Danny's Plan

[antigravity]

With so much debate over Danny's tenure as coach since Richmond's poor effort in the Wizard Cup and Round 1, I'd thought i'd discuss my opinion on Danny's "plan"..

When Danny first came in, in 2000 I was both skeptical and hopeful at what at the time, seemed like a board decision based on desperation. His overall performance has been average (49% winning percentage) both statistically and from a fan's point of view.

Most Tiger supporters would agree that his heart on sleeve personality is definately a joy to witness and fits in well with the culture of the club. People will definately disagree with the following statement, but the quality of some of the younger players that have come through during his stay as head coach is promising and is unmatched by any previous administration during the past 20 years. On this observation alone, Danny's talent as a scout and evaluating a prospective players potential is applaudable. Yes Beck is the scout and not Danny, but at the end of the day, Spud must see something in a player for him to be brought to Punt Road. If you don't beleive so, compare the youngsters drafted during the Geishen days (apart from ottens). Beck worked for both of them.
The Frawley-Knights saga seemed unprofessional and insensitive, yet by informing Knights of what was going to happen before the end of the season was nothing but professional and sensitive. Letting go a once great player for the better of the team as a whole is professional as one can get. Buy letting him know during the season that he wasn't needed, rather than after, gave both the supporters and Knights to bid farewell to each other on good terms.

However, Frawley's main downside is his inability (from a fan's viewpoint) to properly evaluate a currently listed players skills and where they could be best incorporated onto the field. This is clearly demonstrated when Rogers is played in the midfield, Bowden on the half back line and Pettifer in the forward line (or on the field at all!), just to name a few. His inability to properly experiment is cause for concern and the fact that he seems to experiment with team strategy at the most inopportune times make people wonder what he's thinking.

At the end of the day, his overall performance has been adequate, but for a team building for finals success it hasn't been up to scratch.

Hopefully the Richmond administration doesn't act on Frawley and an extension or termination of his contract until after the so called "5 year plan" (which presumably is after the 2004 season). Only then will we as fans, and the administration be able to comprehensively evaluate his overall performance. Sacking him now is looking at the short term, and as Richmond's financial situation is supposedly stable, it would be the wrong decision.

Giving Danny Frawley the chance to complete his contractual agreements is only going to be a step forward for the club as a whole. Showing that the Richmond Football Club is a rational and professional club is going to attract rational and professional players, coaches and administrators. Funnily enough, rationalism and professionalism is what leads to success.

Our list under Danny Frawley and the current management has improved year after year, and with this alone dumbfounds me considering the amount of skepticism that is displayed on this board and in the stands of the MCG.

Lets all get behind the players, the coach and administration because ultimately this is going to encourage success rather than hinder it.

 

[Harry]

Great post antigravity. A few things though.

For me personally Danny's heart on his sleeve personality is not enjoyable to witness and my stomach churns most times Danny speaks.

I do disagree with your comments about the young players that have come through in his stay. Now I'm not sure whether Danny was in charge for the 99 draft, but assuming he was, we have currently 5 players in the side that can be considered regulars. If he was'nt in charge for the 99 draft then we only have 3. These are Coughlan, Newman, and Rodan with Fiora and Zantuck picked up in 99 (I beleive). IMO these players have potential but none have really proved themselves yet.

This is 5 players out of approx. 20-25 players we have picked up. I know that we have picked up alot of recycled players but IMO this success rate with young talent is not quite good enough.

Can't agree with you more about playing players out of position, especially rogers.

The Knights saga was a disgrace. Saying that Knights wasn't in his future plans yet he persists with others that I won't mention was pathetic. At a bear minimum keeping Knights would have helped in the development of the young players.

Knights was a champion at the club and Frawely lost a lot of points for this move. Knights gave everything to the club and he was still in good form and was playing better than most of our other midfielders at the time.

If Frawely had differences with knights (which had been suggested) then it was pretty unprofessional of him to let him go. If frawely had of given a few more players the axe (ie rogers, king DK, cameron etc) and really was looking to rebuild the team then the knights move would have been justified.

IMO I really beleive that 3 years is ample enough time to instill the type of game you want to see in your side. Frawely is in his fourth year and I haven't as yet seen glimpses of a style of play that would be competitive being executed consistently enough to lead me to beleive that Frawely is on the right track.

I'm not saying frawely has no idea, however I let his players on the field do the talking for him. Assuming for just one second, just assuming, that Frawely really has no idea. Do we persist with him for another 2 years for the sake of giving him a 5 year plan? Thats a tough question because I agree stability is important, however if we are not heading in the right direction whats the point in having stability.

 

[Hungry]

Some good points there. I think it's easy to forget what a basket-case our club was in the 1999 season. We were shocking, played the worst brand of football I've ever seen, and even Campbo has said that we're lucky not to have won the wooden spoon that year.

We had the worst skills of any team, no pace and no game plan at all (which lead to chipping the ball 20 metres along the boundary). Apparently players didn't even know when training was on half the time. We signed up four pretty good players on long term contracts for too much money and didn't blood any youngsters (I remember Geishen saying it was time to blood youngsters, and he waited until the last game to bring in Ray Hall - Hall sat on the bench the ENTIRE game, until the last two minutes when the game was over).

Marketing and sponsorship was woeful, and while they could get better, both have visibly improved (my family are Essendon and I can assure you, the RFC now contacts me more than EFC contact them).

And the list - there was enough dead wood on there to start a bushfire - remember Moore? Sampson? Rombotis? Steinfort? Ramsay? Blurton? James? - to name a few.

Yes, Danny has made mistakes, and I think his biggest weakness may well be his soft spot for 'battlers', who are admirable, but ultimately flawed in some way - we know who they are.

I also think his record with youth is better than any of the previous regimes, and in his 3 seasons (yes, it's only been 3,) our kids have been given four rising star nominations - a fair amount i reckon.

Trading has been mixed, sure, but L.Cameron was an inspirational pick up for this club - he stood out in the first half of 2000, but I reckon he's had a huge influence on the improvement in our kicking (even Gaspar's improved out of sight there). I also reckon Johnson and Blumfield are good choices and can understand King and Sziller - the fact is we had needed players who could get the ball.

I can also understand their draft strategy last year - people forget how young a lot of our players are, and we need blokes with a bit of physical maturity for depth (Fleming, Nicholls).

I think that's it, but fair dinkum, thinking of '99 makes me shudder.

 

[dimmauchump]

All i gotta say is since people are making posts about my attitude and blah, blah you guys have said everything ive been saying about frawley till now!!!!! OK so maybe you have said it in a better way but mine is out of pure frustration and maybe comes out nastier than it really is!!!! The point made about letting him see out his contract is really not a solution!!! Imagine we had let walls and gieschen finish their contracts!???? We would have been rattling tins and stirring pots with all those wooden spoons!!!! I know it sounds harsh but we need success and we need it now!!!! We need the right coach to get the players we have to do the job!!!! A coach who has the balls to delist players and make the harsh decisions come match day!!!! Totally agree on knighter, and if people believe what he did was right so he could please a few people at the club then they shouldnt call themselves tiger supporters!!!! Knighter had at least one more year in him and he would have left on a good note!!! He probably would even have stuck around and coached our midfield!!! Instead we had a icon of the tigers, a true champ cut short while others are given chance after chance when they dont deserve it!!!! ALA cameron, king, tivendale, rogers!!!!

Its good to see that other supporters can see the flaws in THE SPUD!!!!

Seems as though most people on this board prefer to hear what they want- but enough said on that!!!

Keep the posts up!!!

 

[MC24]

… you guys have said everything ive been saying about frawley till now!!!!! OK so maybe you have said it in a better way but mine is out of pure frustration and maybe comes out nastier than it really is!!!!

Here I was thinking you hadn't noticed FUD. How wrong was I?

You don't think we're just as frustrated as you? The only real difference is that some of us deal with what we have now, instead of living in coulda, woulda, shoulda.

Things are on the right track at the Club and I have faith that things will be different from now on and if I didn't think they were don't think I would be saying so. I have no doubt that the right people will make the right decisions at the right time. By all means have an opinion, but see that there is actually some good happening at our Club, whether you or anybody else wants to see it.

 

[antigravity]

And the list - there was enough dead wood on there to start a bushfire - remember Moore? Sampson? Rombotis? Steinfort? Ramsay? Blurton? James? - to name a few.

*Shudder*

Moore, Sampson, Blurton, Ramsay.. That does bring back some bad memories.
However I have to admit I had a soft spot for James and Rombotis. Both were fairly hard at the ball, and I loved James' recklessness and toughness. Something that we lack at Richmond.

I always thought that fat arse Blurton was out token aboriginal player.. He was HOPELESS.. Clinton King however more skilled could be called the moden day Moore..