12 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

No it hasn't, only by you and a couple of others on here, I have watched him since October, and the only difference I noticed was at the Intraclub where he sat back

 

7 hours ago, deespicable me said:

Watts looked fine as he has all pre-season. I am also in the camp that thinks he is hard done by.

It's hardly a revelation that amateur observers miss the nuance of conditioning and intensity as they watch training.  Watching training and picking up some odds and sods is very different to processing training, knowing what the coaches are assessing, as well as being behind the scenes in meetings/conversations and having an understanding of what is being asked of the player.  Scoop is worried that his entire 2018 training observations won't be taken seriously because he had no clue Watts wasn't meeting training standards.  Annoying players by questioning their injuries and getting told porkies doesn't help his credibility either.

I draw both of your attention to these direct quotes from Goodwin, "Jack had a few months where he wasn’t at the level, to his own admission."  Link below.  It also mentions in the article that Watts came back "underdone", although that's not a quote from Goodwin, so no doubt you'll dismiss it, because it suits your biased narrative even though it's a logical conclusion given recent reports, as well as comments from @Leoncelli_36 who received inside mail that this was indeed the case..

So this isn't about one intra-club performance as Scoop asserts, it's about "a few months" of below level training intensity.  However you want to put your own slant on it you're both wrong.  Accept the coach just may have a better handle on things than your good selves.

http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/jack-watts-slowly-building-training-intensity-as-he-pushed-for-spot-in-melbourne-round-1-lineup/news-story/b1e55d6e171bfd20008a8d0215fb172e

Edited March 6, 20178 yr by ProDee
Added link

17 hours ago, nutbean said:

is there such thing as doing a good hammy ?

That's  usually the hammy before it goes twang.

7 hours ago, deespicable me said:

Kent was in full training and is probably a week or so ahead of Garlett, if there is a choice between them.

If at all possible I'll take both of them 

1 hour ago, ProDee said:

 

It's hardly a revelation that amateur observers miss the nuance of conditioning and intensity as they watch training.  Watching training and picking up some odds and sods is very different to processing training, knowing what the coaches are assessing, as well as being behind the scenes in meetings/conversations and having an understanding of what is being asked of the player.  Scoop is worried that his entire 2018 training observations won't be taken seriously because he had no clue Watts wasn't meeting training standards.  Annoying players by questioning their injuries and getting told porkies doesn't help his credibility either.

I draw both of your attention to these direct quotes from Goodwin, "Jack had a few months where he wasn’t at the level, to his own admission."  Link below.  It also mentions in the article that Watts came back "underdone", although that's not a quote from Goodwin, so no doubt you'll dismiss it, because it suits your biased narrative even though it's a logical conclusion given recent reports, as well as comments from @Leoncelli_36 who received inside mail that this was indeed the case..

So this isn't about one intra-club performance as Scoop asserts, it's about "a few months" of below level training intensity.  However you want to put your own slant on it you're both wrong.  Accept the coach just may have a better handle on things than your good selves.

http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/jack-watts-slowly-building-training-intensity-as-he-pushed-for-spot-in-melbourne-round-1-lineup/news-story/b1e55d6e171bfd20008a8d0215fb172e

In tennis terms:15 all, Saty's serve.

Fair enough to have a different view but I don't think the personal attack is warranted. I for one appreciate Saty's input to the training reports.

1 hour ago, ProDee said:

 

It's hardly a revelation that amateur observers miss the nuance of conditioning and intensity as they watch training.  Watching training and picking up some odds and sods is very different to processing training, knowing what the coaches are assessing, as well as being behind the scenes in meetings/conversations and having an understanding of what is being asked of the player.  Scoop is worried that his entire 2018 training observations won't be taken seriously because he had no clue Watts wasn't meeting training standards.  Annoying players by questioning their injuries and getting told porkies doesn't help his credibility either.

I draw both of your attention to these direct quotes from Goodwin, "Jack had a few months where he wasn’t at the level, to his own admission."  Link below.  It also mentions in the article that Watts came back "underdone", although that's not a quote from Goodwin, so no doubt you'll dismiss it, because it suits your biased narrative even though it's a logical conclusion given recent reports, as well as comments from @Leoncelli_36 who received inside mail that this was indeed the case..

So this isn't about one intra-club performance as Scoop asserts, it's about "a few months" of below level training intensity.  However you want to put your own slant on it you're both wrong.  Accept the coach just may have a better handle on things than your good selves.

http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/jack-watts-slowly-building-training-intensity-as-he-pushed-for-spot-in-melbourne-round-1-lineup/news-story/b1e55d6e171bfd20008a8d0215fb172e

     Pro Dee, let it go. 

15 minutes ago, Olgreybeard49 said:

In tennis terms:15 all, Saty's serve.

Fair enough to have a different view but I don't think the personal attack is warranted. I for one appreciate Saty's input to the training reports.

Attack ?  What attack ?

It seems Spectrum has compiled a dossier on Scoop.

1 hour ago, ProDee said:

Attack ?  What attack ?

I would think he might be referring to the following:

"Scoop is worried that his entire 2018 training observations won't be taken seriously because he had no clue Watts wasn't meeting training standards.  Annoying players by questioning their injuries and getting told porkies doesn't help his credibility either. "

Unless of course you meant scoop as a term of endearment... somehow I think not.

2 minutes ago, hardtack said:

I would think he might be referring to the following:

"Scoop is worried that his entire 2018 training observations won't be taken seriously because he had no clue Watts wasn't meeting training standards.  Annoying players by questioning their injuries and getting told porkies doesn't help his credibility either. "

Unless of course you meant scoop as a term of endearment... somehow I think not.

Not to mention his 2018 training observations are courtesy of Nostradamus.

I've put ProDee on ignore now, you would think if he doesn't find my posts informative he wouldn't read them, but then again.....

I will reiterate what I have posted before re injury, I ask, if they answer I put the answer, I don't necessarily belive what is told to me, but I let others form their own opinion , something some on here seem to a difficulty with

I have watched a lot of training this pre season, and I am buggered if I can see any change in Watts during any sessions, apart from the Intraclub, but that is my opinion

I do find it rather amusing that if I put something a player or coach tells me it is rubbish, yet if others do the same it is 'inside mail',laughable

On the Garlett situation will be ready to go Rd1

Edited March 7, 20178 yr by Satyriconhome

35 minutes ago, hardtack said:

I would think he might be referring to the following:

"Scoop is worried that his entire 2018 training observations won't be taken seriously because he had no clue Watts wasn't meeting training standards.  Annoying players by questioning their injuries and getting told porkies doesn't help his credibility either. "

Unless of course you meant scoop as a term of endearment... somehow I think not.

Oh, that "attack" ?

Right.

15 hours ago, Moonshadow said:

I look at it positively Saty.... I would take it as a compliment if players failed to answer my questions or gave me misleading answers. It would mean we as a club are tight lipped, even to the most regular track watchers.

I agree Moonie, I ask, if I get an answer I post it, doesn't necessarily mean it's true

I do sometimes get told things and also told to keep them to myself, which I do, 

 

For Satyr and all others who take the time to post training reports, please keep up the good work.

1 hour ago, Satyriconhome said:

I agree Moonie, I ask, if I get an answer I post it, doesn't necessarily mean it's true

I do sometimes get told things and also told to keep them to myself, which I do, 

 

old man love your training reports, there's not much else to read on this site in pre season, you are not the only one not to notice any different in watts this preseason, me and Eddie  on Sen overnights talk all about watts and Melbourne, four times a week  he thought watts had came back in good shape from  the off season too,  and he has connection in the club and often goes to training.

Edited March 7, 20178 yr by Grapeviney
language

All the players wear GPS's, heart rate monitors etc. The coaching staff know to the step how hard they are working. 

12 hours ago, deespicable me said:

Watts looked fine as he has all pre-season. I am also in the camp that thinks he is hard done by. If you saw Suckling in the Dogs second pre-season game he had love handles! Goodwin says we'll get back "a very good player" when he returns, well he already is a very good player. He has been a top track worker over the years and this year is no exception, I'd be [censored] if I was him, getting dragged through the media again, but Jack just keeps bouncing back, he is a very resilient character. Anyway sorry I got distracted. He will play Thursday as reported above so hopefully all this can once again be put behind him.

Do you know more than we do?  If not then you're in no position to claim he has been 'hard done by' as you have no idea what has gone on behind the scenes.

42 minutes ago, Ricky P said:

All the players wear GPS's, heart rate monitors etc. The coaching staff know to the step how hard they are working. 

maybe jack's monitors just need recalibrating - lol

17 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

maybe jack's monitors just need recalibrating - lol

Either that or attach it to the bulldog used in ManDee's gif above.

5 hours ago, ProDee said:

 

It's hardly a revelation that amateur observers miss the nuance of conditioning and intensity as they watch training.  Watching training and picking up some odds and sods is very different to processing training, knowing what the coaches are assessing, as well as being behind the scenes in meetings/conversations and having an understanding of what is being asked of the player.  Scoop is worried that his entire 2018 training observations won't be taken seriously because he had no clue Watts wasn't meeting training standards.  Annoying players by questioning their injuries and getting told porkies doesn't help his credibility either.

I draw both of your attention to these direct quotes from Goodwin, "Jack had a few months where he wasn’t at the level, to his own admission."  Link below.  It also mentions in the article that Watts came back "underdone", although that's not a quote from Goodwin, so no doubt you'll dismiss it, because it suits your biased narrative even though it's a logical conclusion given recent reports, as well as comments from @Leoncelli_36 who received inside mail that this was indeed the case..

So this isn't about one intra-club performance as Scoop asserts, it's about "a few months" of below level training intensity.  However you want to put your own slant on it you're both wrong.  Accept the coach just may have a better handle on things than your good selves.

http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/jack-watts-slowly-building-training-intensity-as-he-pushed-for-spot-in-melbourne-round-1-lineup/news-story/b1e55d6e171bfd20008a8d0215fb172e

Training is more than just the sessions we are lucky enough to have our track watchers report from. There's also time spent in the gym and doing other stuff we don't get to see or hear about. Who knows - maybe the failure to meet KPIs was for not spending enough time in the gym. Or he turned up late to (or fell asleep in) a team meeting. If our seasoned track watchers think Jack's intensity on the track looks fine, maybe they're right and it's not on the paddock that any problems exist.

 

1 hour ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Training is more than just the sessions we are lucky enough to have our track watchers report from. There's also time spent in the gym and doing other stuff we don't get to see or hear about. Who knows - maybe the failure to meet KPIs was for not spending enough time in the gym. Or he turned up late to (or fell asleep in) a team meeting. If our seasoned track watchers think Jack's intensity on the track looks fine, maybe they're right and it's not on the paddock that any problems exist.

 

"Seasoned track watchers"  ?  Thanks, I needed a laugh.

There seems to be an incredible amount of yearning for a lack of "intensity" during training sessions to be anything other than a lack of intensity during training sessions.

You say he may have "fallen asleep" during a meeting, whereas the coach says it's an issue that has been evident for "months".

What appears to be clear at face value suddenly isn't necessarily clear as posters are desperate to believe it's actually not what the coach says it is.

Maybe he hasn't been leaving the toilet seat down ?

FMD.

 

 

Edited March 7, 20178 yr by Demonland
Keep politics out of football threads

4 hours ago, Wiseblood said:

Do you know more than we do?  If not then you're in no position to claim he has been 'hard done by' as you have no idea what has gone on behind the scenes.

I have every right to have an opinion. I said in my post "I think". I said nothing about I know.

For you and Pro Dee just remember there is a lot of love for a new coach in their "honeymoon" period.

Goodwin has chosen to single out Jack and whether wittingly or not it once again became a big issue that Jack has had to deal with.

I agree with Saty that Jack was a bit down at the intra club, and he may have had issues off field but I don't agree with how its been handled. My opinion. I'm not desperate to prove anything Pro Dee, just my opinion.

And I'm happy for you to have yours. But for me its a black mark as much against Goodwin as it is Watts.

Whats he going to do when Jack doesn't perform in a game. Coz we all know he will have off days.

I will judge Goodwin by how he and we respond to a loss. That is quite often where a coach can lose his players. Roos has been a master at keeping a cool head and protecting the players sometimes when they don't deserve it. If this is an indication of how Goodwin handles his gun players "I think" we're in a bit of trouble.

That o.k with you Wiseblood

 

20 minutes ago, deespicable me said:

Goodwin has chosen to single out Jack ...

These are the types of comments I find absurd.  You have no basis of fact to back up this comment.

You'd rather blame the coach for not accepting poor standards than the player not producing what's required. 

Unfathomable to me. 

Edited March 7, 20178 yr by ProDee

16 minutes ago, ProDee said:

These are the types of comments I find absurd.  You have no basis of fact to back up this comment.

You'd rather blame the coach for not accepting poor standards than the player not producing what's required. 

Unfathomable to me. 

Surely you aren't denying that Watts was 'singled out'?  There were other good performing players from last year, apparently not injured but not given a game but no comment was made about them by the club.  And if you counter that if Goodwin is asked about a particular player he has to comment on him, you are not using your imagination.  I think (ie. don't know) that it is quite possible the club has mishandled this in an attempt to improve Watts or impose standards. Let's hope my fear is misplaced.

BTW, please keep your politics out of it.

14 minutes ago, sue said:

Surely you aren't denying that Watts was 'singled out'?  There were other good performing players from last year, apparently not injured but not given a game but no comment was made about them by the club.  And if you counter that if Goodwin is asked about a particular player he has to comment on him, you are not using your imagination.  I think (ie. don't know) that it is quite possible the club has mishandled this in an attempt to improve Watts or impose standards. Let's hope my fear is misplaced.

BTW, please keep your politics out of it.

That's because the media didn't ask about Jetta or Frost or Garland etc. The media loves a Jack Watts story so it was actually them who singled Watts out. The club just responded. Garland may also be down in his standards but no one cared to ask.

11 minutes ago, sue said:

Surely you aren't denying that Watts was 'singled out'? 

No he's stating that Goodwin did not choose to single Jack out (as per the quote).  Rather, that Watts performance required Goodwin to single him out.