Is there another sort jr?

Yes. There is.

Some respect, not some attention grabbing, finger pointing.

I'm going to preface this by saying I didn't watch the game and I've only seen snippets.

Watts is a cog in a machine, every player is a cog so if one is going in the wrong directing it will have flow on effects and hurt the team. I think Watts is going in the right direct but just slower than others. It's not excusing him from shirking contents but for me it means he's still an integral part of the team's future success.

He's put his hand up, before anybody criticised him, and apologised to his teammates. There are few that have played the game who can say they never shirked a contest, what's important is him response. Lucky for him he's got a team this week that he matches up well on. I think Jesse is building towards a big game and the Tigers could well be it, and this will be Dawes's third game for the year, perhaps third times the charm.

Minimal changes, settled team is good for moral.

In: Peders

Out: Frost (inj)

Yes, he did. You don't react that quickly unless you know what you are trying to do.

I have seen players in my own team know that they cannot 'win' a contest through a mark so they leave their body in, attempt to keep their feet and react quicker to effect the situation in their own way. I would have done the traditional attempt - smash in, and hope I don't get injured, give away a free and that my teammates are close by.

Watts is soft. Why haven't we gotten our heads around this?

We know this. Roos knows this and yet he still plays, and he still plays because footy allows all different types of players on that field and the way we continually expect more than we know Watts can deliver is a form of madness. Good footy teams have a balance of all different types of players and skill sets and Watts has AFL level ability with his skills, vision, forward IQ, and aerobic running ability.

And again, we are not talking about hypotheticals here - his 'soft display' led to a Hogan goal. He knew exactly what he was doing, which I think is what is so infuriating for some of us.

Haha so Watts is soft and you're ok with it?

The play might have worked but it relied heavily upon the Crows defender missing the contest. That's too much risk. His round 1 flick back on the goal line was footy smarts, this play wasn't.

Of course you need clever players who bring pace, skill and smarts to the game, just as you need players without perfect skills but with grunt who can win contested ball.

But the old rule is when it's your turn to go you have to go and that's the one Watts fails. When you've dropped 2 simple marks and haven't won any physical footy all day it's time to go even harder. I blame Watts and the coaches for never seemingly getting that message across to him. Bernie Vince had a bad game in round 2 and look how he played on the weekend. It's pretty simple stuff.

Yes, he did. You don't react that quickly unless you know what you are trying to do.

I have seen players in my own team know that they cannot 'win' a contest through a mark so they leave their body in, attempt to keep their feet and react quicker to effect the situation in their own way. I would have done the traditional attempt - smash in, and hope I don't get injured, give away a free and that my teammates are close by.

Watts is soft. Why haven't we gotten our heads around this?

We know this. Roos knows this and yet he still plays, and he still plays because footy allows all different types of players on that field and the way we continually expect more than we know Watts can deliver is a form of madness. Good footy teams have a balance of all different types of players and skill sets and Watts has AFL level ability with his skills, vision, forward IQ, and aerobic running ability.

And again, we are not talking about hypotheticals here - his 'soft display' led to a Hogan goal. He knew exactly what he was doing, which I think is what is so infuriating for some of us.

I'd like to believe that rpfc. I'm not 100% convinced, but it was either a very good piece of play or a very lucky one. Jack Watts is a Melbourne player, so I prefer to give him the benefit of the doubt ........... but if he played for another team, I'm not quite so sure.

Any hope for Watts would have long expired under most other coaches. Not under Roos. I admire Roos for backing his player despite the negativity. Despite the frustration, I think it's the right call. However, Jack's fortunes and his career at Melbourne will be determined by how the team plays. If the team starts winning games, Jack will be an important part of that success. The reverse will be the case if we continue to lose games.

Jack seems destined to carry the hopes and frustrations of the MFC fan base. If he played a ripper on friday, cutting the Tigers and being in our best in a win, but then fluffed an easy mark in a loss the following week... the same keyboard heros would be singling him out as the reason for all our woes.

Georgiou R.R. Martin, on 21 Apr 2015 - 11:35 AM, said:

Haha so Watts is soft and you're ok with it?

The play might have worked but it relied heavily upon the Crows defender missing the contest. That's too much risk. His round 1 flick back on the goal line was footy smarts, this play wasn't.

Of course you need clever players who bring pace, skill and smarts to the game, just as you need players without perfect skills but with grunt who can win contested ball.

But the old rule is when it's your turn to go you have to go and that's the one Watts fails. When you've dropped 2 simple marks and haven't won any physical footy all day it's time to go even harder. I blame Watts and the coaches for never seemingly getting that message across to him. Bernie Vince had a bad game in round 2 and look how he played on the weekend. It's pretty simple stuff. Just wondering George....Have you played the game in any form.......It is not simple by any means........You mention Bernie's game last week but not Dawes's....If it was so easy Dawes should have killed em last week......Just asking?

Yes, he did. You don't react that quickly unless you know what you are trying to do.

I have seen players in my own team know that they cannot 'win' a contest through a mark so they leave their body in, attempt to keep their feet and react quicker to effect the situation in their own way. I would have done the traditional attempt - smash in, and hope I don't get injured, give away a free and that my teammates are close by.

Watts is soft. Why haven't we gotten our heads around this?

We know this. Roos knows this and yet he still plays, and he still plays because footy allows all different types of players on that field and the way we continually expect more than we know Watts can deliver is a form of madness. Good footy teams have a balance of all different types of players and skill sets and Watts has AFL level ability with his skills, vision, forward IQ, and aerobic running ability.

And again, we are not talking about hypotheticals here - his 'soft display' led to a Hogan goal. He knew exactly what he was doing, which I think is what is so infuriating for some of us.

well put. I am not sure what we are arguing about. Surely we all know Watts is soft by now? Thats not meant to be harsh - he is an outside skillful player and doesnt naturally go in hard to get the ball as his strengths are on the outside. IMO you can get away with a couple of these types of players once they deliver in other areas.

Watts will never be Hogan or Viney. just like youll never see Hogan or Viney do the sublime skillful stuff Watts does.

The line about "our best ball user and decisonmaker" has become a bit of a throwaway. It wasn't on display last week, and it wasn't on display the week before. He's a brilliant kick and decisonmaker, when he has time and space.

There has always been a little bit of hope winning out over reason. I'll be putting faith in Roos to make the right calls and he's backing the player in, as well as his own ability to get the best out of the player, which is great.

As much as I like Watts the person, the team will always come before any individual for me.

Just wondering George....Have you played the game in any form.......It is not simple by any means........You mention Bernie's game last week but not Dawes's....If it was so easy Dawes should have killed em last week......Just asking?

I was a pretty terrible local footballer. I find it hard to reliably hit targets kicking. Only rarely could I consistently take a good grab and I certainly didn't have any athletic gifts.

Effort and intensity is what I think should be easy for an AFL player. Vince showed some great tackling and anticipation skills that helped him do his job, but the main thing he brought was effort. Dawes might not have had a big impact on the game but he brought the ball to ground when required and chased and pressured.

Contested marks and contested ball winning are as much a skill or natural talent as any other part of the game. Hours and hours training wont turn Jordie McKenzie in to Joel Selwood or Chris Dawes in to Jono Brown.

Every time the ball is kicked to Dawes I don't know if he'll mark it but I know he'll fight for front position, attempt to mark, likely bring it to ground and then try and win it and get it out to a team mate. It often isn't pretty but I don't doubt his effort or willingness to put his body on the line. A kick to Watts seems to produce a moments of hesitation where you just don't know if he's going to give his all. Maybe he's not scared of being hurt but it's a mental thing of not having confidence in if he'll win it, or maybe he's planning on what he'll do with after he gets it and gets caught waiting. Either way it's a terrible trait that should've been corrected by now.

Yes. There is.

Some respect, not some attention grabbing, finger pointing.

Sorry jr I obviously I said it wrong

I meant is there any other sort of Media show?

Yes, Dunstall certainly strikes me as the headline seekng type. Come off it.

Dunstall was also quick to point out how talented he is, but lets himself down with some of his efforts.

Sometimes you just need to take it on the chin. Watts sounds like he has put his hand up and is keen to make amends so good on him.

Jack seems destined to carry the hopes and frustrations of the MFC fan base. If he played a ripper on friday, cutting the Tigers and being in our best in a win, but then fluffed an easy mark in a loss the following week... the same keyboard heros would be singling him out as the reason for all our woes.

Perfect summation, not only about Watts but also some of the KHs on here.

Everybody should give what Wayne Carey said on Talking Footy a listen

Yes, Dunstall certainly strikes me as the headline seekng type. Come off it.

Dunstall was also quick to point out how talented he is, but lets himself down with some of his efforts.

Sometimes you just need to take it on the chin. Watts sounds like he has put his hand up and is keen to make amends so good on him.

You mean like a lot of posters on here do when they are wrong P-man

Bit like me and Brayshaw, I thought he wasn't ready and he has proved me completely and utterly wrong, and it's great

Yes, Dunstall certainly strikes me as the headline seekng type. Come off it.

As an aside - I like Dunstall as a commentator - I think the call that he made a career on the Dermies Shirt tails is way off the mark.

(I also think he is the one commentator who actually has a bit of a soft spot for us)

As an aside - I like Dunstall as a commentator - I think the call that he made a career on the Dermies Shirt tails is way off the mark.

(I also think he is the one commentator who actually has a bit of a soft spot for us)

Nut, there is only one 'commentator' worth his salt and that is Cometti, who just commentates, the rest are too busy trying to show how knowledgeable they are about the game

As for special comments,Mathews, Carey, Ling and Richardson, the rest meh

Haha so Watts is soft and you're ok with it?

That's the elevator pitch...

BTW he shouldn't have dropped those two easy grabs and his attempt in the marking contest was a non-attempt - he needs to take those marks and disguise that non-attempt better. He also needs to lift his intensity around the contest.

But fix these areas and he is still not doing his job. He still will rely on others to get him the footy. But when he does get it - it is usually a sublime experience that unlocks defences and gets us moving forward (something we struggle with of late).

He is fearless with the footy, just not fearless to get it. Nearly every team at every level has these blokes. You can constantly push them to push their mindset but to harp endlessly about it is madness and maddening.

From the outside looking in - Roos does the former, and Neeld did the latter.

Nut, there is only one 'commentator' worth his salt and that is Cometti, who just commentates, the rest are too busy trying to show how knowledgeable they are about the game

Or even worse, reminiscing about their own past glories and connections.

All this talk about Watts.

He's Travis Johnstone 2.0: he's the kind of player you want in your team when your team's playing well. He gets the ball, hits a target, can kick a goal or two.

But when your team is struggling, he won't win the game for you, or stand out.

Dumping him would be silly, because whenever the team's on a role, he tends to be at the forefront. Yeah, that makes him a downhill skier, but he's still blasting down the mountain faster than the opposition.

He's a role player. People want him to be a superstar but he's not. He plays a role and that's it. And his role is particularly highlighted when we play well.

He's kind of like the icing on a cake, the "cherry on top".

He's going to be a real asset when this team plays finals. Reliable. Until then, he can only do so much. We need the true leaders to stand up. The guy isn't superman.

All this talk about Watts.

He's Travis Johnstone 2.0: he's the kind of player you want in your team when your team's playing well. He gets the ball, hits a target, can kick a goal or two.

But when your team is struggling, he won't win the game for you, or stand out.

Dumping him would be silly, because whenever the team's on a role, he tends to be at the forefront. Yeah, that makes him a downhill skier, but he's still blasting down the mountain faster than the opposition.

He's a role player. People want him to be a superstar but he's not. He plays a role and that's it. And his role is particularly highlighted when we play well.

He's kind of like the icing on a cake, the "cherry on top".

He's going to be a real asset when this team plays finals. Reliable. Until then, he can only do so much. We need the true leaders to stand up. The guy isn't superman.

great summary.

Wayne Carey defended Watts as well, so i guess that doesn't count for anything?

At the end of the day Jack Watts is by far our best decision maker, ball user and has something that not many people on our list have and that is time with the ball in hand. He will have played 100 games soon and will end up being a 200 game player for the club, whilst he will never be a key forward he will be pivotal in our future success, due to his assets that very few players actually have.

In talking about Tunbridge, the famous 50's half-forward whose floaters just kept going through, that recent book the 100 Heroes or whatever-it-was quoted somebody back then commenting on Tunna being so flimsy, and what they said was along the lines of "if he needed protection we'd provide it for him". Of all our players from the 50's, I reckon Tunbridge is still referred to just about as much as anyone.

Now legendary, Tunbridge at the time was dangerous, accurate-kicking and pretty-well unclassifiable; a unique member of a powerful team, without the physical attributes a lot today assume are fundamental. Needed looking after, even, and then...

Watts is a lot bigger than Tunbridge, but perhaps comparable in needing the team around him before his best is seen. Like the great Tunbridge, maybe he'll still end up known as a one-off with uncanny ability to get goals to happen.

A man as hard as Norm Smith rated Tunbridge and was not let down. Roos appears to be able to see Watts' value beyond the absence of other normal qualities.

In talking about Tunbridge, the famous 50's half-forward whose floaters just kept going through, that recent book the 100 Heroes or whatever-it-was quoted somebody back then commenting on Tunna being so flimsy, and what they said was along the lines of "if he needed protection we'd provide it for him". Of all our players from the 50's, I reckon Tunbridge is still referred to just about as much as anyone.

Now legendary, Tunbridge at the time was dangerous, accurate-kicking and pretty-well unclassifiable; a unique member of a powerful team, without the physical attributes a lot today assume are fundamental. Needed looking after, even, and then...

Watts is a lot bigger than Tunbridge, but perhaps comparable in needing the team around him before his best is seen. Like the great Tunbridge, maybe he'll still end up known as a one-off with uncanny ability to get goals to happen.

A man as hard as Norm Smith rated Tunbridge and was not let down. Roos appears to be able to see Watts' value beyond the absence of other normal qualities.

Interesting comparison and comments.

However, despite his thin angular body and will of the wisp style, Tunna never shirked a contest. Indeed, he got regularly clobbered for putting himself in the contest and under the hammer.

In talking about Tunbridge, the famous 50's half-forward whose floaters just kept going through, that recent book the 100 Heroes or whatever-it-was quoted somebody back then commenting on Tunna being so flimsy, and what they said was along the lines of "if he needed protection we'd provide it for him". Of all our players from the 50's, I reckon Tunbridge is still referred to just about as much as anyone.

Now legendary, Tunbridge at the time was dangerous, accurate-kicking and pretty-well unclassifiable; a unique member of a powerful team, without the physical attributes a lot today assume are fundamental. Needed looking after, even, and then...

Watts is a lot bigger than Tunbridge, but perhaps comparable in needing the team around him before his best is seen. Like the great Tunbridge, maybe he'll still end up known as a one-off with uncanny ability to get goals to happen.

A man as hard as Norm Smith rated Tunbridge and was not let down. Roos appears to be able to see Watts' value beyond the absence of other normal qualities.

what a great post saw him play brut strength is not everything in our great game ,barry vagg great player seemed soft but in his home town he was known as a hard tough player

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/talking-point-do-we-overreact-when-it-comes-to-afl-players-ducking-20150421-1mplnf.html

Interesting comparison and comments.

However, despite his thin angular body and will of the wisp style, Tunna never shirked a contest. Indeed, he got regularly clobbered for putting himself in the contest and under the hammer.

like barry vagg watts 6.5 will take time for the feet to catch up with his brain,he will be a champ,look at how long it took hawkins at geelong ,he was bagged from pile to post