Richmond members forum | 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.

Richmond members forum

Harry said:
However he has no imput on the on-field performance.................as long as we have the likes of Hutchinson and Frawely in the football department it is guaranteed that we will go nowhere.

He identified the list was a problem but said that we can't make too many changes.

I walked out before it finished as I was disgusted and my arm was tired from being raised and ignored.

The Football Department still needs to be accountable to someone Harry. I guess it's to Greg Miller. But he is also accountable to someone. So if they don't perform they can be certain of not being there for too long. If there were changes to be made and the opportunity was there, rest assured, they would be made.

As far as the list is concerned, were they being realistic, conservative or just throwing their hands in the air about it all? I don't have an answer to that. But it has been stated that the quality of this year's draft does not run deep. That's not to say there won't be success stories from it, but there's an amount of risk involved.

Personally, I hope Ian Campbell has input into all areas of the Club. He has the attitude and ability to straighten this Club out. He can identify a problem and get it handled in a professional manner.

If the Club has identified the off-field areas that need attention, you would like to think they have done the same on the field. However, some things can be changed quicker than others.

At the Forum last night, it was pointed out that the Club would like to make a number of changes to the list. However, realise that there is no quick solution. We can't just snap our fingers and hey presto, problems over. I'm as frustrated as anyone about this side of the Club, but these things take time. I get the impression that there are certain things the Club is not prepared to say right now, but things will become clearer in due course.

Harry, if you didn't have your questions answered throughout the meeting, Ian and Greg made themselves available after the meeting concluded. So there was another opportunity for people to have their say then.
 
JohnF said:
Hutchison was just cloaking what he really wanted to say : "Look, if you said at the start of the year that Beck, Frawley and me would still have jobs in 2004 we would have been over the moon with that".

LMAO. Thats a classic JohnF.
 
The irony is, MC24, that we supporters are actually MORE prepared to take time to build a list than the actual football dept is. We are screaming from the rooftops for them to go back to square one and draft kids. We are more than happy to come last for a few years as long as we can see that kids are being groomed, a la St Kilda, for a period of sustained success in the future.

But the football dept seems hellbent on short term, stop-gap measures in throwing away draft picks on with all these recycled duds. I thought it was laughable a year ago that Flemming and Nicholls were touted as additions to the midfield, and I am livid about it now. There is just no way on god's earth that either of those blokes are AFL standard onballers. But that is what the footy dept told us they were drafted for. Two wasted draft picks is what they are! At the absolute best they are serviceable bench players.

Yes, late draft picks are a gamble, but if we never use them we can never expect to unearth the Zantucks and Newmans. I think it's absolute balony to say that there is nothing in the draft after pick 30. They said the same thing about the draft in which Sydney took Adam Schneider at about pick 75.
 
Now I'm confused.

On one hand we have MILLER saying that the list is week and we will recruit and trade aggressively. No problems with that.

NOW it appears we have Hutchy saying that if it was for a few injuries we would be in the mix, so we are not really that far away. "We can't make to many changes" etc.

This sounds like a total contradiction of points of view.

If this is so then I hope MILLER has control. But what I wonder is why the apparent sudden change of position. A few weeks ago wasn't Hutchy saying that we could expect to see an aggressive trade period and that we should expect to see a few big names traded or at least bandied about in the trade period.

Maybe they have finally realise we have no one of trade value after four years of neglect.

Sorry but my alarm bells are starting to ring here.

I know things are going to take time to turn around, but their stance seems to change on a weekly basis. They must get it right and start conveying one message to their supporters, not this mixed bag.

I have no problems with getting other AFL players, if they are quality players who are young and fill our long term needs, not those worthy of 1 year contracts. What does that achieve. Players like SCOTLAND could fill a gap. Struggles with the pies midfield, but by all accounts would walk into ours. Just using him as an example.

Problem is these players will not come cheap. Quality players are going to cost more than young kids in my view. Rejects may come cheap, but what do they offer to the long term development of the club????

Look at our record in this area 'HOULIHAN, KING, HUDSON, SZILLER, FLEMMING, NICHOLS, and to a lesser extent BLUMFIELD. Need I say more...!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Argghhhhhhhhhhhhhh
 
Gus, I disagree, I think the club has made it crystal clear what our plans for the future are : We're not far away, but we've got a long way to go.

I'm content with this plan, but i'm not satisfied ;D

If they can contradict themselves in the same line, then don't even worry about what they say in separate sentences.
 
Tigerblood said:
The irony is, MC24, that we supporters are actually MORE prepared to take time to build a list than the actual football dept is. We are screaming from the rooftops for them to go back to square one and draft kids. We are more than happy to come last for a few years as long as we can see that kids are being groomed, a la St Kilda, for a period of sustained success in the future.

Blood - It appears obvious that Frawely and co. are only concerned about their current employment...............they have and will only recruit for the short term to develop a team that might be able to scrape into the 8, thus giving them a better chance to remain at their jobs.

The board is as much to blame than the footy dept. The reason being they are not setting any direction for the club..........................the list has been identified as very weak..............yet the board hasn't decided whether the club will rebuild.

The board must state a clear direction of rebuilding and must give a coach and his staff at least 3-4 years to develop a side. IMO Frawely isn't the man but if the board beleive he is they must back him for 4 years otherwise Frawely will only recruit and develop for the present and neglect the future.

If this continues there needs to be severe changes at boardroom level.
 
What can I say Tigerblood. I agree with you, but the Club does not seem willing to run the financial risk of putting on players who may never play a senior game.

We go back to the debate about developing players, versus recruiting the right players. Even if we recruit good players, do we have the capacity to develop players? That's what I would like to know.

Nevertheless, we seem to be getting things right off the field. So we can only conclude that there will ultimately be a flow on effect to the playing side of things. There has to be.

After all, one side of the Club can't keep propping the other side up forever. Something has to give somewhere.

If and when tough decisions need to be made, they will be. But it has to be at the appropriate time and given that we don't know all the ins and outs of the Club, they are better placed to make any decisions that need to be made.
 
It would seem that Casey has probably got the whole coaching panel, and probaly Miller as well, on one of his buisness type performance based contracts.
Which would explain why they haven't been drafting young kids. The ones that they have drafted, haven't had a decent oppurtunity.
The Bombers, Eagles, Roos, Crows, and Lions have won their premerships from teams that they have moulded together from a young age.
 
Tigerman, I believe Miller has a handshake agreement with the Club. There is nothing in writing, as far as I am aware.
 
Yes MC24 it is a handshake deal.

I bet that it's performanced based especially for next season and so on.

I guess if he gets results he deserves to be well paid.

I just fear that we are going to go for short term fixes and not build a team.

Since the early days of Roar Power I hace been calling for the club to draft young kids and give them ago.

I'd love to see a team put together like Tommy did with Hart, Bartlett, Bourke, Barrot, Clay, Sheedy, Green, Richardson etc.

I'm hoping like hell that they they start at the end of the season.
 
tigerman said:
Yes MC24 it is a handshake deal.

I bet that it's performanced based especially for next season and so on.

When you said contract, to me it implied written agreement. Anyway, I take your point.

tigerman said:
I just fear that we are going to go for short term fixes and not build a team.

I'd love to see a team put together like Tommy did with Hart, Bartlett, Bourke, Barrot, Clay, Sheedy, Green, Richardson etc.

I'm hoping like hell that they they start at the end of the season.

I hope so too Tigerman, but going by the Forum last night and what Miller said on the radio on the weekend, I wouldn't get my hopes up.
 
Reading all this information about what was said at the Forum just has my blood boiling.

What hope does this football club have, I ask, when our Football Department is full of such a bunch of complete and utter losers ? Frawley, Beck, Miller, Hutchison etc. …their statements over the course of this year indicate that the whole lot of them are dumb, deluded, egotistical and completely un-talented for the roles they are supposed to be performing. Every week there is a different statement on where we are going, what needs changing, what there interpretation of things is.

We just have no hope in the world while the quality of people in the Football Department is just so downright pathetic.

Effectively, what these losers have been telling us over the last few weeks is that even though they acknowledge we have a crap playing list (oh, and that really, its been crap for some time even though we did say after 2001 we were close to being premiership contenders !) we will, never the less, continue to:

a) recruit discards from other clubs to solve the problem b) trade away a lot of our draft picks in order to get these discards - despite constant media bashing and member anger at our refusal to re-build the proper way c) not make that many changes anyway because we really don’t have the guts to move enough players on d) make up pitiful excuses like injuries etc. as having an impact e) pay ridiculous sums of money all the while to these duds that remain.

And what is this utter garbage coming out of Miller’s mouth about how hard it is to make significant inroads into a playing list ? What crap that is. He’s just like every other RFC representaive at that level. He doesn’t have the guts to take us 2 steps back to go 1 step forward.

I agree Harry, I have never heard such a bunch of excuse makers like these blokes. They stick their collective heads in the sand at every failure they present. They have no guts, no foresight and certainly no intelligence. Fancy suggesting our year could have been vastly different if it weren’t for a couple of incidences in a few games ! Whaaaat ? We’ve bloody well lost 12 out of our last 13… or what ever it is !

Fancy taking a termination clause out of a guy’s contract that has a losing record like Frawley’s ? Insane. Just insane. Fancy Miller trying to suggest that Frawley is not responsible for the playing list ? Ha ha ha….what an insult to our intelligence. As Ridley pointed out on separate thread, every player on the list has either come to the club, or been through a contract negotiation, during his tenure. As I’ve posted on this site before, Frawley personally canned the trade of both Daffy and Bourke years ago. Frawley coaching next year is an absolute disaster for us. Great move Miller.

Forget all the spin doctoring of Casey and Greenberg about how good our Football Department is because it is a joke ! I’ve met Hutchison and he is a moron of a bloke. Ditto Frawley. I know people from North Melbourne who reckon Miller is nothing but a recruiter that did well in the 90’s and has lived off that reputation ever since. Outside of that, he isn’t that talented. He nearly bankrupted North as their CEO.

We appoint crap coaches. We get crap footballers from other clubs. We recruit youth minimally, and even then half of them are hopeless. The ones that are any good don’t get much of a run. All the while these duds that we’ve got grow into 4 or more year players that are grossly over paid.

This football club needs a complete cleanout - again. This time, however, replacing it with people who actually know what the hell they are doing. And you're right Harry. That means starting with a new board that would have the sense to clean out the Football Department completely, including Frawley, Brittain, Crocker, Hutchison, Spargo, Wheadon, Miller and Beck. Then, the new board would advise the new football department that it has 3 years within which to completely re-vamp the playing list and have us playing in the finals each and every year. The football department would then appoint Wallace as coach, Scott Clayton as Recruiting Manager, ensure that 10 players were deleted in the first year and another 10 in the next. Under Wallace and Clayton replacement players would come via a combination of astute recruitment from other clubs (not bloody hack discards) and national draft picks. In the 3rd year we should be in, or very close to playing finals football with a vastly more promising list. Thereafter we should be finals participants for a number of years.

Sound familiar ? Look at Collingwood.

Maguire took over a crap board and replaced half of them. He then got rid of Shaw and replaced him with a decent coach in Malthouse. Malthouse then turned over 22 players in 2 years whilst getting remaining players to lift their game under a better system. He then complimented this with a blend of youth via the National Draft by using the talents of Noel Judkins (a half decent recruiter, unlike Beck) to recruit Lonie, Cloke, McGough, Didak etc. etc.

The new slogan for Richmond next year should be:

Mistakes. Excuses. Forever !
 
Redford said:
c) not make that many changes anyway because we really don’t have the guts to move enough players on

Bit of a worry Redford. I've wondered all along how we could possibly make all of the changes Greg Miller was promising.

I can see a situation where only the last half dozen players might be moved on. Maybe one or two "name" players too, but they will have to be from the few with any trade value, which means they mightn't necessarily be the ones they'd benefit more by giving the chop.

Doesn't do much to address the majority of the list who we're constantly told can't follow Spud's game plan.

Hopefully being sent back to Coburg for lack of effort might be an option next year.

Some of our players have been rewarded for their mediocrity for too long, and if Spud hasn't been able to get them to play the last few seasons, I wonder how he'll manage it in the future.

Still time will tell, I spose. Am still hoping for miracles.
 
Come trade time, if RFC do not focus on recruiting youth and rebuilding our list then some sort of coup must take place. Letters from all richmond supporters should be sent to prominent Richmond people like Rex Hunt pleading that they use their influence to get rid of Casey and co.

As MC24 said - its our club and we can make a difference.
 
I think we need say a Rex Hunt or Carloine Wilson too take over like Edwood did at Collingwood maybe even a K.B and then clean the whole place out get SHEEDY too coach sack the duds and rebuild.

my two cents
 
Harry said:
The absolute worse thing that came out of his mouth was the club will be looking at players with AFL experience in the draft using our picks 30 and onwards.................he said that picking up a player with AFL experience is cheaper than picking up kids from the under 18 level...................an AFL player would cost approx. 70K and can be signed up for 1 year whereas an under 18 player would need to be on the list for minimum of 2 years and would cost 100K + .................... they have this set in their policy so expect more draft picks being wasted on players like Nicholls, Sziller, Houlihan etc.

Does every draftee even the later ones get 2 year contracts? I remember reading somewhere that only first and second picks got 2 year contracts.

In any case this doesn't add to me. Let's go out and draft a experienced dud cause he's cheaper than a 18 year old dud ??? What happens in the situation when both the experienced and 18 year old are good pick-ups- you pay $100K for 2 years for a kid who'll play for 10 years or $140K for 2 years for a guy who'll give 4 years of service. Appears they have no confidence whatsoever in their recruting abilities (with good reason from past efforts).
 
mightytiges said:
Harry said:
The absolute worse thing that came out of his mouth was the club will be looking at players with AFL experience in the draft using our picks 30 and onwards.................he said that picking up a player with AFL experience is cheaper than picking up kids from the under 18 level...................an AFL player would cost approx. 70K and can be signed up for 1 year whereas an under 18 player would need to be on the list for minimum of 2 years and would cost 100K + .................... they have this set in their policy so expect more draft picks being wasted on players like Nicholls, Sziller, Houlihan etc.

Does every draftee even the later ones get 2 year contracts? I remember reading somewhere that only first and second picks got 2 year contracts.

In any case this doesn't add to me. Let's go out and draft a experienced dud cause he's cheaper than a 18 year old dud ??? What happens in the situation when both the experienced and 18 year old are good pick-ups- you pay $100K for 2 years for a kid who'll play for 10 years or $140K for 2 years for a guy who'll give 4 years of service. Appears they have no confidence whatsoever in their recruting abilities (with good reason from past efforts).

That is the crux of the whole matter. They have no faith in their own ability to identify young talent. So instead of finding someone that can they take the option of drafting disgards.
 
Interestingly, if you go back over the National Draft since, say, 1993, the rate of success (i.e. those that actually play any meaningful number of games in senior footy) hovers around 50-50 for most clubs. I put ours at 43% hit rate, and Essendon's at about 50%. Alternatively, if you look at the players received from trades of National Draft picks then the hit rate, on similar criteria, rises to over 65%. I put ours at about 70% and Essendon's at about 65% or slightly more.
I'm not advocating giving away draft picks for old, injury-prone hacks, but the stats for the ND show that basically it's a bit of a crapshoot and luck plays a fair part in it. That's why clubs aren't necessarily thrilled about drafting youth for youth's sake, when the percentages over time say that an "established" player might be a better chance of actually playing senior footy.
 
Dean3 - I love stats and yours certainly make interesting reading. They don't take into account the fact that most of the players we've recruited are playing senior football but not well and unlikely to ever do so. I'm sure most fans dont have issues with players like Johnson or Stafford but it's the Kings, Nicholls, Flemings, Biddiscombes, Houlihans etc that show there's little value in recruiting players who are borderline AFL standard at best. If the coach is the type of coach (read Pagan, Sheedy , Malthouse, Matthews) who can bring the best out of someone it's a different story. Our coaching staff have not brought one half decent played to the club and managed to turn them into a decent player.