This sums this thread up for me perfectly.

Keeps the journos employed for another week

1 minute ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Keeps the journos employed for another week

But but this is all BS.  The rumours are wrong.

Aren't they ?

I wish the club would make a statement rather than continuing to let the speculation and rumours circulate.

Don't like it! this playing mind games Bulltish can end up going horribly wrong and lose a player like Watts momentum and confidence!

Don't like this at all!!!! Rubbish non selection psycho babble footy speak KPI'S Bah, I had said before he trained beautifully the three times I saw him and he is a cut and a half above nearly all of our players! Watch this backfire spectacularly! 

1 minute ago, Nasher said:

I wish the club would make a statement rather than continuing to let the speculation and rumours circulate.

This is from the article on the website, not sure how much more they can say without telling us exactly what he has done/not done which I'm sure they don't want the world to know.

 

Mahoney confirmed that key forward would not play again this week and explained why.

“We think there has been some predictable, but unfair media speculation about Jack Watts’ non-selection. To clarify, the team is being selected on some key criteria, during the pre-season,” he said.

“Jack knows exactly what needs to be worked on and his past two or three weeks, he’s been working hard on what he needs to improve on in certain areas.

“He still remains a key player for us this season.”

3 minutes ago, Nasher said:

I wish the club would make a statement rather than continuing to let the speculation and rumours circulate.

Mahoney confirmed that key forward would not play again this week and explained why.

“We think there has been some predictable, but unfair media speculation about Jack Watts’ non-selection. To clarify, the team is being selected on some key criteria, during the pre-season,” he said.

“Jack knows exactly what needs to be worked on and his past two or three weeks, he’s been working hard on what he needs to improve on in certain areas.

“He still remains a key player for us this season.”

7 minutes ago, ProDee said:

But but this is all BS.  The rumours are wrong.

Aren't they ?

Rumurs of what exactly?

JW has obviously been asked to be at a certain level of fitness by the coach and as of February 21 he hasn't reached it

I have read that in about 5 articles

But hardly the crossroads of his career which the journalists are hoping for

The season hasn't begun yet

1 minute ago, leehow said:

This is from the article on the website, not sure how much more they can say without telling us exactly what he has done/not done which I'm sure they don't want the world to know.

 

Mahoney confirmed that key forward would not play again this week and explained why.

“We think there has been some predictable, but unfair media speculation about Jack Watts’ non-selection. To clarify, the team is being selected on some key criteria, during the pre-season,” he said.

“Jack knows exactly what needs to be worked on and his past two or three weeks, he’s been working hard on what he needs to improve on in certain areas.

“He still remains a key player for us this season.”

Does anyone need more info?

Although very slow for a member of the footy club (excluding the players) to say anything. Not exactly preemptive. 

Quote

Mahoney confirmed that key forward would not play again this week and explained why.

“We think there has been some predictable, but unfair media speculation about Jack Watts’ non-selection. To clarify, the team is being selected on some key criteria, during the pre-season,” he said.

“Jack knows exactly what needs to be worked on and his past two or three weeks, he’s been working hard on what he needs to improve on in certain areas.

“He still remains a key player for us this season.

well that statement isn't going to quell any media speculation

It's speculation about his non performance that makes me think it's his thumb that's the issue.

Just now, hemingway said:

Does anyone need more info?

Although very slow for a member of the footy club (excluding the players) to say anything. Not exactly preemptive. 

Honestly I couldn't care less. It should be dealt with in-house, the media will speculate regardless. Watts is one of my favourite players, but if he isn't meeting standards then he should be left out. The advantage of our improved depth is that players that aren't performing will not get a game unlike previous years.

So you can turn up to pre season training looking like a blimp with legs and all is well, but we throw Watts under a bus for some vague non-compliance with "key criteria". This ought to end well.

On 2/20/2017 at 8:42 PM, Nasher said:

Still quite comfortable with my initial call of BS - but as ProDee says, others can please themselves.

So I take it you're no longer comfortable with your view ?

5 minutes ago, DemonAndrew said:

It's speculation about his non performance that makes me think it's his thumb that's the issue.

And there's still some that have a weird conspiracy theory.

How about "unsatisfactory preseason training standards" ?

Nah, that's too fat fetched.  FMD.

2 minutes ago, ProDee said:

And there's still some that have a weird conspiracy theory.

How about "unsatisfactory preseason training standards" ?

Nah, that's too fat fetched.  FMD.

Or maybe he just needs to pull it out?

Must be injured. No way Dion Johnstone is ahead of him on form or training form.

Poor by the club not to make a firm statement to the media to squash the speculation that surrounds him. It's only preseason, but given his history of copping it bad in the media it's poor manager by the club.

1 minute ago, ProDee said:

And there's still some that think there's some kind of conspiracy theory.

How about "unsatisfactory preseason training standards" ?

Nah, that's too fat fetched.  FMD.

Just out of (mild) interest, where is that stated ?

 

All I can find from the club is  : 

“We think there has been some predictable, but unfair media speculation about Jack Watts’ non-selection. To clarify, the team is being selected on some key criteria, during the pre-season,” he said.

“Jack knows exactly what needs to be worked on and his past two or three weeks, he’s been working hard on what he needs to improve on in certain areas.

 

 

The club's statement does nothing but keep the pot simmering

I love it when something goes wrong for a player and supporters almost want to gloat about it because they're right.  Why anyone would want to gloat in this regard is beyond me.

Hopefully Jack can continue to work hard and get himself in the side for Round 1, as he is clearly best 22.

Just now, Go the Biff said:

Just out of (mild) interest, where is that stated ?

 

All I can find from the club is  : 

“We think there has been some predictable, but unfair media speculation about Jack Watts’ non-selection. To clarify, the team is being selected on some key criteria, during the pre-season,” he said.

“Jack knows exactly what needs to be worked on and his past two or three weeks, he’s been working hard on what he needs to improve on in certain areas.

 

 

The club's statement does nothing but keep the pot simmering

Well if he'd been meeting the preseason criteria that others have then he'd be playing, wouldn't he ?  So, obviously, his training hasn't been satisfactory.  Yes ?

Tom McDonald said he'd improved over recent weeks.  Gawn suggested he was right to play, but others have been ahead with their training.

Mahoney says "he knows what he needs to work on".

I'm not sure why you're asking the question.  Clearly, his training standards, or ethics, or perhaps game-plan delivery have been unsatisfactory.  What exactly, we don't know.  But unsatisfactory nonetheless.

Uh Oh. we all know what this is code for

" “He still remains a key player for us this season. "

Yes, minister 

I must admit I am surprised that Watts has been left out of this weeks side. I am of the understanding that clubs like to get 6-7 quarters into players before Rnd 1. If Watts is a required player and definitely in the best 22 as has been stated then his preparation may be compromised. If he has a shocker against the Saints it will be hard to know if it was because of his failings to meet KPI's (whatever they are) or due to lack of match practice. 

1 minute ago, ProDee said:

Well if he'd been meeting the preseason criteria that others have then he'd be playing, wouldn't he ?  So, obviously, his training hasn't been satisfactory.  Yes ?

Tom McDonald said he'd improved over recent weeks.  Gawn suggested he was right to play, but others have been ahead with their training.

Mahoney says "he knows what he needs to work on".

I'm not sure why you're asking the question.  Clearly, his training standards, or ethics, or perhaps game-plan delivery have been unsatisfactory.  What exactly, we don't know.  But unsatisfactory nonetheless.

Your reply highlights exactly why I'm asking the question

You've put up 3 plausible options "his training standards, or ethics, or perhaps game-plan delivery"

I'd like to know from the club what he's failed to meet

Not some vague corporate newspeak that says effectively nothing and only opens the door for conjecture

Pro Dee is like a dog with two phalluses after this news.

 

Look at him go.

As I have stated I saw him training and each time was a cut above in skill, fitness and attitude! Garbage NON selection IMV