Priority Picks (merged) | 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.

Priority Picks (merged)

How bad is our timing, the worst season a team can ever have and we dont get priorit draft picks.

Had Wallace cleared out the list like he should have done when first appointed and we endured a few rough easons then instead of a finals spot that never appeared, we would have an extra 10 young quality kids on our list with 50 to 100 games expereince by now.

It's RFC fault for where it is and the current coaching group and admin simply have to make the best of it.

There is plenty of evidence to support that just because you dont have priority draft picks that you cannot recruit well. Sydney and the doggies dont seem to bottom out, yet recruit well. We need to be the same.
 
things might not be as bad as they seem, because if Richmond starts talking to some of the kids in this years draft, telling them they would pick them up with latter picks, to keep them in melbourne,
do you think all of the kids want to go to Queensland?
This has been happening for years in W.A and S.A, telling kids that even if they dont preform well in the state carnivals that the club would still recruit them.
eg; bernie vince
mark lecrae
 
zippadeee said:
things might not be as bad as they seem, because if Richmond starts talking to some of the kids in this years draft, telling them they would pick them up with latter picks, to keep them in melbourne,
do you think all of the kids want to go to Queensland?
This has been happening for years in W.A and S.A, telling kids that even if they dont preform well in the state carnivals that the club would still recruit them.
eg; bernie vince
mark lecrae

Right now, most would probably prefer the Queensland option :help
 
So is there any priority picks this yr at the end of the 1st rd if we win under 5 games? (sorry if this has already been answered)
 
French Tiger said:
So is there any priority picks this yr at the end of the 1st rd if we win under 5 games? (sorry if this has already been answered)
No-ones sure at this stage Frenchie, conflicting reports that Priority picks are off the table this year or they're still there???
 
willo said:
No-ones sure at this stage Frenchie, conflicting reports that Priority picks are off the table this year or they're still there???

Cheers! Clinging to some sort of hope that at least there is something there if even minor.
 
Priority picks are still in. Assuming we win 4 or less games we have picks 4, 28 & 29.

I'm very happy to read Gale has said we will not ask AFL for extra compensation. This would taint any future success if we were given additinal help. Let's do it the hard way - it will be far more satisfying!
 
And take a lot longer!!!!
Why shouldnt we get compensation!

Are people trying to say the Melbourne and Carlton have not had extra compensation????

Kreuzer, Gibbs, Trengove all came to their clubs because they tanked!
Now we have been not compensated fairly because we have battled all the way to rd 22 every yr
And we all know that is because Wallace was saving his bacon in 08 by finishing strong and last yr because Jordy kicked the goal after siren when melbourne turned their whole team upside down and had the backline in the fwd line and let a squib take a contested mark to ice the game

I can't see this side in 3 years developing into a premirship team unless we get some more gun kids into it!!!!
In 10 years these next 3 drafts will shape the lcubs and GWS and GC will have the best of the best!
 
RICHO_12 said:
And take a lot longer!!!!
Why shouldnt we get compensation!

Are people trying to say the Melbourne and Carlton have not had extra compensation????

Kreuzer, Gibbs, Trengove all came to their clubs because they tanked!
Now we have been not compensated fairly because we have battled all the way to rd 22 every yr
And we all know that is because Wallace was saving his bacon in 08 by finishing strong and last yr because Jordy kicked the goal after siren when melbourne turned their whole team upside down and had the backline in the fwd line and let a squib take a contested mark to ice the game

I can't see this side in 3 years developing into a premirship team unless we get some more gun kids into it!!!!
In 10 years these next 3 drafts will shape the lcubs and GWS and GC will have the best of the best!

We are not the only club affected by the sides coming in.

Lets say Kangas finish second last. They would get pick 6. Should they go to the AFL and ask for extra compensation as previously they would have got pick 2 if they finished second last???
 
TuesdayswithTerry said:
We are not the only club affected by the sides coming in.

Lets say Kangas finish second last. They would get pick 6. Should they go to the AFL and ask for extra compensation as previously they would have got pick 2 if they finished second last???

mate, the clubs have accepted the concessions, its as simple as that.
 
RICHO_12 said:
And take a lot longer!!!!
Why shouldnt we get compensation!

Are people trying to say the Melbourne and Carlton have not had extra compensation????

Kreuzer, Gibbs, Trengove all came to their clubs because they tanked!
Now we have been not compensated fairly because we have battled all the way to rd 22 every yr
And we all know that is because Wallace was saving his bacon in 08 by finishing strong and last yr because Jordy kicked the goal after siren when melbourne turned their whole team upside down and had the backline in the fwd line and let a squib take a contested mark to ice the game

I can't see this side in 3 years developing into a premirship team unless we get some more gun kids into it!!!!
In 10 years these next 3 drafts will shape the lcubs and GWS and GC will have the best of the best!
We have had plenty of draft picks in the past.Remember we are worst performed club in the last 30 years?We need to get smart for the first time since our premiership years,and recruit outside the draft IMO.
 
TuesdayswithTerry said:
Priority picks are still in. Assuming we win 4 or less games we have picks 4, 28 & 29.

I'm very happy to read Gale has said we will not ask AFL for extra compensation. This would taint any future success if we were given additinal help. Let's do it the hard way - it will be far more satisfying!

i'm happy too. Gale simply said that we don't NEED priority picks to become competitive and that we wont' be asking for extra concessions, however, nowhere does he say that we won't accept any concessions/priority picks that comes our way, simply that we wont be begging for them.
smart man.
 
Sent this to Vlad and Adrianna, wont make a difference but made me feel better........

Having supported the Richmond Football Club for 36 years and as a lifetime follower of the VFL/AFL I feel compelled to express my concern at the lack of equity in AFL policy. There is no denying that Richmond have nobody to blame but themselves for the current state of the playing list and the resultant on-field performance. The club has made poor decisions over a number of years, especially in the recent decade. Poor recruiting in the draft, looking for short term fixes in trading picks for mediocre players, holding on to players who were not up to AFL standard and failing to develop talent are but a few of many poor decisions.

Our current predicament is the fault of the club and that is acknowledged by any reasonable follower of the game. However this is no different to any club that has found itself in a similar situation over the last decade. Each of these clubs has been "rewarded" for their mediocrity by the AFL and most have in fact gone out of their way to ensure their results put them in a position to maximise the AFL's benevolence.

The AFL has set the precedent and now as a result of nothing other than unfortunate timing the Richmond Football Club is not being treated equally. Why should the club be punished for the same mistakes others have made and been rewarded for?

This is not asking for preferential treatment for Richmond, only for the same assistance given to other clubs. The team that finishes last should receive the same first pick in the draft others have received. A team that wins less than five matches should be given the same priority selection before the second round of the draft as others have received. A team that wins less than 8 matches over 2 years should be given the same priority pick before the first round of the draft as others have received.

The decision to introduce expansion clubs should have not mean that because of nothing other than timing Richmond is treated unfairly compared to other existing teams. Carlton were punished for salary cap rorting then rewarded with draft privileges. Melbourne made fools of the AFL last year in their endeavours to ensure they received the same benefits as Carlton. St Kilda have built a Grand Final team around priority picks.

It is a gross injustice that Richmond will not receive the same assistance.

Even worse than this gross injustice is the pig-headedness of the AFL in refusing to acknowledge this injustice. The unbending approach to the altered draft rules over the next couple of years clearly demonstrates the pig-headedness of this administration. The quote in The Age 4th May 2010 attributed to the AFL Chief Executive Officer highlights how far removed from reality the organisation has become.

Demetriou firm in his belief that to grant the club discretionary priority picks ''sets a very poor precedent for teams who've made mistakes in the past. That would be up to the commission, but I have to say it's unlikely to happen and I must add that Richmond haven't asked for any favours,''

To claim that granting Richmond discretionary priority picks 'sets a very poor precedent for teams who've made mistakes in the past' is laughable as the AFL is itself responsible for this precedent existing in having introduced the priority system. The mistakes made by Richmond are no different than those who have been rewarded by the priority system. To then go on and say 'Richmond haven't asked for any favours' is a pathetic attempt to try and deflect the issue. As the governing body of the competition the AFL has a duty of care to ensure that all clubs receive equal treatment and this is nothing but lip-service trying to deflect the inequality back onto Richmond. Possibly the most offensive part of this statement is the use of the word 'favours'. The implication being that to give Richmond a priority pick would be doing them a favour. No it would not, instead it would be maintaining the same standards that have been in place for a number of years.

Failure of the AFL to recognise the anomaly is embarrassing. Failure to act is downright reprehensible.
 
RFC not KFC said:
Sent this to Vlad and Adrianna, wont make a difference but made me feel better........

Having supported the Richmond Football Club for 36 years and as a lifetime follower of the VFL/AFL I feel compelled to express my concern at the lack of equity in AFL policy. There is no denying that Richmond have nobody to blame but themselves for the current state of the playing list and the resultant on-field performance. The club has made poor decisions over a number of years, especially in the recent decade. Poor recruiting in the draft, looking for short term fixes in trading picks for mediocre players, holding on to players who were not up to AFL standard and failing to develop talent are but a few of many poor decisions.

Our current predicament is the fault of the club and that is acknowledged by any reasonable follower of the game. However this is no different to any club that has found itself in a similar situation over the last decade. Each of these clubs has been "rewarded" for their mediocrity by the AFL and most have in fact gone out of their way to ensure their results put them in a position to maximise the AFL's benevolence.

The AFL has set the precedent and now as a result of nothing other than unfortunate timing the Richmond Football Club is not being treated equally. Why should the club be punished for the same mistakes others have made and been rewarded for?

This is not asking for preferential treatment for Richmond, only for the same assistance given to other clubs. The team that finishes last should receive the same first pick in the draft others have received. A team that wins less than five matches should be given the same priority selection before the second round of the draft as others have received. A team that wins less than 8 matches over 2 years should be given the same priority pick before the first round of the draft as others have received.

The decision to introduce expansion clubs should have not mean that because of nothing other than timing Richmond is treated unfairly compared to other existing teams. Carlton were punished for salary cap rorting then rewarded with draft privileges. Melbourne made fools of the AFL last year in their endeavours to ensure they received the same benefits as Carlton. St Kilda have built a Grand Final team around priority picks.

It is a gross injustice that Richmond will not receive the same assistance.

Even worse than this gross injustice is the pig-headedness of the AFL in refusing to acknowledge this injustice. The unbending approach to the altered draft rules over the next couple of years clearly demonstrates the pig-headedness of this administration. The quote in The Age 4th May 2010 attributed to the AFL Chief Executive Officer highlights how far removed from reality the organisation has become.

Demetriou firm in his belief that to grant the club discretionary priority picks ''sets a very poor precedent for teams who've made mistakes in the past. That would be up to the commission, but I have to say it's unlikely to happen and I must add that Richmond haven't asked for any favours,''

To claim that granting Richmond discretionary priority picks 'sets a very poor precedent for teams who've made mistakes in the past' is laughable as the AFL is itself responsible for this precedent existing in having introduced the priority system. The mistakes made by Richmond are no different than those who have been rewarded by the priority system. To then go on and say 'Richmond haven't asked for any favours' is a pathetic attempt to try and deflect the issue. As the governing body of the competition the AFL has a duty of care to ensure that all clubs receive equal treatment and this is nothing but lip-service trying to deflect the inequality back onto Richmond. Possibly the most offensive part of this statement is the use of the word 'favours'. The implication being that to give Richmond a priority pick would be doing them a favour. No it would not, instead it would be maintaining the same standards that have been in place for a number of years.

Failure of the AFL to recognise the anomaly is embarrassing. Failure to act is downright reprehensible.
Well done KFC. Good on you for expressing your views. Keep us informed if you get a reply. My only concern is that I hope Vlad reads it becasue that puppet Anderson is as useful as tits on a bull.
 
RFC not KFC said:
Sent this to Vlad and Adrianna, wont make a difference but made me feel better........

Having supported the Richmond Football Club for 36 years and as a lifetime follower of the VFL/AFL I feel compelled to express my concern at the lack of equity in AFL policy. There is no denying that Richmond have nobody to blame but themselves for the current state of the playing list and the resultant on-field performance. The club has made poor decisions over a number of years, especially in the recent decade. Poor recruiting in the draft, looking for short term fixes in trading picks for mediocre players, holding on to players who were not up to AFL standard and failing to develop talent are but a few of many poor decisions.

Our current predicament is the fault of the club and that is acknowledged by any reasonable follower of the game. However this is no different to any club that has found itself in a similar situation over the last decade. Each of these clubs has been "rewarded" for their mediocrity by the AFL and most have in fact gone out of their way to ensure their results put them in a position to maximise the AFL's benevolence.

The AFL has set the precedent and now as a result of nothing other than unfortunate timing the Richmond Football Club is not being treated equally. Why should the club be punished for the same mistakes others have made and been rewarded for?

This is not asking for preferential treatment for Richmond, only for the same assistance given to other clubs. The team that finishes last should receive the same first pick in the draft others have received. A team that wins less than five matches should be given the same priority selection before the second round of the draft as others have received. A team that wins less than 8 matches over 2 years should be given the same priority pick before the first round of the draft as others have received.

The decision to introduce expansion clubs should have not mean that because of nothing other than timing Richmond is treated unfairly compared to other existing teams. Carlton were punished for salary cap rorting then rewarded with draft privileges. Melbourne made fools of the AFL last year in their endeavours to ensure they received the same benefits as Carlton. St Kilda have built a Grand Final team around priority picks.

It is a gross injustice that Richmond will not receive the same assistance.

Even worse than this gross injustice is the pig-headedness of the AFL in refusing to acknowledge this injustice. The unbending approach to the altered draft rules over the next couple of years clearly demonstrates the pig-headedness of this administration. The quote in The Age 4th May 2010 attributed to the AFL Chief Executive Officer highlights how far removed from reality the organisation has become.

Demetriou firm in his belief that to grant the club discretionary priority picks ''sets a very poor precedent for teams who've made mistakes in the past. That would be up to the commission, but I have to say it's unlikely to happen and I must add that Richmond haven't asked for any favours,''

To claim that granting Richmond discretionary priority picks 'sets a very poor precedent for teams who've made mistakes in the past' is laughable as the AFL is itself responsible for this precedent existing in having introduced the priority system. The mistakes made by Richmond are no different than those who have been rewarded by the priority system. To then go on and say 'Richmond haven't asked for any favours' is a pathetic attempt to try and deflect the issue. As the governing body of the competition the AFL has a duty of care to ensure that all clubs receive equal treatment and this is nothing but lip-service trying to deflect the inequality back onto Richmond. Possibly the most offensive part of this statement is the use of the word 'favours'. The implication being that to give Richmond a priority pick would be doing them a favour. No it would not, instead it would be maintaining the same standards that have been in place for a number of years.

Failure of the AFL to recognise the anomaly is embarrassing. Failure to act is downright reprehensible.

Totally agree with all the points made. Do not expect the AFL dictatorship to agree however! As per all dictators, they do as they please with no fear of accountability.
 
Well done KFC.Perhaps you should also pass it on to Benny Gale with intstructions for Benny to "accidently" pass it on to Vlad via an official direct email addy which no doubt all clubs have. ;D