13 hours ago, rjay said:

In those conditions you would have a lose man back on any ground 'rp', not just Manuka....

It appears the instruction was to use the outer side (watching from TV), as the wind was pushing the ball that way and to the right of screen. Is this what we should have been doing?

We let them open up the corridor and scoring side way too easily. This is where I would have stationed our spares and kept pushing them to the line and forcing more stoppages and boundary throw in's...this is what they did pretty easily when we had the wind.

All in all I think we played really dumb football, but I also think we have a few dumb footballers in the team.

The wind in Manuka usually pushes the ball to the 'Kingston' side pocket and that it did on Saturday. When you are defending that end like we were in the first, you station your loose man favouring that side.

But we didn't have one. GWS - 6 goals up in the second started with one... !

You also 'attack' up that wing going into the wind because you won't get punished when you turn the ball over.

The only aspect of this that is very much Manuka-driven in the belligerent arrogance of Goodwin and co. to direct us to play up the 'grandstand' side presumably because there is a small protection from the wind and we can execute our skills oh-so-well... If we were playing a shite team, I could understand it, but we were not and it was demoralising to watch as I have played, coached, and watched dozens of games at Manuka and have never instructed a team to open up the ground for the opposition the way we did for GWS in that first quarter against the wind.

 

 

47 minutes ago, rpfc said:

The wind in Manuka usually pushes the ball to the 'Kingston' side pocket and that it did on Saturday. When you are defending that end like we were in the first, you station your loose man favouring that side.

But we didn't have one. GWS - 6 goals up in the second started with one... !

You also 'attack' up that wing going into the wind because you won't get punished when you turn the ball over.

The only aspect of this that is very much Manuka-driven in the belligerent arrogance of Goodwin and co. to direct us to play up the 'grandstand' side presumably because there is a small protection from the wind and we can execute our skills oh-so-well... If we were playing a shite team, I could understand it, but we were not and it was demoralising to watch as I have played, coached, and watched dozens of games at Manuka and have never instructed a team to open up the ground for the opposition the way we did for GWS in that first quarter against the wind.

 

 

I will back him in against the saints. Big week ahead and 3 games at the G. 

 

At at least if we don't make finals with all the travel the boys have done their end of year trip will be covered with points.

1 hour ago, doc roet said:

Should go play netball.

Too much contact. Wouldn't cope 

15 hours ago, rpfc said:

If you are looking for someone to blame for that first half - Goodwin is your man.

I couldn't believe it when I saw how we were playing Manuka as a local... Just horrendous instruction and the fact we didn't have a loose man in the first quarter lost us the game.

Thank God

someone gets it.

Earlier in the year, as ruck, Jack was great. I can't help but think his sealer v Pies was his premiership in his head, or final say against a club that beat him up on debut. I agree with the other poster that he gets too satisfied and happy with himself after a decent game. The thing I feel sorry for him about though is he has never knuckled down a position on field, always being thrown around. But that still doesn't excuse his one armed marks and one armed tackles and jogging around like just another number. From what I can see his best position is ruck, but he can't be ruck in this side unfortunately. Would I trade him? Yes I'd certainly think about it, but the frustrating part is he's our best kick.

What a worn trope this is.

It's not that Jack Watts doesn't play howlers - he most certainly does.

It's the lazy, ignorant and mean spirited scape-goating that just grates. He can be critiqued, but he doesn't get 'critiqued,' not really, he gets blamed, he get the ire of those that can't fathom where else to point their anger and frustration.

Not many could hit a target and the coaching staff failed the team and us with the way they instructed the team to play.

And yet, who gets a thread dedicated to them and their role in our drama?

One member of the coaching staff gets a fawning thread for a bunch of words and the easy kill gets devoured once again.

1 hour ago, rpfc said:

The wind in Manuka usually pushes the ball to the 'Kingston' side pocket and that it did on Saturday. When you are defending that end like we were in the first, you station your loose man favouring that side.

But we didn't have one. GWS - 6 goals up in the second started with one... !

You also 'attack' up that wing going into the wind because you won't get punished when you turn the ball over.

The only aspect of this that is very much Manuka-driven in the belligerent arrogance of Goodwin and co. to direct us to play up the 'grandstand' side presumably because there is a small protection from the wind and we can execute our skills oh-so-well... If we were playing a shite team, I could understand it, but we were not and it was demoralising to watch as I have played, coached, and watched dozens of games at Manuka and have never instructed a team to open up the ground for the opposition the way we did for GWS in that first quarter against the wind.

 

 

...and we did it again in the 3rd Q. I was yelling at the tele, was such dumb footy opening it up for them.

We needed to hold in the 3rd then go in the last.

1 hour ago, rpfc said:

The wind in Manuka usually pushes the ball to the 'Kingston' side pocket and that it did on Saturday. When you are defending that end like we were in the first, you station your loose man favouring that side.

But we didn't have one. GWS - 6 goals up in the second started with one... !

You also 'attack' up that wing going into the wind because you won't get punished when you turn the ball over.

The only aspect of this that is very much Manuka-driven in the belligerent arrogance of Goodwin and co. to direct us to play up the 'grandstand' side presumably because there is a small protection from the wind and we can execute our skills oh-so-well... If we were playing a shite team, I could understand it, but we were not and it was demoralising to watch as I have played, coached, and watched dozens of games at Manuka and have never instructed a team to open up the ground for the opposition the way we did for GWS in that first quarter against the wind.

 

 

Great insight rpfc, thanks for the rundown. I was there on Saturday and it was exactly as you say. So disappointing that the coaches box was so slow to react. And after that first quarter GWS locked us down on that side of the ground so well and we had no answers. Incredibly frustrating.

I havn't read all this thread but watching the game live, I did make an effort to watch Watts as noting the way the game was going, I expected he may be an outlet of criticism for some fans.  From what I could see he was guilty of what I tell my older kids as "running everywhere but being nowhere" which is essentially a lot of three quarter pace running in open space (often running from space to space), and yes it does require a lot of effort and gut running; unfortunately it rarely impacts the contest.  What I try to teach older kids is "running with intent" which requires a lot of sprinting to get to the actual contest and importantly involved in the contest (at pace) or failing this sprinting to where the next actual contest is going to be - not space where anticipating an easy kick (from teammate or opposition).  This running with intent also then flows through to spread.  On Saturday I did not notice Watts run with intent!!!!!

Note this is not to say he doesn't in other games, or perhaps he is even instructed to play this way; it's just what I observed.

 

While Jack was not alone in having a poor day on Saturday. I think with the emergence (and health) of Hannan, Maynard, Smith, Van den Burg and Weideman, all of which appear to show more competitive vigour and intent that Jack, that Jack's ability to stay in the team will be threatened.

I've little confidence in his ability to consistently win contested ball in a one-on-one, and while he's undoubtedly a smart and at time sublime player, when the heat is on he appears to struggle in the contest (great on the outside, on the lead etc...).

With Hogan out his contested ball and marking are even more exposed.

At the moment I have Hannen, in his first year, ahead of him and would replace him with Van den burg in a heartbeat. 

 

5 hours ago, PaulRB said:

While Jack was not alone in having a poor day on Saturday. I think with the emergence (and health) of Hannan, Maynard, Smith, Van den Burg and Weideman, all of which appear to show more competitive vigour and intent that Jack, that Jack's ability to stay in the team will be threatened.

I've little confidence in his ability to consistently win contested ball in a one-on-one, and while he's undoubtedly a smart and at time sublime player, when the heat is on he appears to struggle in the contest (great on the outside, on the lead etc...).

With Hogan out his contested ball and marking are even more exposed.

At the moment I have Hannen, in his first year, ahead of him and would replace him with Van den burg in a heartbeat. 

Watts is not a contested mark - never was, never will be

The guys strength is running into space, creating an option, often finding a mismatch and becoming a link. Hogan has always said that he loves it when JW has the ball in his hands

At the moment, his timing is out

Watch him star these next three weeks

On 05/08/2017 at 7:33 PM, Clint Bizkit said:

People who defend Watts don't fully understand why he is criticised.

Has Pro Dee hacked your account, Clint?

5 minutes ago, jumbo returns said:

Has Pro Dee hacked your account, Clint?

Never mind Pro Dee, Clint is good at finding the negative in everything MFC

All I can say Is leave Britney alone.

My mail is Wattsy is back watching motivational videos by Anthony Robbins and working out to Richard Simmons

I'm sure he has the potential to lift himself to get us into finals.

 Jack will be back!

Just a crazy idea.  

Perhaps the poor form of the team can be linked to a combination of failures of coaches, players and fitness staff. 

 

6 hours ago, PaulRB said:

While Jack was not alone in having a poor day on Saturday. I think with the emergence (and health) of Hannan, Maynard, Smith, Van den Burg and Weideman, all of which appear to show more competitive vigour and intent that Jack, that Jack's ability to stay in the team will be threatened.

I've little confidence in his ability to consistently win contested ball in a one-on-one, and while he's undoubtedly a smart and at time sublime player, when the heat is on he appears to struggle in the contest (great on the outside, on the lead etc...).

With Hogan out his contested ball and marking are even more exposed.

At the moment I have Hannen, in his first year, ahead of him and would replace him with Van den burg in a heartbeat. 

VdB is a butcher of the highest order specialising in prime cuts of the sherrin going straight to the opposition. 

4 minutes ago, At the break of Gawn said:

VdB is a butcher of the highest order specialising in prime cuts of the sherrin going straight to the opposition. 

Are we pinning our hopes on an injury prone NEafl player ?

There is no comparison.

Both can sometimes kick goals.

Watts is  the most reliable shot for goal in the AFL

22 minutes ago, Stretch Johnson said:

Just a crazy idea.  

Perhaps the poor form of the team can be linked to a combination of failures of coaches, players and fitness staff. 

 

My god man ... That's.... THAT'S heresy  !!! ?

I.e.    probably much to it 

24 minutes ago, Pennant St Dee said:

Never mind Pro Dee, Clint is good at finding the negative in everything MFC

Play the ball, children.

6 minutes ago, Clint Bizkit said:

Play the ball, children.

All in jest, CB

Talking footy - it's fun 

16 minutes ago, Clint Bizkit said:

Play the ball, children.

Just stating facts CB.  Maybe it's this century which has done it to you or severe MFCSS but there's glass half empty and then there's your view on MFC

44 minutes ago, Pennant St Dee said:

Just stating facts CB.  Maybe it's this century which has done it to you or severe MFCSS but there's glass half empty and then there's your view on MFC

Not always.

I think we missed Hannan more than most realise. The pressure he applies with his agility and pace has been integral this season and is not easily replace.

 

9 hours ago, Ungarie boy said:

I havn't read all this thread but watching the game live, I did make an effort to watch Watts as noting the way the game was going, I expected he may be an outlet of criticism for some fans.  From what I could see he was guilty of what I tell my older kids as "running everywhere but being nowhere" which is essentially a lot of three quarter pace running in open space (often running from space to space), and yes it does require a lot of effort and gut running; unfortunately it rarely impacts the contest.  What I try to teach older kids is "running with intent" which requires a lot of sprinting to get to the actual contest and importantly involved in the contest (at pace) or failing this sprinting to where the next actual contest is going to be - not space where anticipating an easy kick (from teammate or opposition).  This running with intent also then flows through to spread.  On Saturday I did not notice Watts run with intent!!!!!

Note this is not to say he doesn't in other games, or perhaps he is even instructed to play this way; it's just what I observed.

 

I also watch Watts when at the game and disagree.

He always runs to a somewhere and usually this is a space where he then has time and most importantly balance to distribute the ball. He often does this at pace and does not avoid a contact if an opponent also gets to that space. He perhaps does not run to contests but rather runs to where the action will be.

That he is often ignored by his teammates or that they do not have the skill or often time to deliver it to him is a significant factor in his performance.

I don't bElieve  he ever plays without intent. But perhaps some with less ability do not know what that intention is or was. I used to see Watts get the ball and instinctively go to give it off but in that time their was never any teammate with the ability to be where he thought they should be. I see that improving and the structures and playing complement has improved. We still have some way to go but there have been matches this year when Watts has been sublime, not due to his efforts but due to those around him using him or the space he created.

Watts is often maligned as being non competitive but you do not create as many goals as he does without being at the contest. He cannot be at every contest but the more his teammates put him in the better he and the team go.

Watts and Kent are our trade bait this year.