Matthew Clarke | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

Matthew Clarke

Tigertough1974 said:
A lot of stuff in your post, the question i have is do you think good character is not important? as your making a point of this... football ability is eye of the beholder especially young ability, hence many many at each club watching them, needless to say FJ got a lot wrong, being of good character is vital to them maximizing their potential IMO

We are all sitting here trying to understand how and if the recruiting philosophy will change with this change in personnel.
My post was only about the contrast between Jackson and Clarke.
In looking at my previous posts I now realise that I used the wrong quote about the addition of Williams rather than this one about Clarke's philosophy.
http://www.richmondfc.com.au/news/2014-10-02/tigers-go-oneonone-with-draft-hopefuls

I do not think good character is unimportant (few double negatives there), however I don't think it's essential as Clarke says in that article.
“Good people in good football clubs, make great football clubs.”
IMO if you recruit any staff, rejecting the ones who do not exhibit GOOD character, you may limit your results.
Examples of juniors who did not show GOOD character and were downgraded due to it would be both Franklin and Darling.
I think character is a key aspect. Note I have not said GOOD character.

IMO it takes all types to be successful.
GOOD character tends to lead to solid citizens (as I put it previously). The ones who don't rock the boat.
IMO Having an entire team of that type can be as bad as having too many "bad boys" or "loose cannons".

Finally I agree with you that judgement of football ability is in the eye of the beholder.
I'd even extend it out from there into personal qualities like character.
All recruitment eventually comes down to subjective opinion.
It's why we're all still trying to get a handle on Clarke.
 
RedanTiger said:
We are all sitting here trying to understand how and if the recruiting philosophy will change with this change in personnel.
My post was only about the contrast between Jackson and Clarke.
In looking at my previous posts I now realise that I used the wrong quote about the addition of Williams rather than this one about Clarke's philosophy.
http://www.richmondfc.com.au/news/2014-10-02/tigers-go-oneonone-with-draft-hopefuls

I do not think good character is unimportant (few double negatives there), however I don't think it's essential as Clarke says in that article.
“Good people in good football clubs, make great football clubs.”
IMO if you recruit any staff, rejecting the ones who do not exhibit GOOD character, you may limit your results.
Examples of juniors who did not show GOOD character and were downgraded due to it would be both Franklin and Darling.
I think character is a key aspect. Note I have not said GOOD character.

IMO it takes all types to be successful.
GOOD character tends to lead to solid citizens (as I put it previously). The ones who don't rock the boat.
IMO Having an entire team of that type can be as bad as having too many "bad boys" or "loose cannons".

Finally I agree with you that judgement of football ability is in the eye of the beholder.
I'd even extend it out from there into personal qualities like character.
All recruitment eventually comes down to subjective opinion.
It's why we're all still trying to get a handle on Clarke.
Going for blokes who are talented but have iffy character risks you getting blokes like garlett from hawks
 
The character thing only matters in the first round, that's when clubs won't be brave enough to take a swing because the fallout is too high.

That's why I've never had a crack at the club for going after Daniel Connors, Troy Taylor or at a Hawthorn for grabbing Dayle Garlett. Swinging for the fences after the first round is OK. Even Liam McBean was a swing fro the fences pick and I think it was ok.

We went too safe in the first round. Conca and Vlastuin are classic second round picks that get marked up because of being excellent humans. Brodie Grundy was and is a different cat who was considered a top 3 pick for everything he did on the ground and then when clubsd started talking to him, he dropped like a stone. For the absolute wrong reasons. I am always wary of blokes who rocket from no where after all the games have been played. We should have grabbed Grundy. He had proven form and filled a gaping hole on our list. But he didn't interview well. We valued the character part of things too high. Let it override performance. And it never should. Unless it's the extreme end like my love child Dayle Garlett.
 
Agree entirely our template weighting has been too driven by character and not enough by the footy. It's cost us dearly let's hope Clarke has adjusted weighting accordingly
 
So in 2013, Williams wanted McCarthy, Clarke wanted Cripps, and Frank chose Lennon?

If Clarke has more hits like that it's easy to see why he got the job.
 
Why recruit someone with good character if they can't kick properly. Character should only come in after you identify the best footballers.
 
Talking to a mate the other night who's friend is a Dogs recruiter.
He was saying their main criteria and mantra is elite decision making and explained that's why they took Daniel when all others shied away because of height.
Can't argue with their process in last five years. Shame we didn't pay credence to the same skillset.
 
Prince Gwilliam said:
Talking to a mate the other night who's friend is a Dogs recruiter.
He was saying their main criteria and mantra is elite decision making and explained that's why they took Daniel when all others shied away because of height.
Can't argue with their process in last five years. Shame we didn't pay credence to the same skillset.

Elite decision making hey? I prefer good character.

Wonder if we looked at the recruiters from the dogs or other clubs. Probably not. Too hard and Benny and Dan were too busy most likely.
 
spook said:
So in 2013, Williams wanted McCarthy, Clarke wanted Cripps, and Frank chose Lennon?

If Clarke has more hits like that it's easy to see why he got the job.

That's a good sign, if Clarke realises the importance of recruiting genuine midfielders then he's half way there. That was always going to be Frank's undoing, he also ignored a lot of the athletic testing which makes turning a flanker into a midfielder even more improbable. From 2010 - 2014 the quickest player we recruited was Ellis, all the rest were in the bottom 30% for pace and all were average distance runners. It's certainly possible to overcome these limitations but there must be some other compelling qualities such as contested ball winning ability and overall production. These measures also need to be assessed against the quality of opposition. Hopefully we have turned the corner now that Clarke is calling the shots.
 
Prince Gwilliam said:
Talking to a mate the other night who's friend is a Dogs recruiter.
He was saying their main criteria and mantra is elite decision making and explained that's why they took Daniel when all others shied away because of height.
Can't argue with their process in last five years. Shame we didn't pay credence to the same skillset.

Can vouch this is correct.

Can also 100% say they were mad keen on Vlastuin and projected him to play midfield ala Heppell's full time move there.
 
bullus_hit said:
That's a good sign, if Clarke realises the importance of recruiting genuine midfielders then he's half way there. That was always going to be Frank's undoing, he also ignored a lot of the athletic testing which makes turning a flanker into a midfielder even more improbable. From 2010 - 2014 the quickest player we recruited was Ellis, all the rest were in the bottom 30% for pace and all were average distance runners. It's certainly possible to overcome these limitations but there must be some other compelling qualities such as contested ball winning ability and overall production. These measures also need to be assessed against the quality of opposition. Hopefully we have turned the corner now that Clarke is calling the shots.
I assume you mean 2010-13. In 2014 we drafted Menadue, Drummond, Butler, Short, Castagna, who are all quicker than Ellis. Then again, so is McIntosh (2012), so do you mean in the first round?
 
We don't really know how good a recruiter is or isn't without knowing what instructions they are given.

If the senior coach has a game plan based around running players of a certain size and instructs the recruiters to target that sort of player then after a period of time that will result in compromises as other options that don't fit that criteria get overlooked.

You can't judge a jockey if they have to follow poor instructions from the trainer that result in losing the horse race.
 
spook said:
I assume you mean 2010-13. In 2014 we drafted Menadue, Drummond, Butler, Short, Castagna, who are all quicker than Ellis. Then again, so is McIntosh (2012), so do you mean in the first round?

Yep, first round picks, and I would suggest this is how Clarke pleaded his case when vying for a promotion. The 2014 draft was solid but I still contend we should have taken Weller & Blakely who seem to be progressing much faster than Ellis & Menadue.

One thing I'll credit Frank with is the much improved strike rate with late picks, something which was lacking even when he was nailing first rounders. We may even find that the 2015 draft was the one time he worked out the perfect formula, and it was a shallow draft at that. But he obviously left his run way too late.
 
Leysy Days said:
Can vouch this is correct.

Can also 100% say they were mad keen on Vlastuin and projected him to play midfield ala Heppell's full time move there.

Welp. This saddens me greatly.
 
bullus_hit said:
I still contend we should have taken Weller & Blakely who seem to be progressing much faster than Ellis & Menadue.
This will continue to be an interesting comparison for years, I reckon.
 
wammo said:
Off topic, but if Ellis made the AA under 22 squad 3 years running, wouldn't that put him close to being a straight swap for Prestia? Or is my impatience with Brandon's game getting the better of me.?

Brandon had a really poor year but he's still a very good player, outside yes, but he covers a hell of a lot of territory, very similar to Gaff in that regard. I personally don't want him traded given his age and his excellent record. He's durable having missed only 3 games in his career, he can hit 40 disposals a game, he was AA top 40 and he's already polled 21 Brownlow votes (Prestia has 23).

So absolutely, if we need to trade him then I would expect his net worth to be one second rounder short of Prestia's, probably a pick around the 30 mark.