Who should be tigers next coach

[Koalalill]

The fact that both did not leave, would have been because Frawley would have highlighted to the admin they are required players. This to me suggests that he and his assistants obviously had a big say in the development of the player list.

Understand what you are saying UT but...

I have put myself in an awkward spot here. This may sound like I am talking in riddles but forgive me because I have to be careful because of confidentiality

If the Coaches says we want to keep player "A" but the CEO or Footy Ops Mgr says no you cant keep him - he's gotta go - who do you blame then ???

It is all about support. I would consider the Holland a situation a victory for the coach.

 

[Harry]

KL - I respect your opinion but I completely do not agree with what you are saying at all.

What I am saying is that when Malthouse went to Collingwood he was given free reign to do what he wanted. He wanted get rid of 20 odd players he was allowed to that and the members of that football club said "that's OK it is Malthouse". He is a premeirship coach.

The coach is responsible to assess the list and needs to replace players that are incapable with players that are capable. Call that rebuilding, tinkering or whatever you like. Frawely has persisted with the Kings, Rogers, Houlihans, Biddiscombes etc and has further recruited Fleming and Nicholls because he beleived that they are capable. No other reason.

If Danny Frawley walked in at Richmond and announced to the world "the list is crap and I am getting rid of 10 players" members of our Club would have said "you can't be serious - we have Campbell, Knights, Richardson, Ottens, *smile*, Daffy etc our list aint that bad". I do not believe Danny has every been in that position Harry. The administrations over the years at Tigerland have put players we have on pedestals that they do not deserve and paid them ridiculous amounts of money (eg Bourke, Daffy). They have overrated the list. I believe no Adminstration at the Club has had the guts to say it is OK if we try to re-build. It is always we need to make the finals - we need to get close we got give the members something.

As I said above its the coaches responsibility to build the list and discard the incapable. The administration has no say on the playing list and a good strong coach would not be influenced by them. You mention Daffy and Bourke - well it was Frawely who backed out of possible trades involving these two which resulted in these ridiculous contracts.

We have had little success in the same period of time. So what have we done? We tried to fluke a flag in 2002 by thinking our list of players was better than what they were. Who's fault was that?

Danny Frawely.

I agree the Footy Department has made some shocking decisions in some of the players we have picked up. Houlihan, Hudson absoulete shockers. But nestled in their are the likes of Coughlan, Rodan, Krakouer, Newman and now Schulz and McGrath.

If Frawely is persisted with it won't be long untill these players lose all confidence and become the next Joel Bowdens.

How can you draft quality kids when there is only one person (Beck) going and watching them every week . To me that's embarrasing.

It was/is Beck's responsibility to build a team of talent scouts and send them to observe talent. If he was any good at his job he should have demanded this from the club and he would have received this.

At the end of the day we can make up as many excuses as we like for Frawely, Beck and co. but the simple fact is that they have failed and are simply not up to it.

 

[MC24]

I partly agree with your argument that that he was not in the same position as Malthouse, purely on the fact that Malthouse was and IS a proven premiership coach, hence Frawley may have been a bit inhibited. But he has clearly had alot of input into the makeup of the list, there is no excuse in my view in his failure to build a list after 4 years, that can perform and play his game plan. The fact that his message is clearly not getting through, is a sign that his time is up.

We have a novice coach because we virtually had no other choice, at the time.

Malthouse has had about two decades in the coaching caper. Would he and every other coach have made mistakes when they first started?

If people are prepared to learn from their mistakes and our footy Club is prepared to help them, rather than stick a knife in their back when things start to go wrong, then they deserve the opportunity to fulfill their obligations and commitment. By being given the best opportunity to do their job in a supportive environment.

Under those conditions, if they are seen to be no better or worse, then it is time to move on.

Those conditions have not existed at RFC for many years. I defy any coach to have achieved any more than anyone has achieved in the past two decades, working in such an unsupportive and unaccountable environment.

 

[Koalalill]

You mention Daffy and Bourke - well it was Frawely who backed out of possible trades involving these two which resulted in these ridiculous contracts.

Harry - Nick Daffy signed a 4 year deal with the Tigers before Danny was appointed. The contract was already in place. As for the trade - agreed a mistake -anything to get rid of Daffy would have made me happy. But if it went through we still would have lumbered with paying part of it.

It was/is Beck's responsibility to build a team of talent scouts and send them to observe talent. If he was any good at his job he should have demanded this from the club and he would have received this.

Harry - I am not a Greg Beck fan by any means but to say he would received extra scouts to work with him if he demanded it is not true. The Club for what ever reason would not spend the $$ on recruiting. To have scouts you have to have the $$ to employ them or at least pay their expenses.

It is fair to say that we will continue to agree to disagree but I am chuffed that you respect my opnion

 

[Harry]

Harry - I am not a Greg Beck fan by any means but to say he would received extra scouts to work with him if he demanded it is not true. The Club for what ever reason would not spend the $$ on recruiting. To have scouts you have to have the $$ to employ them or at least pay their expenses.

Its an indictment on the Rabble Footballing Circus that they wouldn't spend $$ on extra recruiting staff yet they throw a cool 500K pa. to the overated Gaspar and Holland. What have we been giving our money to?

 

[MC24]

Maybe if we actually knew the conditions and the constraints under which people were expected to work in at RFC over the years, it would no doubt become apparent why we have been so unsuccessful for so long.

In all likelihood, it would explain a lot of things and spare us a lot of mind bending and second guessing.

 

[PuntRoadRoar]

I heard that there will be a really top coach going next year, apparently he has a game plan that only 1 club in the league use unsuccessfully. He will get the best out of the current list we have and he also has a great belief in hack players recruited from other clubs he will also make them cherry ripe for years to come and with his unsuccessful background would be an ideal coach

His name:

Danny Frawley ;D


YOU IDIOT !!!!

ok seriously get rid of him NOW!!!

 

[tigerman]

Someone has to take the blame for our recruits, and developement of them.


2002 - Richmond
Jay Schulz.
Tim Fleming.
Bill Nicholls
Daniel Sipthorp
Justin Blumfield.
Kane Johnson.

Richmond 2001
David Rodan
Adam L. Houlihan
Chris Hyde
Martin McGrath
Paul Hudson
Greg Stafford
Craig Ednie


2000Richmond
Kayne Pettifer
Mark Coughlan
Chris Hyde
Andrew J. Krakouer
Chris Newman
Steven Sziller
Ben Haynes
Royce Vardy

1999 - Richmond
Clay Sampson
Aaron Fiora
Ezra Poyas
Scott Homewood
Andrew Mills
Ty Zantuck
Leon Cameron
Clinton King
Ben Hollands