I love these reviews. Constructive shows out the ones who aren't working hard enough.

Much better then the one liners Brian Royal use to pull out last year.

You hear so much sanitised stuff from coaches in public these days - that is vastly different to what the players are hearing behind closed doors.

I again get that SUPPORTERS love the review but again I will ask - what does the players get out of their performances being critiqued publicly ?

Players have either got it or not.

If they cannot handle constructive criticism considering where the MFC and Casey sit...the door is over there...

Well said Mark Neeld. This debate is not about handling constructive criticism - it is about putting such criticism into the public arena.

Contrast this to McCartney after he gave Macrae a spray - But he said on Wednesday that he would in future keep such criticism in-house. ''I was probably too honest,'' he said.

Once more I ask - We are trying to develop, improve and rectify bad habits of players - does PUBLICLY critiquing the players have a positive benefit for the player. If there is a benefit please let me know as I can't see it. ( I have been in business long enough and read enough to know that outside the football arena - criticism no matter how constructive is best handled one on one. ) Some players will just accept it but how about others with more fragile egos ( and unfortunately there are plenty of those) ?- This is a quote from Roos from early in the year - "One thing we don't know is how scarred the group is and how down on confidence they are, and how soon we can get that back up.". Does publicly criticising individual players have a benefit to the player ?

I think our player reviews are probably a result of feedback from supporters like us for years on end.

A response to mass reports of supporters being fed up with "spin."

I suspect that you are 100% right and it is entirely for our benefit and I like most others on this site have been interested in the insight and comments. However......

For many years I have been involved in people management and I only see downside in this approach from a players perspective and absolutely no benefit whatsoever.

There has been a middle ground suggested. Publish the stats and give a match report like Hawthorn does - Hawthorn pick out the players that have impressed and have put their name up for selection. We are intelligent people - if a players name is not mentioned we can put one and one together ( and call him a spud and ask for his immediate delisting)

I see 2 different issues here.

1. The honest reviews being made public.

I have no issue with this. I still think they are constructive.

And if you think they go too far, as I said earlier, it's probably an overcorrection (depending on perception) due to supporters complaining for years of being fed too much spin.

2. No player reviews being conducted with VFL players, only a small write-up on the club website.

I find this concerning in isolation, but would prefer more information.

I don't for one second believe that the coaches don't meet with players and discuss what they need to work on to improve.

They may not address the VFL match specifically, or individual moments within the match.

But is that necessary?

If the player has been repeatedly told what they need to work on, shouldn't that stand until told otherwise?

Maybe the coaches have taken the view that nothing has changed and there is no new feedback to provide at this time.

And maybe in that case, the problem is not with the coaching department, but the player themselves.

I'd suggest those complaining of not having their match reviewed are focusing on the wrong aspects and they have a mental hurdle to get over. It's clear that Roos is unconcerned with the scoreboard or a win, as that is the cumulative end result of consistently doing the right thing in each individual piece of play throughout the match. Don't focus on the result, just get the basics right, like you've been told to, and success will follow.

It sounds to me like these players are maybe looking for a pat on the back for showing some effort on gameday, when it should be a given.

I see 2 different issues here.

1. The honest reviews being made public.

I have no issue with this. I still think they are constructive.

And if you think they go too far, as I said earlier, it's probably an overcorrection (depending on perception) due to supporters complaining for years of being fed too much spin.

2. No player reviews being conducted with VFL players, only a small write-up on the club website.

I find this concerning in isolation, but would prefer more information.

I don't for one second believe that the coaches don't meet with players and discuss what they need to work on to improve.

They may not address the VFL match specifically, or individual moments within the match.

But is that necessary?

If the player has been repeatedly told what they need to work on, shouldn't that stand until told otherwise?

Maybe the coaches have taken the view that nothing has changed and there is no new feedback to provide at this time.

And maybe in that case, the problem is not with the coaching department, but the player themselves.

I'd suggest those complaining of not having their match reviewed are focusing on the wrong aspects and they have a mental hurdle to get over. It's clear that Roos is unconcerned with the scoreboard or a win, as that is the cumulative end result of consistently doing the right thing in each individual piece of play throughout the match. Don't focus on the result, just get the basics right, like you've been told to, and success will follow.

It sounds to me like these players are maybe looking for a pat on the back for showing some effort on gameday, when it should be a given.

I've addressed your first point to death so I will let that one go but the second point is interesting. I, like you, would prefer more information. Not for one minute would I suggest that a player would read a VFL report and think "wow - I did not know that !". I am also sure that Roos information on the VFL would come from more sources that just reading the report on the AFL website. I would also suggest that Allison/Millers reports would be more in depth and discussed in detail with Roos and the selection panel so they can make a more informed selection decision. I am hoping that there is no disconnect between the VFL panel and the coaches at the MFC but as previously said - I would like more information before damning.

Perhaps it is a case of the players in the VFL not getting direct one on one review with Roos or the senior coaches? I can't imagine for a minute that some of the development coaches aren't speaking with those players to discuss their game, but it might not be Roos or Stone.