show at senior level what they showed as a junior, I would cite Brendon Goddard as the perfect example, try reading any St Kilda board for comments on him in his first five or six years, you will find echoes

I think after the Trengove and Toumpas example, you will probably find both Howe and Watts at Casey this week

I'll be surprised if Watts or Howe are dropped, and I'll be even more surprised if BOTH are dropped, but I certainly won't complain.

Out- Watts Bail Byrnes

In - Gawn Riley McKenzie

Having gone out to Casey Fields yesterday the only players who put up their hands were Gawn, McKenzie and to a lesser extent Riley. Garland and Kent would be a chance if fit.

Who replaces Watts and Howe? Certainly wouldn't be like for like.

Would be good to see Riley get a chance, similar to Jordie but with better disposal and greater vision.

Should make for an interesting selection this week anyway.

So typical - last week Goodes and this week Walker.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-04-28/tex-confident-of-afl-return

Hope he doesn't get up - we have the potential to gain some real momentum with the Crows, Dogs and Tigers.

Edited April 28, 201411 yr by Young Dee

I too defend Watts.

His efforts of late are indefensible. If he is not injured, he needs to play at Casey. If he is injured he needs to be rested. Watts would be killed in the ruck, his strengths are as an outside player. You can't hide in the ruck, he would be pushed out of the way as he has virtually no strength below his waste and not a lot above either. Sam Jacobs would kill him. Gawn in Watts out.

Edit: As third man up he may be ok.

For a start, he would rarely be against Jacobs. But even if he is, Watts should kill him around the ground and at ground level.

It's also not to put him in there to look at the win/loss column of the hitouts, it's getting him to compete in a contested situation. He he can compete, that's his main goal.

He's soft because we are soft on him.

Controversial to drop Chris Dawes?

Out: Dawes, Bail, Byrnes

In: Fitz, Kent, Blease

Can someone who has access to deep stats please tell me how many times the ball was kicked to Chris Dawes and how many times that resulted in a gain to Sydney? He demands the ball and then doesn't win it. Frawley should be the number one target till J Hogan is in. Pederson is far better at the moment as well. Time to try out another forward again, like Fitz.

Before anyone blathers on about Dawes' leadership and verbal abilities, just look at how many goals we scored. Time to restructure again and bring in goal kickers blease, kent and fitz.

No offence but I think you'd struggle to find one person who'd agree with dropping Dawes for Fitz.Dawesy is one of the first blokes I am picking atm and I'm pretty sure Roos would feel the same.

The delivery into the forward line on the weekend was poor, to say the least. Half the time it was around his knees.