Re: Anti-Tankers i want a response
the claw said:
in saying all this early in the season they lost 3 or 4 games they should have won if this had happened they would be in the mix well and truly for finals. the difference between them and us is they will be a genuine finals contender next yr where as we will still be wallowing near the bottom of the ladder. in a way they could afford to miss a pp we cant.
That is such a dumb thing to say.
If West Coast had won three or four games that they should’ve won earlier in the season they would be sitting in the eight, so would Richmond, so would Freo, so would anyone except Melbourne.
They would all take that in a heartbeat too. So what is your point? Both Richmond and West Coast have put themselves in no man’s land by winning too many games and not enough games at the same time. So have Freo and North. In Richmond’s case, the only thing I bemoan is that they have not won enough games. Are you suggesting that West Coast have won their six games in a stylish way and Richmond have won their five and a half in a haphazard way and that is a significant difference?
What’s your view on Sydney? They shy away from playing kids until they are 21-22 and have completed the development phase of their careers, they are still giving games to old farts like Crouch, O’Loughlin, Kirk and Jude Bolton and are making a mad dash for eighth, which will most likely end up as ninth because they have left it too late. They have recruited a 25 year old ruckman and will probably try to bring Kennelly back for next year. They are just as likely to trade at least two of their first five picks for recycled players in the off-season. They have employed similar strategies for years. These strategies seem to work OK for them and have yielded a flag and several consecutive finals appearances.
If Richmond were doing any of these things there would be a meltdown on PRE. The sad thing is, many of these things are exactly what Richmond should be doing. Essentially, when someone finally gets a game for Sydney, it is because he is a man and he is expected to play like one. No excuses, no allowances for youth or potential or what that player may one day become. He is playing because he deserves to be and keep playing as long as he is good enough. He is expected to contribute to a winning culture, he is not there to rack up games for when the gun Pick Ones join the team in three years time to commence a planned run up the ladder.
That is what real culture is, and this culture compensates for the fact that Kirk and Pyke can't kick, or that Craig Bolton is too short to play Full-back, LRT is a Dud, Jude Bolton is too slow, Crouch is too old, O'Loughlin is past it, Rhys Shaw and MAttner are rejects and whatever else they have which would spark that meltdown if they were Richmond players.
Playing kids is fine but it means you go into the majority of your games with immature footballers, both mentally and physically and they will get pantsed by mature teams like Sydney every day of the week. Was anyone really expecting Vickery and Graham to be competive against Jolly? Or Post against Goodes? Maybe in five years time but not now, Sunshine.
For the record, I think that Rawlings was spot-on with his comments about culture. That is why hanging on to Cousins is imperative for next year. Our poor culture is due to poor leadership, over a very long time. In my view, it is more important to fix this than to chase a couple of gun 18 year olds. This club needs men, real men, not kids.
