nutbean

only because of the photo above it - Roos pointing to the way out !

Don't be ridiculous - it's not the recruiters - it's our incompetent medical/fitness team.

Its more difficult for AFL than NRL as unless you are a free agent you don't have unrestricted movement like the NRL players have. So take the example of Tom MacDonald - how can he come out midseason and say I'm off to Hawthorn next year ? Both Hawthorn and Melbourne would have to be able to broker a deal to make that happen and we know that doesn't always happen. The only players this approach could work for is unrestricted free agents like Frawley as he has unfettered movement.

I've addressed your first point to death so I will let that one go but the second point is interesting. I, like you, would prefer more information. Not for one minute would I suggest that a player would read a VFL report and think "wow - I did not know that !". I am also sure that Roos information on the VFL would come from more sources that just reading the report on the AFL website. I would also suggest that Allison/Millers reports would be more in depth and discussed in detail with Roos and the selection panel so they can make a more informed selection decision. I am hoping that there is no disconnect between the VFL panel and the coaches at the MFC but as previously said - I would like more information before damning.

That is not unusual for NRL - it is part of their system. You can announce you are off and who you are off to whilst still playing for your club. We also have the problem with the non Free agents not having the freedom to be able to move to the club of their choice that would make the NRL model problematic.

I suspect that you are 100% right and it is entirely for our benefit and I like most others on this site have been interested in the insight and comments. However...... For many years I have been involved in people management and I only see downside in this approach from a players perspective and absolutely no benefit whatsoever. There has been a middle ground suggested. Publish the stats and give a match report like Hawthorn does - Hawthorn pick out the players that have impressed and have put their name up for selection. We are intelligent people - if a players name is not mentioned we can put one and one together ( and call him a spud and ask for his immediate delisting)

You hear so much sanitised stuff from coaches in public these days - that is vastly different to what the players are hearing behind closed doors. I again get that SUPPORTERS love the review but again I will ask - what does the players get out of their performances being critiqued publicly ? Well said Mark Neeld. This debate is not about handling constructive criticism - it is about putting such criticism into the public arena. Contrast this to McCartney after he gave Macrae a spray - But he said on Wednesday that he would in future keep such criticism in-house. ''I was probably too honest,'' he said. Once more I ask - We are trying to develop, improve and rectify bad habits of players - does PUBLICLY critiquing the players have a positive benefit for the player. If there is a benefit please let me know as I can't see it. ( I have been in business long enough and read enough to know that outside the football arena - criticism no matter how constructive is best handled one on one. ) Some players will just accept it but how about others with more fragile egos ( and unfortunately there are plenty of those) ?- This is a quote from Roos from early in the year - "One thing we don't know is how scarred the group is and how down on confidence they are, and how soon we can get that back up.". Does publicly criticising individual players have a benefit to the player ?

Negotiation skills 101.

That's the biggest load of horseshi................... ohhh...

If you think footballers have fragile ego's that's nothing compared to me. I would make Lake's hissy fit look like nonchalance.

I agree - don't serve up rubbish but why are we entitled to know the contents of player reviews ? We have never had it in the seniors - Have a look at the Hawks VFL handling - they give a VFL match report and highlight who played well and is in line for promotion. Those who don't get a mention - we can work it out for ourselves. I don't accept that because we don't see the game we need the club to give us a player by player critique. Even though we see the seniors it is obvious that the coaches see players differently than we do. I like Salem but he has so far failed to provide any more than cameos. Many have been wondering why he has held his place. I am sure Roos has his reasons - but doesn't the same apply - should Roos tell us why ? I am NOT making this conversation about us, the supporters. I am making it about the players and I have noted that we are the only club that gives such frank assessments - are we cleverer than the rest of the AFL ?

You still have avoided the question - you don't see any other club making such frank assessments of individuals public - do you think this is beneficial to the player ? If you answer this yes - then shouldn't you question as to why don't all clubs don't do this for VFL and furthermore why it is not done at senior level.

No problem with your performance reviews at work being made public ? No idea why players wouldn't appreciate them ? And your idea of coaching is if a player doesn't do as he is told then the best way to fix that problem is just make it public !

You don't recognise the difference between numbnuts fans like us and the media getting stuck in as opposed to coaches who set specific roles and KPI's ? To draw the analogy again - it doesn't worry me what you say about my work performance - I only answer to my boss. There is match review of the seniors with each club every week - seen one of those made public ? Do you see senior coaches critique all senior players every week ? Why is that ? Do you hear coaches explain the role all players are given each week and how they performed ? Roos has stated that they set specific roles in the team for the players - has he ever elaborated on them ? I have never been a Jack Watts knocker but even his most ardent supporters have been given plenty of ammunition to criticise through games this year. Have you seen Roos make one negative comment about Watts? So are we saying - there are two sets of rules - one for MFC listed players getting a senior gig and another for the ones playing at Casey - once you make the seniors you are immune from public criticism ? I re-iterate - the only people who are benefiting from this insight are the supporters and I certainly wouldn't think the players appreciate it. If we truly believe this is so beneficial then we should be calling for the same critiquing of the seniors ( there are countless posts here where people can't understand why Bail/Watts/Terlich/Garland/Frawley and countless others are getting a game - shouldn't we have insight as to why they are ?)

So I have had a look at other club websites. Carlton and Geelong seemed to ignore VFL altogether. Hawks do a generic match report. Richmond and Collingwood do the same as us - have their coach/development manager assess each player - posters should go on the sites and read them - they are in stark contrast to us. Richmond had to very soft negative comments and it appears everyone is a gun at Collingwood even if you don't a kick.

My issue with it is - I find it completely unnecessary. The players should receive feedback and it should be done one on one. The only the positives I can see for this method is for the supporters and as you have pointed out - I can only see a negative for the players. I will repeat - I have performance reviews but it isn't published in the company newsletter.

Roos really liked the giving up of pick 2 for a quality player plus a later first rounder. I wouldn't be surprised to see the same deal again with GWS. Buy one, get one free.

After reading Allison's reports I thought his blunt assessments might just be his style but after reading Miller's report, and the same bluntness, I can only conclude that this public method of critiquing players is a policy of the FD. ( as opposed to "Jeff Kennett going off half cocked at Hawthorn - but hey that's Jeff")

I was only half listening to be honest. It started off as a serve re Goose of the week but he launched into "Denham has nothing of note to say about anything at all". If he wasn't serious he certainly delivered it dead pan. I confess to not listening to KB's show because my ears vomit when I hear him - is this a running joke between Smith and Denham to slag off at each other ?

So would GWS - at us for even suggesting it.

Agreed. I haven't seen anything to suggest that he doesn't want to be there. I have seen some fumbling. I have seen some poor decisions and disposal. And I have seen this from lots of players apart from Frawley. I understand that people have varying views on his worth to the team due to some of his flaws but I seriously question that his effort has missing.

I think they should play him in the centre indicating that they are uncertain either way.

I was in the car yesterday and heard a bit of Patrick Smith - it amused me that he doesn't like Greg Denham any more than we do - he gave him a right decent serve.

For the record - mine IS bigger than yours.

Actually - it is a rarity - that's why it made headlines.