I've always said jack needs a four letter word beginning with c installed in him - or killer instinct for a nicer way to put it. But I can't see how dividing the playing group and supporters with this decision and how they've handled it as in the best interests of the club. We need to be as one moving in the same direction. Dragging watts  in house up to the standards surely would have been a better option. Especially if we're getting bigger all for him and paying him to play against us

32 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

With respect UH there may be a bit of 'hair splitting' in the bits i've higlighted.  Goodwin talks about 9 years of being in rut.  Jones talks about his activities away from the club.  etc etc. 

I haven't posted on this thread for a while as it was going round in circles but I feel hearing from Jack's father and by implication his mother, has changed things a bit.

The Stringer situation looks worse because of the girlfriend's interview and WB botched the trade and didn't take pick 11.  But they had one shot (Beveridge's interview) and made a clean cut of Stringer.  For Jack its been like the 'death of a thousand cuts' from the various commentary since our last game.  So while the Stringer situation looks worse and it could be rated 9 out of 10 bad then mfc with Jack is about 7.5 out of 10 bad.  Still very bad in my book.

Just for comparison.  It is very well known that Kent is being heavily shopped around.  But the club has been very respectful to him and handled it quietly.  A far cry from what we are seeing with Jack. 

I fear this will not end well for anyone. 

I have no idea why the club chose its path.  But for mine it was not a good choice.

We've discussed this briefly LH, I remember and I agree with the points you've made above and in prior posits.

But you can't (and I doubt anyone else can) categorically tell me the exact reason why JW has been told to look for other opportunities.

Also Connors this morning also said the club has treated JW well and he still has good relationships with those at the club. It's now JW's choice to not come back. You didn't put that in your post.

 

My point is that emotion is running this debate not facts. JW is 1 of 44 players

 

 

Edited October 15, 20177 yr by Unleash Hell

Jack's old man coming out to defend his son is no different to Trent Cotchin's wife doing the same. In both cases it's cringeworthy.

Like all of us, his father is not in a position to judge whether Jack trains hard or not. That is something that the FD can assess on a comparitive basis to the rest of the playing list. 

As Josh Mahoney said in the letter of reply, the club is bigger than the individual.

Edited October 15, 20177 yr by mo64

7 minutes ago, drdrake said:

Over 5000 posts and some still can't get their head around why Jack Watts may be traded.  The only reason jack Watts is up for trade is he has some trade value and is expendable.  Make no mistake Jack made himself expendable by his out put in the last half of the year.

I like Jack Watts and would love to see him become the player he can be, the fact is that hasn't happened so far at his time at Melbourne or what we have seen is the best he will offer which will be a real shame.

This is probably the best post on this thread that sums up the situation.perfectly

Regardless of all the bs and over analysis and speculation the above point sums up the JW situation perfectly.

Without all the known facts to discuss other issues the rest of the Issues are pointless

Edited October 15, 20177 yr by Unleash Hell

Just now, mo64 said:

Jack's old man coming out to defend his son is no different to Trent Cotchin's wife doing the same. In both cases it's cringeworthy.

Like all of us, his father is not in a position to judge whether Jack trains hard or not. That is something that the FD can assess on a comparitive to the rest of the playing list. 

As Josh Mahoney said in the letter of reply, the club is bigger than the individual.

Rubbish

These footballers are real people, not blocks of wood

Oh.....wait....

1 hour ago, Ron Burgundy said:

Quite frankly, that's not the issue.

Watts is one year into a three year contract (which the club didn't sign under duress), and it seems the club has now sought to exit him on 'made up' grounds i.e. they've manufactured events of default. 

It seems to me that his performance has been little different to what the club observed in 2016 following which it put a 3 year deal to him, which it is not now wishing to honour.

 

You're a Watts zealot and no amount of sense spoken to you can save you from this affliction. 

1 minute ago, jumbo returns said:

Rubbish

These footballers are real people, not blocks of wood

Oh.....wait....

A block of wood could have been more valuable Jumbo

4 minutes ago, Unleash Hell said:

This is probably the best post on this thread that sums up the situation.perfectly

Regardless of all the bs and over analysis and speculation the above point sums up the JW situation perfectly.

Without all the known facts to discuss other issues the rest of the Issues are pointless

That above point has been made on every page too

Edited October 15, 20177 yr by Deeprived Childhood

19 minutes ago, hillie said:

Tru

True. If a flag comes our way then watts lever and any other move will be vindicated. I just don't think that when this time of year is for improving your list that trading watts for a second round pick does that. When in today's age of footballer, sensitive and unhardened, that making the group uncomfortable and kicking out a much loved teammate in this  public way, does a whole lot for the comraderie of the rest of the group. I personally think they should all push hard and pull out all stops. We've had no success for 53 years. But this and the Viney co captain decision, sort of fly on the face of what Richmond have done and united as one.

Yeah, that'll do it. Like sitting around singing Kum-bay-ah...

 

20 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

It changes nothing.  Of course he will stick up for his son if he is asked about, any father would. 

And this will end fine for the club.  Jack will be moved on, the sun will come up in the morning and the MFC will roll on.

Crikey Wise.  Read my comment in context -  I didn't say it changed anything.  I only that it prompted me to post on this thread again.

Anyway Jack's father's comments are new information so it is not unreasonable to bring them to this thread for discussion.

You may not like it but sobeit.

1 minute ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

 

Crikey Wise.  Read my comment in context -  I didn't say it changed anything.  I only that it prompted me to post on this thread again.

Anyway Jack's father's comments are new information so it is not unreasonable to bring them to this thread for discussion.

You may not like it but sobeit.

Certainly not unreasonable to bring it up at all, didn't mean to phrase it that way.

Just now, Lucifer's Hero said:

 

Crikey Wise.  Read my comment in context -  I didn't say it changed anything.  I only that it prompted me to post on this thread again.

Anyway Jack's father's comments are new information so it is not unreasonable to bring them to this thread for discussion.

You may not like it but sobeit.

No it's not. Jack's father's comments are purely emotional based on what his son tells him.

32 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Extract from Trade Radio: 

Andrew Watts is Jack's father.

Expanding on 'reprobate' he says:

Clearly his father is taking issue with the derogatory rumours spread about his son, largely based on comments from Goodwin, Jones, Mahoney. 

We may not like his father's commentary but no one is publicly standing up for Jack.  Even his kind hearted video to a fan was presented as having a cheap shot at mfc and nothing was further from the truth.

I really admire a father standing up for his much maligned son.    It isn't good for MFC when a father needs to do that.  It is exceptionally rare for a player's father to come out and defend them.  I would think for Jack's family to do that involves very unusual circumstances. 

I do not know who or what to believe anymore.  As each day passes more and more people are coming out and casting doubts on MFC's narrative on Jack's season. 

Posters may want to blindly tow the company line but I fear there will be some bad fallout from this.  Not so much Jack leaving but moreso the way it has been handled.

A very sad situation just became moreso.

 

What do you expect his father to say, of corse he is going to take Jacks side and believe what Jack has told him about how it all went down.

You either believe the line the club has put out there since last pre season, or you believe Watt's that he was blind sided by the whole thing or you site some where in between.

Personally I don't think there is any conspiracy, what did the club have to gain by lying about Watts condition during the preseason last year, no one was disputing it then, but now that he is been traded people are questioning it. The club has been consistent on this matter since last year

9 minutes ago, Deeprived Childhood said:

That above point has been made on every page too

Hard to keep up with all the pages haha

I know every man and his dog is trying to have their say on the matter, but i will say that keeping Watts is akin to bringing in Stringer. It's not overly necessary or earth shatteringly important. The 'icing on the cake' potential is there, but it doesn't have the final say on team-wide ultimate success. The system we're building shouldn't be overly concerned with who is on the receiving end of assists from our 1 year older midfield. Obviously goal-kicking nous is valuable, but we were doing fantastically until midseason without any stand out forwards. We only have to replicate being the #1 pressure team in the competition until round 14 again, but maintain it and build upon it. With a defensive fortress held in stead by Lever, we should be well on our way towards providing more opportunies for whoever is in the forward line. I'm tipping a surprise or two forward and in the middle to bob up in place of Watts this year. 

Who knows, maybe this time next year we'll all be panicking over the loss of a player like Vandenberg, Hannan or _____ to a big offer from another club/s.

Edited October 15, 20177 yr by Deeprived Childhood

Some people want to believe what comes from the club is the only view or the only view people wish to take.  That's fine.  I believe there are usually two sides to a story so I am a bit circumspect and don't simply accept the club's view as the truth. 

We will never know the truth but I'm not going to belittle people for believing what they want so maybe people should take a deep breath before attacking poster's comments on here.  Its become unpleasant.

Lots of angst thrown my way in the quotes of posts this morning.  They have reminded me why I have stayed away from this thread for a week or two.  I'm taking a holiday from this thread again.

Edited October 15, 20177 yr by Lucifer's Hero

1 hour ago, GawnWithTheWind said:

Without Jack, if you look at our best 22, there are very few players who don't consistently do the non-negotiable (tackling and ruthless competitiveness being the main ones).

Hogan and Oscar may be the only two who you would question 100% commitment to tackling, everyone else has competitiveness and tackling as number one priority.

Pretty clear what Goodwin wants.

Without Jack our forwardline is 1 injury away from Weiderman regardless of his form, 2 injuries away from T Smith and 3 injuries away from having literally no key forwards left to play the game. If Hogan’s bad luck continues, Pederson gets injured and TMac turns out not to be a forward You have literally no forwardline. It’s not that far-fetched, it nearly happened last year.

Meanwhile Port have the luxury of playing Westhoff as a utility, Dixon will be salivating at having Watts kicking to him and he will rotate with Ryder in ruck for the most mobile rucking duo in the AFL. And this is after they already finished four places higher than us this year. 

Well done MFC you have given a free hit to a better club while making us weaker when you could have done nothing. I hope it’s worth it.

Timidly asking"Has he gone yet"?

So much handwringing. The demons are moving on.

Goodbye Jack and goodluck!

4 minutes ago, deejammin' said:

Without Jack our forwardline is 1 injury away from Weiderman regardless of his form, 2 injuries away from T Smith and 3 injuries away from having literally no key forwards left to play the game. If Hogan’s bad luck continues, Pederson gets injured and TMac turns out not to be a forward You have literally no forwardline. It’s not that far-fetched, it nearly happened last year.

Meanwhile Port have the luxury of playing Westhoff as a utility, Dixon will be salivating at having Watts kicking to him and he will rotate with Ryder in ruck for the most mobile rucking duo in the AFL. And this is after they already finished four places higher than us this year. 

Well done MFC you have given a free hit to a better club while making us weaker when you could have done nothing. I hope it’s worth it.

Hogan, Weideman, T Mac, Pedersen, T Smith, Petracca, Hannan.  All can play tall.  That's more than enough.

1 minute ago, deejammin' said:

Without Jack our forwardline is 1 injury away from Weiderman regardless of his form, 2 injuries away from T Smith and 3 injuries away from having literally no key forwards left to play the game. If Hogan’s bad luck continues, Pederson gets injured and TMac turns out not to be a forward You have literally no forwardline. It’s not that far-fetched, it nearly happened last year.

Meanwhile Port have the luxury of playing Westhoff as a utility, Dixon will be salivating at having Watts kicking to him and he will rotate with Ryder in ruck for the most mobile rucking duo in the AFL. And this is after they already finished four places higher than us this year. 

Well done MFC you have given a free hit to a better club while making us weaker when you could have done nothing. I hope it’s worth it.

Funnily enough I think Dixon will be doing the opposite. Getting angry and frustrated at Watt's inability to pull the trigger sooner with his passing, as the space around Dixon gets filled by defenders. This is certainly something I'm not going to miss.

11 hours ago, beelzebub said:

Maybe i just wont say it in black and white... somewhat appropriate for a Melb site.

Maybe youre too dim or frankly fn lazy to apply the grey matter

 Maybe you take the MFC at face value. More fool you.

There is a Trojan horse. Now run along and pretend youre intelligent.

Just because I don't take the club at face value doesn't mean I should automatically take the incoherent ramblings of an anonymous poster at face value either.

The only one "pretending" they're intelligent is the one who keeps alluding to something without ever saying what they actually mean.

But yeah, I'm just lazy because I won't engage in a charade of a guessing game with you about what you THINK is happening. ???

Front up and stand by your opinion. If you've got something to say say it, don't continue with bs riddles that you think make you come across as smart. 

13 minutes ago, deejammin' said:

Without Jack our forwardline is 1 injury away from Weiderman regardless of his form, 2 injuries away from T Smith and 3 injuries away from having literally no key forwards left to play the game. If Hogan’s bad luck continues, Pederson gets injured and TMac turns out not to be a forward You have literally no forwardline. It’s not that far-fetched, it nearly happened last year.

Meanwhile Port have the luxury of playing Westhoff as a utility, Dixon will be salivating at having Watts kicking to him and he will rotate with Ryder in ruck for the most mobile rucking duo in the AFL. And this is after they already finished four places higher than us this year. 

Well done MFC you have given a free hit to a better club while making us weaker when you could have done nothing. I hope it’s worth it.

Ugghh ....Watts is not a key forward

This thread has become Beirut on a bad day

Edited October 15, 20177 yr by Guest

4 minutes ago, deejammin' said:

Without Jack our forwardline is 1 injury away from Weiderman regardless of his form, 2 injuries away from T Smith and 3 injuries away from having literally no key forwards left to play the game. If Hogan’s bad luck continues, Pederson gets injured and TMac turns out not to be a forward You have literally no forwardline. It’s not that far-fetched, it nearly happened last year.

Meanwhile Port have the luxury of playing Westhoff as a utility, Dixon will be salivating at having Watts kicking to him and he will rotate with Ryder in ruck for the most mobile rucking duo in the AFL. And this is after they already finished four places higher than us this year. 

Well done MFC you have given a free hit to a better club while making us weaker when you could have done nothing. I hope it’s worth it.

Based on your logic, Richmond were 1 injury (Riewoldt) away from not having a forward line. BTW, Jack Watts is not a key forward. Our key forward stocks are just fine.

I don't see why the club cops the blame for these derogatory rumours going around.

They said pretty simply what the story is, and it's others who have leapt in to expand it into character assassination and/or hints of black ops.

In the space of a month, Jack has gone from an unfilfilled talent to the worst footballer in the comp.

Jack has always been a media magnet and for that reason it is wise to completely disregard anything that doesn't come out of his mouth, or the club's.

The most credible explanation is the simplest: club believes Jack is an underperformer, and believes they're better placed going forward without him on the list.

London to a brick there's nothing more to it than that.

The rest is sound and fury signifying nothing.

11 hours ago, frankie_d said:

"Trojan horse" is a particularly interesting comment. Something that isn't what it appears, and something used to smuggle in "the soldiers".

The superficial aspects of the Watts trade are really a distraction? -  the intent of the trade isn't so much to get Watts out, but to achieve another end? I wonder what that might be?  bring a full stop to the Bailey/Neeld/Schwab era? (But we've still got Jones - and Garland)

Or is Watts not the trojan horse  --- someone else is other than they seem? Goodwin? Mahoney? Someone seeking to get all the attention focused on Watts, while really having another aim?

If there is any truth in beelzebub's "Trojan horse", then it's pretty worrying...

See, this is what I mean.

Don't go trying to read into things that aren't there frankie. Someone throws out a vague comment and makes allusions to something and then you have other posters scrambling to interpret its meaning and through Chinese whispers it has a destabilising effect on the club.