binman

Interesting that not one person has Watts in the top 10

One can empathise and show compassion without having directly experienced the same trauma or event. Indeed no one can ever truly say they no how someone else feels whether or not there is a shared experience.

Yep compassion is important. Sure it is a neccessary ingredient but the the most important? Not IMO, certainly not in isolation and/or not in concert with the required training and communication skills. "I've got a very good relationship with Brendan and he's been communicating because he wants to be a part of Reach, he wants to help young people. Unfortunately for Brendan, there's a part of him that he's not aware of - the ramifications of what he does, he doesn't understand them just yet". Sage words from Jimmy who is clearly saying Fev has an enourmous amount of work to do before he would let him any where near any Reach clients.

Coming from the perspective of someone with 20 years experience in the social welfare sector i could not disagree more with this. The welfare sector (and particlarly the youth sector) is full of "i've been there too and i know how you feel" people who are out there trying to save souls and think they have some special capacity to do so because of what they perceive is their "shared experience". Without the neccessary theoretical underpinnings, skills, training and knowledge this often selfish pathway to redemption can be a very dangerous one for those being "helped". Fev needs to sort himself out before he worries about helping anyone else. And once he does and he still wants to work with troubled young people than in order to do so he should go get some relevant qualifications (a process that may help him in his own efforts to move forward)

The OP was complaining that the numbers never seem to completely line up from week to week - I was giving a possible alternate way of interpreting the lists. quote name='Nasher' Nasher i think you're way of interpreting the injury list is a good way to look at it, in terms of time out etc As well as raising the issue of accuracy of weeks out i also flagged the issue of fuzzy diagnosis. Can i also add a concern about what a times appears disengenuous ,or at the very least not fully transparent, informtion about injuries. Generally the club has been good in the last couple of years with info to memebers but not in this regard. The tregove injury is actually a good example. Didn't the club say he was being rested in Tassie and against the lions? When did he do his ankle? of course it could have been done at training after that but wouldn't they normally say? I'm no good at remembering specific examples but it seems to be there have been quite a few similar mysterious injuries since Bailey has been on board as well other injuries that never seem to heal or somehow morph into something else. We also seem to have an inordinate number of "general soreness" late withdrwals. I'm not espousing some strange conspirancy theory but i find it perplexing. I mean the medical and sport science teams in the AFL are at the top of their respective professions and accurate info should not be beyond them (even if legible handwriting probably is - perhaps that's the issue, 3 and 8 look so similar)

Yeah i saw that - and they had Frawley listed then as indefinite which is interesting (although predicted return early April - seems a potentially bad injury according to the info link). During the season the lists are updated weekly.

Fair call. You're right you can't hold them to the numbers but still i would like to be pretty confident if they say 6-7 weeks then it will be 'round that mark. Other clubs seem to be able to more accurate and with most injuries there are precedents they can draw on. Of the various injury sites this is my favourite: http://www.injuryupdate.com.au/afl.php as it gives a good description of the injury and even though it relies on the clubs relasing their injury list once they do it gives a generally very accurate time frame for return.

Melbourne injury list Robert Campbell (achilles) - 6-8 weeks Troy Davis (thyroid disorder) - ongoing Jack Fitzpatrick (foot) - 3 weeks James Frawley (shoulder) - 3-4 weeks Jordie McKenzie (groin) - 3-4 weeks Tom McNamara (foot) - 3 weeks Cale Morton (hand) - 4 weeks Michael Newton (hand) - 1 week Jack Trengove (ankle) - 1 week melbournefc.com.au The current injury list as of today. A bit of a concern that Chip is still 3-4 weeks away and Morton 4. I guess they may be being conservative and plan to bring them back after the bye but both have been 3-4 weeks for about 3-4 weeks. Similar situation for both Jordie McKenzie and Robert Campbell (ie weeks out staying static). Surely they can't be so far off with their initial prediction for all of them? Players can always have set backs in their rehab but surely at least one of the four would have made some progress. Only Newton seems to have made any progress of the senior players who have been out for a while.It makes me suspicious of their prediction of 1 week for Trengove. How we report our injuries and the accuracy of the time out has been a frustration of mine for the last 2-3 years (i can't be more specific with the timeframe - just kidding). It seems club policy to be fuzzy with expected length out and even diagnosis. Do others share this frustration or am i being unfair on the club?

Jurrah, Jurrah and Jurrah

good point about the bench, Bate comes out of the side and Petterd starts on the ground Howe for Watts? I don't think Watts is showing nearly enough defensive pressure and/or intensity and takes too few pack marks. Howe is older, more experiened playing against men and can take a big grab appraently (though to be fair haven't seen too many thus far). Has an X factor, woyuld like to see how he goes in the big time and we could do with a stronger player down there Oh and i think i'll change my sub to tapscott

Defensive: Bartram, Garland, Macdonald, Bail, Rivers, Grimes Guts: Jamar, Scully, Trengove, Davey, Moloney, Sylvia Forwards: Howe, Bate, Dunn, Green, Jurrah, Maric Pine: Petterd, Jones, Jetta, Benell Sub: gysberts/strauss I wonder if teams might go with an extra runner than semi big man as their sub. A risk if your ruck is injured but might be able to keep up the rotations with the runner. in our case i reckon dunn can give Jamar the chop out and after all he played the whole year without much support and made all australian

We need to ensure those playing at senior level have the required intensity (ie the one percenters, the tackling, the sheer desire to get the ball etc) that is non negotiable in todays AFL. The outside player is, almost, a thing of the past -particulalry 93kg forwards. Future development does not need to come at the cost of winning, but playing young players in the seniors is only one aspect of player development. If a player was not playing with the required intensity would their (and the teams) development be better served playing at Casey? We want Watts to develop as a KPF yet we are playing him as a high half forward (and we have a surfeit of this type of forward). Would 6 games at Casey playing CHF help his development? If they do drop Watts they could replace him with Howe who is 22 and has played 3 years of senior football. Is there not an argument to say his development would be better served playing in the AFL? If there is who would he come in for? As i have been at pains to say the issue is not Watt's potential talent but his current level of intensity. If another 18, 19 or 22 year old player had played with the required intensity over summer (and playing in the ones would aid his development) then sure why not bring him in. Why should those players development play second fiddle to JW?

I read Matt Burgans live feed on the night and there wasn't much mention of watts. He did make note of of some good early tackles by Green and Watts and that tackling seems to have been a focus (no surprise there). However from the feed it certainly didn't sound like the sort of response to a rocket you'd hope for. No goals and not in best according to the dees website. Intersting that Bailey (who "was disappointed with his team’s lack of intensity after the main break" in Tassie) made a comment that ("fierce tackler")Jetta had a good pre season and noted that they missed his tackling against the Hawks. Again the theme is intensity. I suggest the first 5 games of this season are crucial, for a whole range of reasons - our chances of making the finals not least among them. Given this i believe they will pick the side they believe will maximise their chances of winning as opposed to having a focus on future player development.

Fascinating that the focus of this thread has gone to the question of "will watts make it" rather than the initial post which was a suggestion Watts had been told that without an improvement in his form he was a chance of not being selected in round 1. My view on that issue remains the same as it was a few days ago. I don't think he should be selected if his intensity is not at AFL level and nor should any player. I respect the alternative view that he needs to be in the seniors to develop that aspect (and other componenets) of his game, though i feel his development could be assited in this regard by not being a lay down misere for selection I also repsect the view some have that Watts does indeed show the required intensity, so i'm happy to agree to disagree on that front. All that said i won't be surprised if he is not selected round 1 as i think there is question mark on his intensity level and the club has made some recent references to the need for the forwards to improve their defensive pressure Does anyone know how Watts played last Friday. How was his intensity? How was his tackling? The reports i have read have been very thin and i can't find any stats, nor is there any player review on the melbourne site.

And when he does select him in the seniors

Bingo! This what the coaching staff expect from our forwards,including JW. If they don't apply it they won't be in the team (and nor should they)

Me too, give him all the time he needs. But whilst last year you could justify playing him when his form didn't warrant it, in order to further his development, that time has passed. He should now only be selected if his form and level of intensity warrant it. If it doesn't then he should play with Casey (or the dees mgoos if/when they come along) until it does

I won't if those four goasl are from soft free kicks, he only picks up those four possesssions and flounces around the pack making theatrical attempts to get at the ball and/or man (look at me coach i'm going in hard!) This thread was intially about Watts apparently being told he was a chance of missing round 1 selection because of form, not "will he become a champion". On form he would not be picked if Round 1 was today. If he doesn't perfom today don't pick him. As noted by another poster it won't be the end of the world, in fact who knows it it might even help him (as well as sending a strong message to the rest of the team that only those 100% commited will play). Bailey has made a point of saying recently that this year is about improvement (in his parlance winning more quarters) as has Jimmy (winnig more games). To do this they need to, from round 1 , pick the team who gives us the best chance of winning as opposed to the development teams of the last few seasons. If JW is not in the best 22 don't pick him. Period

On current form he should miss round one. They've told him that, one presumes to make it clear he needs to perform tommorow (his last chance to before the season) and as i have previously suggested my feeling is the coach wants to see more intensity at the ball and greater defensive pressure. I will be really interested in how he goes tommorow. In a way his response will tell us alot about his chances of going up a level and alot about Jack. From my understanding, despite appearing somewhat laconic at times, he is very competitive and i expect he will come out all guns blazing. I also suspect that even if he does not have a great game but shows significantly increased intensity he will be selected for round 1. However without that increase in intensity even 2 or 3 goals may not be enough for him to be selected. Good work Steamin'

From the Melbourne football club website. http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/7415/newsid/108839/default.aspx Intersting article today in the age with Bailey emphasising the importance of forwards creating pressure and having to have good defensive skills (ie tackiling, physical pressure etc)

Ah isn't it great to have thread about Jack again, rather than the TSS! His age may be relevant in terms of his ability to take marks, hold his ground in marking contests etc etc but his age is completely irrelevant to the issue of intensity at the ball and man. To be clear my view is Jack has the talent to be a top player, but (and it is a big but) at the moment he doesn't go in hard enough. I reiterate that Tom Scully is as young, much smaller in frame (probably what 12 kgs lighter?) and is ferocious in his attack on the ball. What's stopping Jack following suit - certainly not his age.

Melbourne statisticss v Brisbane Lions 26 disposals - Brent Moloney 22 - Nathan Jones 19 - Rohan Bail 18 - Neville Jetta 16 - Michael Evans 15 - Mark Jamar 14 - Colin Sylvia 14 - Luke Tapscott 13 - Lynden Dunn 13 - Daniel Nicholson 12 - Matthew Warnock 12 - Ricky Petterd 12 - Jared Rivers 12 - Joel Macdonald 12 - Tom Scully 9 - Stef Martin 9 - Jordan Gysberts 9 - Jeremy Howe 8 - Matthew Bate 8 - Jamie Bennell 8 - Tom McDonald 7 - Addam Maric 7 - James Strauss 4 - Jack Watts 3 - Lucas Cook 2 - Jake Spencer Playing predominately as a high half forward (and on the ground for much of the match) and only having four possesions is not good enough, practice match or no practice match. People have sunk the boots into Bate and Martin (with some justification) but they had 8 & 9 possessions respectively. Petterd had 12, Dunn 13, Howe had 9 and Lucas Cook who was only on the ground for 20 mins almost had as many as Watts. If the club has put Watts on notice then well played i reckon.

In the 5 games i have seen thus far this year (the intra club game, Adelaide etc, Essendon and Brisbane) the thing that had stood out for me in regard to Watts has been his lack of intensity at the ball and/or man. I would not be surprised if the footy department have given him a rocket and told him he needs to fire up and perhaps this is the issue they have, not his form as such (though he only had 4 possessions against Brisbane). His size (ie still to fully bulk up) is no excuse for not being fierce at the ball. In the game against Brisbane Scully, who is still remarkably slight, went full throttle at a contest (at the half backline)and hip and shouldered a far bigger opponent. The ball jarred free and was taken into our forward line for a goal. One of ther only highlights of the day and all because of one (little) fellas desire for the ball. This is what Watts needs to bring to his game and if he can't/won't he will struggle in AFL, little lone become the champion we are yearning for

Super mercado, i'm super impressed. Had not seen the site until this thread popped up a couple of days ago. Got myself lost in following links on Demon Wiki. Ended up watching Alan jarrot winnig the Handball comp on WOS. Terrific stuff

The most common response to Sculls interview today was how mature, professional and level headed he is. Terrific stuff from a young fella. I have to say this maturity is in complete contrast to the hysterical comment/vibe that has permeated most (but not all thankfully) of the posts on Demonland to do with the TSS (Tom Scully Saga). Please demonlanders get a grip, lets focus on the year ahead and take a leaf from the young mans' book and focus on the task at hand. TS will come out tommorow and go about his business and start the build towards another season of footy. Lets do the same and start focusing on the team not the individual