To Man Dee. The bad treatment referred to is entirely to do with the failure of the FD to come clean on the story. That is not speculation, but fact. I am not aware of a statement from the club that is clear and unambiguous. That they have allowed the ill informed commentary to continue unabated is the distasteful and demeaning behavior of the FD.

If Jack's behavior and attitude are not acceptable, explain why to the club's supporters and we can all move on.

34 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Watts is a protected species on here.

That's very funny 'dazzle'....

A lot of posts and threads would beg to differ.

He's certainly very polarising though.

Lets just hope he gets his act together and plays good footy for us.

Watts' shall we say lackadaisical style has long been a topic of discussion on here. I thought he made some real inroads last year but there's room for improvement.

I don't want to see his confidence take another battering, but if this move causes him to improve again in terms of his intensity on the field then I'm all for it. An aggressive Jack Watts goes from being a good player to an elite player.

1 minute ago, rjay said:

That's very funny 'dazzle'....

A lot of posts and threads would beg to differ.

He's certainly very polarising though.

Lets just hope he gets his act together and plays good footy for us.

Very funny...

You couldn't name another player who has been smashed more on here than Jack Watts.

And yeah, looking forward to football - if Jack wants to be a part of it, he would be a huge asset, and if this is the beginning of the end then so be it.

Bit numb to the theatrics, also just want the laundry to win, hard to care about who is in the laundry.

By protected species i mean that for the past few weeks we have all heard now that training form and standard has been quite poor yet some on here still sink the boot into Goodwin and criticise his way of treating Watts when all he is doing is setting an elite standard that  will stand up in finals. 

Some are still lead to believe Watts has done absolutely nothing wrong and its all Goodwins fault.. spare me.

35 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

By protected species i mean that for the past few weeks we have all heard now that training form and standard has been quite poor yet some on here still sink the boot into Goodwin and criticise his way of treating Watts when all he is doing is setting an elite standard that  will stand up in finals. 

Some are still lead to believe Watts has done absolutely nothing wrong and its all Goodwins fault.. spare me.

maybe we have all heard the "i blame jack watts" mantra for so long on dl it became like the boy who cried wolf - lol

Jack suffers the most criticism of any player on our list for his playing style, not his play. The two goals he fed to Dom Tyson is the last quarter against the dorks last year sealed the match. If they were his only contribution, he was worth his spot because I cannot think of any other player on our list who could do the same in  identical circumstances.

Jack is the sine qua non of our premiership hopes. Let's improve him but, please, don't destroy him.

1 hour ago, tiers said:

To Man Dee. The bad treatment referred to is entirely to do with the failure of the FD to come clean on the story. That is not speculation, but fact. I am not aware of a statement from the club that is clear and unambiguous. That they have allowed the ill informed commentary to continue unabated is the distasteful and demeaning behavior of the FD.

If Jack's behavior and attitude are not acceptable, explain why to the club's supporters and we can all move on.

tiers, do you really think that FD's of any club tell the whole truth to the media?

Your conclusion that it is bad treatment entirely to do with the failure to come clean on the story, comes from a fantasy land where the media reports accurately and tells the entire story, where no one lies and everyone knows everything about everyone. I have news for you, such a place does not exist. If you choose to take snippets of information and come to conclusions I say you are speculating. To claim that bad treatment is a fact is ludicrous.

For all we know the club could be protecting Jack from a situation far worse than discussed here. So get off the high horse, none of us really know what is going on and probably never will.

2 hours ago, small but forward said:

To be fair, most supporters can't remember the last time the FD drew a line in the sand and established (and subsequently upheld) standards.

I can understand why some supporters still feel the need for talent to be picked every week without regard to upholding these standards. 

Whilst unfamiliar, I think we're in for some great times as a result. I can't wait to give it to my Hawthorn supporting mates...

 

Agree.  We've had our fair share of talent that didn't meet potential - Travis Johnstone, Colin Sylvia, you can add your own names to the list.

2 hours ago, tiers said:

To Man Dee. The bad treatment referred to is entirely to do with the failure of the FD to come clean on the story. That is not speculation, but fact. I am not aware of a statement from the club that is clear and unambiguous. That they have allowed the ill informed commentary to continue unabated is the distasteful and demeaning behavior of the FD.

If Jack's behavior and attitude are not acceptable, explain why to the club's supporters and we can all move on.

What does "come clean" really mean though?  They've said Jack has not met training KPIs and that sounds like the truth to me.  And if he has failed to meet them then he can't play as some sort of special case.  Goodwin has a right and obligation to set standards and day 1, year 1 is a good time to start.

The FD haven't mislead saying "we're trying other structures e.g. Spencil" "He has a niggle", they've been as straight up as they could be without going into detail.  Maybe the detail is a breach of privacy, maybe the detail is more harmful to Jack's image.

What exactly do you expect them to say?

To your first question, my answer is no, I don't.

The fantasy land you speak of is on these websites and in the media. Not much can be relied on in either place.

However, when there is ongoing, weeks long speculation about the problems associated with any player, the proper response is to protect the player, bring the speculation to an end and come clean. It is unseemly for any club to allow any player to have to suffer this level and intensity of speculation about his performance. That is common courtesy and decency.

Please reply if you wish but I am finished.

7 minutes ago, tiers said:

To your first question, my answer is no, I don't.

The fantasy land you speak of is on these websites and in the media. Not much can be relied on in either place.

However, when there is ongoing, weeks long speculation about the problems associated with any player, the proper response is to protect the player, bring the speculation to an end and come clean. It is unseemly for any club to allow any player to have to suffer this level and intensity of speculation about his performance. That is common courtesy and decency.

Please reply if you wish but I am finished.

You haven't offered a solution to "bring the speculation to an end and come clean" though.

What if the details are more damaging than the KPIs generalisation and speculation?

You're offering nothing.  "How to play the flute - blow in one end and move your fingers up and down on the other"  Yeah thanks.

9 minutes ago, Fifty-5 said:

What does "come clean" really mean though?  They've said Jack has not met training KPIs and that sounds like the truth to me.  And if he has failed to meet them then he can't play as some sort of special case.  Goodwin has a right and obligation to set standards and day 1, year 1 is a good time to start.

The FD haven't mislead saying "we're trying other structures e.g. Spencil" "He has a niggle", they've been as straight up as they could be without going into detail.  Maybe the detail is a breach of privacy, maybe the detail is more harmful to Jack's image.

What exactly do you expect them to say?

I think the club  have handled the matter completely appropriately.

To my mind there is no way known that Jack has been kept in the dark to where he sits and the only reason it is a story is because he was left out of two JLT games. Unless people expected the club to come out 4 weeks ago and say "Jack Watts is not up to scratch at the moment" - to what end ?

There is no subterfuge here. If it was any other player at the club I would suggest people would be ripping into the player.

2 hours ago, tiers said:

To Man Dee. The bad treatment referred to is entirely to do with the failure of the FD to come clean on the story. That is not speculation, but fact. I am not aware of a statement from the club that is clear and unambiguous. That they have allowed the ill informed commentary to continue unabated is the distasteful and demeaning behavior of the FD.

If Jack's behavior and attitude are not acceptable, explain why to the club's supporters and we can all move on.

What would you like, a formal Press conference? A written statement? It's been addressed multiple times including by the coach and Watts himself. Don't make a mountain out of a molehill. 

Just now, nutbean said:

I think the club  have handled the matter completely appropriately.

To my mind there is no way known that Jack has been kept in the dark to where he sits and the only reason it is a story is because he was left out of two JLT games. Unless people expected the club to come out 4 weeks ago and say "Jack Watts is not up to scratch at the moment" - to what end ?

There is no subterfuge here. If it was any other player at the club I would suggest people would be ripping into the player.

Agree, it's a very difficult situation to handle.

1 minute ago, Fifty-5 said:

Agree, it's a very difficult situation to handle.

The only thing that I really don't get is trying to blame anyone else but Watts himself. If you have a poor attitude, come back in bad shape or haven't met training standards who's fault is it ?

9 minutes ago, nutbean said:

The only thing that I really don't get is trying to blame anyone else but Watts himself. If you have a poor attitude, come back in bad shape or haven't met training standards who's fault is it ?

I'm conscious that Watts' footballing story is a unique one.

He's been smashed from pillar to post in public forums his entire career like very few players before him. He's suddenly had a good year, a breakout year of sorts, with some positive press written about him for a change, and maybe it set off a release valve with all the pressure accumulated over the last seven years.

Would that be acceptable? No. But it would explain it.

Hopefully this is just a reality check.

Doesn't hurt watts to get a kick up the arse in the preseason. 

I am sure some or most of us have had it in our work places at some stage. 

It will be how he reacts to it that's important. 

Good to see nothing has changed. 

Jack Watts hey. That's new!

He will be a great loss when he's off the list one day. The server will be relieved.

 

Seriously, are you people still talking about this?

In terms of the club not being fully open in the media what do you expect -

Club: "we think this is Jack's weekness"

Opposition: "great, let's target that weakness verbally or physically"     

OR

Club: "this is how we want Jack to play within our team"

Opposition: "thanks for passing on your game plan for Jack Watts"

 

I guess the club could give some kind of BS decoy of a reason, but that is going to be seen through in an instant and wouldn't stop the chatter, speculation and inuendo.  If this were most other player, the dead bat response from the club would have been accepted and everyone would have moved on... Which is what I'm doing right now, only to return to this thread when Jack is either delisted or more likely puts in a blinder, kicks a bag of six and or wins us the game some other way off his own boot.  

6 minutes ago, Rodney (Balls) Grinter said:

Seriously, are you people still talking about this?

In terms of the club not being fully open in the media what do you expect -

Club: "we think this is Jack's weekness"

Opposition: "great, let's target that weakness verbally or physically"     

OR

Club: "this is how we want Jack to play within our team"

Opposition: "thanks for passing on your game plan for Jack Watts"

 

I guess the club could give some kind of BS decoy of a reason, but that is going to be seen through in an instant and wouldn't stop the chatter, speculation and inuendo.  If this were most other player, the dead bat response from the club would have been accepted and everyone would have moved on... Which is what I'm doing right now, only to return to this thread when Jack is either delisted or more likely puts in a blinder, kicks a bag of six and or wins us the game some other way off his own boot.  

Exactly..Why tell opposition clubs anything

Keep them guessing, it's only been 11 years since a victory over the Aints!

Can I ask, in all seriousness, what the reaction will be if Jetta, Tyson and Kent, regulars last year, along with Watts, don't get a run in the last JLT?

42 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

Can I ask, in all seriousness, what the reaction will be if Jetta, Tyson and Kent, regulars last year, along with Watts, don't get a run in the last JLT?

Jetta Tyson and Kent i wont have a problem with as they are coming back from significant injuries and more likely to require more time. I definitely didn't have Kent and Tyson penciled in for round 1.

Watts is a whole different story mate.

 

1 hour ago, Satyriconhome said:

Can I ask, in all seriousness, what the reaction will be if Jetta, Tyson and Kent, regulars last year, along with Watts, don't get a run in the last JLT?

Well Kent and Tyson have injuries that have precluded them thus far. My view of Jetta like Watts would be they might be playing at Casey for the start of the season.

7 hours ago, tiers said:

This saga has been going on for far too long. It is an embarrassment to the club, the coach and the supporters.

Jack has been very badly treated by the collective FD.

Nonsense. It shows the club is fair dinkum and not a bunch of hand-wringers wondering how to handle the golden child.