aboynamedsue wrote:
If Austin can't get a game with Jamo, Waite, White, Setanta out injured and Bower underdone and Watson in so-so VFL form - then I'd say his papers have been stamped.
I think Austin should have played against the Bulldogs instead of Bower. Not because I think it would have made a huge difference to the result - or that I rate him more highly than Bower (I don't) - but because (1) he's match-fit and in solid VFL form; (2) he deserved another chance (in the circumstances, I didn't think his performance in the WCE game was as bad as some have suggested); (3) unlike Bower, he has shown he can play at both ends of the ground; and (4) it would have allowed Bower to have a full game in the VFL last week to find some fitness and confidence (which could have saved us from using him the Sub yesterday - ie. he could have started in defence and either Austin or Watson been the Sub).
The management of Austin, Bower & Watson has got me very confused at the moment...
+1.
The comments of some on here that Austin had his chance vs WCE are just absurd.
Having a look at the stats on the AFL website for him in the game:
8 possessions (100% efficiency), 4 contested, 1 clanger, 2 marks (1 contested), 1 inside 50, 2 rebound 50, 4 tackles, 7 1%ers
If that's a bad game, from a guy who hadn't played since 2009 (due mainly to injury), then I'll go he.
Watson yesterday:
10 possessions (70%), 4 contested, 2 clangers, 1 mark, 2 rebound 50, 1 tackle, 3 1%ers
(To my knowledge, kick-ins aren't included and this was probably the most notable area in which Watson was shown up yesterday - in my view he was probably selected ahead of Austin for this aspect of his game and, unfortunately, he was a liability)
I'm not saying that Austin is a better long-term prospect than Watson, but he deserves fairer treatment. If there's any consistency about the MC, Watson has to go cos on the stats above, he was even 'worse' than Austin a couple of weeks ago.
Bower looked good when he came on - must start next week's game.