Hudson said he picked up a knock in training on Thursday.
Colwill missed a good part of pre-season with a minor injury.
He made an impression in the second Wales match as a second half sub, but he is still being eased in.
Hudson (and I think Morison less clearly) referred to his growth spurt this year, and how he is adjusting physically and mentally.
McCarthy, Morison and Hudson have all spoken about Colwill's abilities and potential - but he does have weaknesses to work on.
James Rowberry on EJFOF referred to his struggles with heading (and the extra sessions they used to do after training to improve it).
Morison repeated that observation in a jokey way to highlight how good Colwill is in other aspects of his game. He got slaughtered for that on here and a few posters have seriously put it forward as evidence that he didn't like the player. Some of his other comments were ill judged and maybe revealed doubts about Colwill as a guaranteed starter - but not that one.
Why can't we just take Mark Hudson's words at face value? That Colwill is currently the best of the Academy crop and he could be anything he wants to be as a player - the sky's the limit. That he is getting through a growth spurt and a few niggling injuries but is valued and being nurtured by the coaches. That he has some weaknesses in his game (and the last manager wasn't sure how to use him) but that he is working on those weaknesses, is committed to the club, and the manager expects him to be a key player for us.
Enough of the negative thoughts!