Get off your high horse Caro!

[Tiger74]

I just really hope the club puts a submission to the AFL. If the AFL say no, then thats that. But we should at least ask.

AFL has already said no - chances of this happening now are as remote as Polak putting his arms above his head ( :hihi )

if we ask now we look pathetic. better for the club to look for alternate ways for "support" that don't effect the alleged integrity of the draft. personally I have no idea what these are, but thats why I'm not the CEO

 

[cmarkidis]

Agree with this. IMO Demetripoo couldn't give a toss about the RFC. I have a sneaking suspicion that he thinks we could solve his Tassie issue via relocation. Would be very surprised if he goes out of his way to give us back the picks to which we are entitled.

The Tigers are one of the last pieces of the Victorian jigsaw for the AFL to boost attendances and TV ratings with. Demitriou knows this. But whilst he's got the AFL flush with funds and projects in the Gold Coast and GWS to work on, I'd be surprised if he gives us a leg up. This is why we need to take advantage of the rules for ourselves, and ourselves alone - stuff the rest. I keep harping on it, but we MUST make free agency work for us. Draft picks are good, but soon we will need some A-grade experienced players to compliment the youngsters we have taken in the last few ND's. If we don't land the big fish we want, at least we can make our competitors pay through the teeth to keep them.

 

[waiting since 80]

AFL has already said no - chances of this happening now are as remote as Polak putting his arms above his head ( :hihi )

if we ask now we look pathetic. better for the club to look for alternate ways for "support" that don't effect the alleged integrity of the draft. personally I have no idea what these are, but thats why I'm not the CEO

Something that Bulldogs, Melbourne and Kangaroos get every year is money from the equalization fund!... it' around 2.5 million a year each. Something that we are entitled too, though we are too proud to ask for it??, with our debt that we have we should be grabbing it with both hands dont you think?.

 

[Tiger74]

Something that Bulldogs, Melbourne and Kangaroos get every year is money from the equalization fund!... it' around 2.5 million a year each. Something that we are entitled too, though we are too proud to ask for it??, with our debt that we have we should be grabbing it with both hands dont you think?.

we have already received money through the equalization fund - its automatically given to clubs with crappy stadium deals and historically small membership bases

 

[Jack]

AFL has already said no - chances of this happening now are as remote as Polak putting his arms above his head ( :hihi )

if we ask now we look pathetic. better for the club to look for alternate ways for "support" that don't effect the alleged integrity of the draft. personally I have no idea what these are, but thats why I'm not the CEO

I hear what you are saying. But the club still should put a submission forward.

Us as members demand that our club do evertthing possible to have success. If they don't put a submission forward are they doing everything possible? It is the clubs bound duty to a least put a proposal forward.

And, as the season goes on, the AFL could think differently. It is only round 7. If it gets to round 20 and we are still winless and getting beaten by big margins each week, the AFL would have to talk about us behind closed doors. By about round 20, Richmond will be a big story if we are a chance to be winless for the year. It is something that would get big media attention and lead to discussions within the AFL.

Surely the AFL would have to have a look at it. I mean what are priority picks for? Are they not for teams that have under performed for a long period? Designed to keep the league as even as possible so you don't have the same under performing teams in the bottom 4 year after year.

Surely no one fits the bill more than Richmond. Sure they have come up with a criteria of not winning more than 4 games 2 years running. But again I ask what are priority picks for? They are for long term unsuccessful clubs, and surely if you have not made the finals for 10 years, been bottom 4 most of those years, finish 15th one year and are winless the next, then surely that has some merrett for a priority pick. And remember, we cannot get picks 1 and 2 at the moment. We simply would want an extra pick onto our pick 4 so we have something like pick 4 and pick 10. Something that gives us a chance to rebuild and become competitive, just as priority picks are designed to do.

 

[Harry]

Is it any surprise? when the club year in year out, gave away and traded down early picks for retreads and went maximum 3 deep in the national drafts preferring to hold onto mediocre players in the hope they would improve ten fold. constantly went for quick fixes because "we need mature bodies and experience". when other clubs with stronger lists cherished their early picks and maximised the number of picks in the national draft and we treated our picks like poker chips. when we constantly lived in fantasy land and overrating our list was the norm where anyone that opened their eyes would have seen that we lacked class all over the park. when our football dept was more concerned about spin than actually developing the team. this has been long coming and anyone that has followed this club long enough with an open mind could have would have should have seen this a mile away.

 

[premiers2011]

Is it any surprise? when the club year in year out, gave away and traded down early picks for retreads and went maximum 3 deep in the national drafts preferring to hold onto mediocre players in the hope they would improve ten fold. constantly went for quick fixes because "we need mature bodies and experience". when other clubs with stronger lists cherished their early picks and maximised the number of picks in the national draft and we treated our picks like poker chips. when we constantly lived in fantasy land and overrating our list was the norm where anyone that opened their eyes would have seen that we lacked class all over the park. when our football dept was more concerned about spin than actually developing the team. this has been long coming and anyone that has followed this club long enough with an open mind could have would have should have seen this a mile away.

Sadly Hazza your spot on

 

[ToraToraTora]

Is it any surprise? when the club year in year out, gave away and traded down early picks for retreads and went maximum 3 deep in the national drafts preferring to hold onto mediocre players in the hope they would improve ten fold. constantly went for quick fixes because "we need mature bodies and experience". when other clubs with stronger lists cherished their early picks and maximised the number of picks in the national draft and we treated our picks like poker chips. when we constantly lived in fantasy land and overrating our list was the norm where anyone that opened their eyes would have seen that we lacked class all over the park. when our football dept was more concerned about spin than actually developing the team. this has been long coming and anyone that has followed this club long enough with an open mind could have would have should have seen this a mile away.

POTY.

 

[Tigers of Old]

Surely no one fits the bill more than Richmond. Sure they have come up with a criteria of not winning more than 4 games 2 years running. But again I ask what are priority picks for? They are for long term unsuccessful clubs, and surely if you have not made the finals for 10 years, been bottom 4 most of those years, finish 15th one year and are winless the next, then surely that has some merrett for a priority pick. And remember, we cannot get picks 1 and 2 at the moment. We simply would want an extra pick onto our pick 4 so we have something like pick 4 and pick 10. Something that gives us a chance to rebuild and become competitive, just as priority picks are designed to do.

In 2007/2008 we had our chances to really strengthen the list but we weren't smart enough to full utilise the system (tank) despite realising that GC17 was coming full steam ahead. The conflict of our coaches interests compromised our future.
Wallet's priorities were making the 8 to save his own skin as opposed to strengthening the bottom of our list. That he traded 19 off for Mcmuppet was indicative of his overall mindset.
The irony here however is to fully utilise the system it would have meant deliberately tanking and that would have gone against everything that Dimi would have us believe, that is that no teams tank. :spin

We've been punished for not tanking and now faced with the GC17/WS18 locomotive, we're being punished again despite being genuinely in need of those PPs.
I thought we were unlucky to miss pick 1 in 2007 despite finishing last. Amazing to think that 3 years later our club despite clearly being the worst side is once again on the receiving end of lost compensation that is so desperately needed.

Gawd how does this happen to us?? :brickwall :brickwall :brickwall

 

[TOT70]

In 2007/2008 we had our chances to really strengthen the list but we weren't smart enough to full utilise the system (tank) despite realising that GC17 was coming full steam ahead. The conflict of our coaches interests compromised our future.
Wallet's priorities were making the 8 to save his own skin as opposed to strengthening the bottom of our list. That he traded 19 off for Mcmuppet was indicative of his overall mindset.
The irony here however is to fully utilise the system it would have meant deliberately tanking and that would have gone against everything that Dimi would have us believe, that is that no teams tank. :spin

We've been punished for not tanking and now faced with the GC17/WS18 locomotive, we're being punished again despite being genuinely in need of those PPs.
I thought we were unlucky to miss pick 1 in 2007 despite finishing last. Amazing to think that 3 years later our club despite clearly being the worst side is once again on the receiving end of lost compensation that is so desperately needed.

Gawd how does this happen to us?? :brickwall :brickwall :brickwall

Yep. That’s Richmond. In the wrong place at the wrong time all the time.

Thing is, the AFL has set plenty of precedents for helping out clubs that were struggling. In the early 1990s, for example, it introduced a one-off rule to help out a struggling Sydney, allowing them a free shot at two uncontracted players. Richmond fans will recall that those two players were Stuart Maxfield and Kevin Dyson from Melbourne. The Sydney administrators were so incompetent at the time that they misunderstood the rule and tried to get Maxfield and Naish, both from Richmond, before the AFL clarified it for them.

Just to make sure that they got back on track, Sydney (and Brisbane) were granted larger lists for a few years, giving them an extra six or so players than everyone else. As a part of their concessions, both GC and GWS will have lists of 48 plus 9 rookies in their first year when everyone else will have lists of 38 and 8 rookies.

The precedents are there. The AFL has helped out struggling clubs before.

 

[tigersnake]

AS Ridley said, there is a genuine, irrefutable equity issue here. Every other side that has bottomed out in the past, and will bottom out in the future, gets a swag of early picks. We don't. Why? because of an oversight and now bloody-mindedness by the league. It should be addressed full stop. Its ludicrous that Demetriou just stonewalls us, simply wrong. Yeah the new clubs should get some establishment concessions, I think they are too generous but thats a separate issue, but the legitimate needs and rights of the established clubs should not be forgotten.

This is crap, its an injustice.. I'm gunna write to the league, and I'd others too as well.

 

[GoodOne]

Personally I find it hard to have to much compassion for our plight. We have not been successful for 25+ odd years. Plenty of times we've been at the bottom of the rung and haven't taken full advantage of our higher picks. Now we are struggling at the worst time. Other teams manage to take advantage of the circumstances at the time. I don't know whether we are just too honest, or indeed just unlucky but it's clear for the next 3-4 years ALL effort of the AFL will be for the successful integration of the two new teams into the AFL - at the expense of the rest of the competition. We just have to live with it.

 

[IrockZ]

Yep. That’s Richmond. In the wrong place at the wrong time all the time.

Thing is, the AFL has set plenty of precedents for helping out clubs that were struggling. In the early 1990s, for example, it introduced a one-off rule to help out a struggling Sydney, allowing them a free shot at two uncontracted players. Richmond fans will recall that those two players were Stuart Maxfield and Kevin Dyson from Melbourne. The Sydney administrators were so incompetent at the time that they misunderstood the rule and tried to get Maxfield and Naish, both from Richmond, before the AFL clarified it for them.

Just to make sure that they got back on track, Sydney (and Brisbane) were granted larger lists for a few years, giving them an extra six or so players than everyone else. As a part of their concessions, both GC and GWS will have lists of 48 plus 9 rookies in their first year when everyone else will have lists of 38 and 8 rookies.

The precedents are there. The AFL has helped out struggling clubs before.

You cant compare us with interstate sides.

The AFL was desperate for them to become successful while they couldnt give a crap about us.

Im not holding my breath on any concessions coming our way.

 

[Baloo]

I don't think Demestos wants us gone. Our support base is way too big for him to even contemplate relocating or merging us. Our supporters have also done the right thing by the Doggies and other clubs so I'm pretty sure most AFL fans will rise against a push in this direction. The media would also go a bit crazy.

It would cost him his job.

 

[YinnarTiger]

AFL has already said no - chances of this happening now are as remote as Polak putting his arms above his head ( :hihi )

Agree, but as you already know, that happened this week!

 

[Willo]

Is it any surprise? when the club year in year out, gave away and traded down early picks for retreads and went maximum 3 deep in the national drafts preferring to hold onto mediocre players in the hope they would improve ten fold. constantly went for quick fixes because "we need mature bodies and experience". when other clubs with stronger lists cherished their early picks and maximised the number of picks in the national draft and we treated our picks like poker chips. when we constantly lived in fantasy land and overrating our list was the norm where anyone that opened their eyes would have seen that we lacked class all over the park. when our football dept was more concerned about spin than actually developing the team. this has been long coming and anyone that has followed this club long enough with an open mind could have would have should have seen this a mile away.

That's a fair call Harry. (the following isn't directed at you)

BUT, the thing that gripes me, is that as supporters we've just had to suck it all up.
Yep you can blame past recruitment decisions, coaches, boards, managers etc.
BUT where does it leave us humble supporters, other clubs have stuffed up, but they got some "compensation" for their stuffings up.
We currently have a stable administration hell bent on turning things around, a coach/staff/players on a hiding to nothing, why? because of decisions made, mainly by their predecessors.

Have other clubs been penalised like we're about to be, in regard to pick1 for coming last or qualifying for priority picks, that the afl have changed then changed again.
How many clubs get financial assistance from the afl?? how many have been "mismanaged"? financially.

I don't give too hoots whether some people want to load all the blame at "the clubs" feet.
As a member, I'm part of this club. Nobody asked me to trade picks for players, or select the wrong player, especially since "we" all knew they should have selected "someone else".
Why should I (and many like me) have to endure more years of abject misery because the afl deems 2 new clubs a priority over mine.
These people can get stuffed. Bloody typical. Some people have their heads up their khybers, pronouncing "Its all the clubs fault". Look to the future, see what we can become, sure we need help, plenty of other clubs haven't been shy in putting their hands out.
What about us as members??
I'd be prepared to send a bloody petition to the afl and demandrequest some assistance.

 

[French Tiger]

When it all comes down to it Caro is just another frustrated Tiger supporter like we all are & she is just venting some anger.

 

[Big Cat Lover]

That's a fair call Harry. (the following isn't directed at you)

BUT, the thing that gripes me, is that as supporters we've just had to suck it all up.
Yep you can blame past recruitment decisions, coaches, boards, managers etc.
BUT where does it leave us humble supporters, other clubs have stuffed up, but they got some "compensation" for their stuffings up.
We currently have a stable administration hell bent on turning things around, a coach/staff/players on a hiding to nothing, why? because of decisions made, mainly by their predecessors.

Have other clubs been penalised like we're about to be, in regard to pick1 for coming last or qualifying for priority picks, that the afl have changed then changed again.
How many clubs get financial assistance from the afl?? how many have been "mismanaged"? financially.

I don't give too hoots whether some people want to load all the blame at "the clubs" feet.
As a member, I'm part of this club. Nobody asked me to trade picks for players, or select the wrong player, especially since "we" all knew they should have selected "someone else".
Why should I (and many like me) have to endure more years of abject misery because the afl deems 2 new clubs a priority over mine.
These people can get stuffed. Bloody typical. Some people have their heads up their khybers, pronouncing "Its all the clubs fault". Look to the future, see what we can become, sure we need help, plenty of other clubs haven't been shy in putting their hands out.
What about us as members??
I'd be prepared to send a bloody petition to the afl and demandrequest some assistance.

I'll support your petition

 

[Tigers of Old]

I honestly believe that they won't give us any concessions as the AFL see this as the opportunity to make the tanking debate disappear.

 

[bowden4president]

In 2007/2008 we had our chances to really strengthen the list but we weren't smart enough to full utilise the system (tank) despite realising that GC17 was coming full steam ahead. The conflict of our coaches interests compromised our future.
Wallet's priorities were making the 8 to save his own skin as opposed to strengthening the bottom of our list. That he traded 19 off for Mcmuppet was indicative of his overall mindset.
The irony here however is to fully utilise the system it would have meant deliberately tanking and that would have gone against everything that Dimi would have us believe, that is that no teams tank. :spin

The worst part about that, is that it shouldn't have mattered what Wallace's situation was. Our recruiting department should have been able to turn around and tell him that it is their job to do what's best for the football Club, not what's best for him!!