View Full Version : The Ultimate Hawthorn vs Richmond Poll
Johnny_Segment
21 Apr 2007, 12:33
It seems as though the whole site is just filled with Hawthorn and Richmond supporters arguing over who is the better side. We have seen countless threads regarding every facet of both clubs. In an attempt to settle this once and for all, I offer the following for your voting.
If you had to allign yourself with either Richmond or Hawthorn, who would it be? Imagine you are to be drafted and must choose between the two, or you have been offered the coaching job of either of them. I don't care how you do it, as long as it helps you to decide, use it. Consider the likes of:
On field talent
Chances of success
Club history
Club culture
Facilities
Chances of survival
Coaching staff
Leadership
Club ideals
How the club is perceived in the public eye
Off field issues
Future talent
Treatment of fans
etc. etc.Basically, use whatever method or criteria you want to come to a conclusion on which club you would rather be a part of.
KnockOut
21 Apr 2007, 12:44
I really can't decide. I had hawthorn by a street until it came down to 'survival'. Much better playing list and a better chance of premiership success but a Tasmanian move in almost inevitable.
Undecided, someone enlighten me.
philhawk
21 Apr 2007, 12:55
I really can't decide. I had hawthorn by a street until it came down to 'survival'. Much better playing list and a better chance of premiership success but a Tasmanian move in almost inevitable.
Undecided, someone enlighten me.
Chances of survival?
That's a funny one considering we've had the second most members of any club sign up since the beginning of the season.
I really can't decide. I had hawthorn by a street until it came down to 'survival'. Much better playing list and a better chance of premiership success but a Tasmanian move in almost inevitable.
Undecided, someone enlighten me.
Ignorance :rolleyes:
Nothing in the decision to play games in Tasmania - we are contracted by Mirvac to stay at Waverley for at least the next 20 years - before we own it and realise its asset worth.
Its inevitable that Tasmania doesn’t have the infrastructure to support a professional side both now and certainly in 20 years time…
[LIST]
On field talent
In terms of youngsters Hawthorn has the points, overall it'll be interesting to see if we have the legs to last up to round 15 when we play the Tigers.
Richmond rely heavily on their senior players to win them games - Brown, Richo etc. while Hawthorn rely almost exclusively on a brigade of under 24's to win them games.
The big test for Richmond will come when Richo retires AND Brown is out of the side. When this occurs we'll have a much better indication where Richmond sit on field talent wise without their war horse
Chances of success
To early to tell yet, at this stage I'd say the Hawks are in front.
Both clubs won't win any serious silverware for another 2-3 years at least...
Club history
Richmond...
Club culture
One club has been terrible for 15 years the other has been abysmal for 25 years...
Facilities
Waverley Park >>>> Punt Road
Chances of survival
I don’t think either clubs medium term survival is in any great threat.
Hawthorn are in a much stronger position financially – and now alongside Collingwood have the largest football department out of the 10 Victorian clubs, while Richmond’s finances are improving after being on the skids during various stages over the past 20 years.
Hawthorn has an excellent chance to continue growing its support and member base in both the East and SE of Melbourne and Tasmania, while Richmond already have a strong existing support base.
Coaching staff
Coaching ability - Wallace probably has it over Clarkson, baring in mind he is also on probably on a salary 3 times the worth of Clarkson's
I'm not sure who the RFC assistant coaches are, but the Hawks assistant coaching staff (on the whole) are very inexperienced
Leadership
Kennett >>>> March
Off field issues
Both face the same problems - there are too many clubs in Melbourne and thus are eating away at the corporate dollar.
Both sides would benefit from a reduction in the number of Victorian based sides - both administrations would testify to that
Future talent
ATM I'd say Hawthorn - albeit without knowing much about Richmond's stocks
Purely on the provision that the vast majority of our '05 and '06 selections are untapped, taken with high picks and rated highly by drafting experts...
Geelong > Hawthorn and Richmond combined:thumbsu:
Mitchell Madness
21 Apr 2007, 16:59
Geelong > Hawthorn and Richmond combined:thumbsu:
we heard that last year as well, and then you got flogged by both Hawthorn and Richmond!:P
benny_furs
21 Apr 2007, 21:29
Garry Lyon's article didn't help public perception. Hawthorn are clearly the favourites atm.
Look at this from the article.
Roughead gets dropped and kicks 8 in the reserves and gets called a "very good player for the future".
Cleve Hughes is claimed to be a dud after 1 year in the system.
Cleve Hughes today kicks 5 goals and in the best at VFL seniors (a level up from reserves).
Jay Schulz doesn't get a mention despite being 21yo (Roughead 20) and going by VFL games (which Garry likes to do) last year Schulz kicked 6 goals 3 weeks in a row at VFL senior level.
This is just one of many examples where Garry Lyon is shown to be a biased man-bear-pig. He thinks Hawthorn's talent is vastly superior to Richmond's "lacklustre" youngsters when in REALITY it is very close between the two clubs.
Richmond and Hawthorn are relatively even talent wise in my eyes and to anyone else who seriously looks at the lists for themselves and the turnover of talent.
Raskolnikov
21 Apr 2007, 21:59
I hate Hawthorn with a passion but....
Hawthorn>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Richmond
A Living God
21 Apr 2007, 22:02
A grand total of 2 non richmond supporters have voted richmond
TigerGlory
21 Apr 2007, 22:45
Yeah we are getting killed.
But its purely based on the performances this year, and not on a proper look at our talent i'd bet :rolleyes:
Jonathan
22 Apr 2007, 00:02
Richmond and Hawthorn are relatively even talent wise in my eyes and to anyone else who seriously looks at the lists for themselves and the turnover of talent.
You've gotta be kidding if you think Richmond has as much talent as Hawthorn. You guys might have a couple of good young players but Hawthorn would have the deepest young talent in the AFL. Richmonds going nowhere buddy, Hawthorn>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Shitmond.
benny_furs
22 Apr 2007, 02:00
You've gotta be kidding if you think Richmond has as much talent as Hawthorn. You guys might have a couple of good young players but Hawthorn would have the deepest young talent in the AFL. Richmonds going nowhere buddy, Hawthorn>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Shitmond.
Okay now, wipe the froth from your mouth. There we go :)
We have both turned over the same number of players in the last 3 years, it comes down to a little bit of luck now as to which players turn out the best.
Oh woops, that's too rational. :o
HawFoRn!!1!one!!! RulZZZZZZZ!!!! MAN!
OneEyedHawk
22 Apr 2007, 03:07
Look at this from the article.
Roughead gets dropped and kicks 8 in the reserves and gets called a "very good player for the future".
Cleve Hughes is claimed to be a dud after 1 year in the system.
Cleve Hughes today kicks 5 goals and in the best at VFL seniors (a level up from reserves).
Misleading. As always. Hughes was never called a dud, stop making sh** up.
He said Tiger fans want to know if he'll hold down a KP spot in the future, never even queried his ability.
Jay Schulz doesn't get a mention despite being 21yo (Roughead 20) and going by VFL games (which Garry likes to do) last year Schulz kicked 6 goals 3 weeks in a row at VFL senior level. .
Roughead turned 20 four weeks ago, Schulz is 22.
This is just one of many examples where Garry Lyon is shown to be a biased man-bear-pig. He thinks Hawthorn's talent is vastly superior to Richmond's "lacklustre" youngsters when in REALITY it is very close between the two clubs.
Richmond and Hawthorn are relatively even talent wise in my eyes and to anyone else who seriously looks at the lists for themselves and the turnover of talent.
Please never, ever call anyone else biased.:rolleyes:
You've gotta be kidding if you think Richmond has as much talent as Hawthorn. You guys might have a couple of good young players but Hawthorn would have the deepest young talent in the AFL. Richmonds going nowhere buddy, Hawthorn>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Shitmond.
Easy to get young talent when you tank to get good draft picks, unlike your team the last two years Richmond have been trying to win games, thus the reason we have finished higher than Hawthorn in the past 2 years.
tazhawk
22 Apr 2007, 09:02
Geelong > Hawthorn and Richmond combined:thumbsu:
I guess that is why your nickname is .......................NitWit.:thumbsu:
keefriffhard
22 Apr 2007, 09:57
Easy to get young talent when you tank to get good draft picks, unlike your team the last two years Richmond have been trying to win games, thus the reason we have finished higher than Hawthorn in the past 2 years.
Utterly commendable.....
This is why we will see ranting on all forms of media when Richmond again finish ninth this year.
Hawthorn's tough decision of taking medium term pain for us supporters by trading older players and playing our kids has seen us have a great run at the selection table. Which undoubtably is the best way to rebuild a poor list these days. Unless you have a list you think can take you all the way within a couple of years there is no point in finishing mid-table and drafting recycled senior players. And I can't see the Tigers challenging West Coast in September any earlier than the 2011 date thrown up by your coach this year.
Looking at the group of youngsters we still have yet to break into the side is very exciting. Great few years ahead at Waverley.
Can you honestly say the Tigers are in the same situation? The reason that it will always be a harder proposition for any Richmond coach to consistantly play his youngsters and not be afraid to finish near the bottom of the ladder to get some good drafts is the feral attitude of some Tiger supporters who would publicly tear up memberships and call for his head. Even a proud club such as Carlton has realised that the only way to rebuild a team from the ground up causes a lot of anguish, but ultimately a greater reward. The Wooden Spoon no longer holds the same stigma as it once did. The reverse side is picking up players like Bryce Gibbs.
benny_furs
22 Apr 2007, 13:29
He said Tiger fans want to know if he'll hold down a KP spot in the future, never even queried his ability.
...and Hawk fans DON'T want to know if Rug-head can hold a KP spot down in the future?
There's no doubt all the Hawk kids will be guns, I forgot. Richmond will be lucky to get more than just Deledio (who has been overtaken by the brilliant rookie Young, apparently :o )
If you don't think this article is flattering to the Hawks then you're thinking with your emotions which all supporters can do, but don't come on here and tell us why it is perfectly true than all your kids are blue chip talent and Richmond's have doubts.
Jonathan
22 Apr 2007, 13:55
Easy to get young talent when you tank to get good draft picks, unlike your team the last two years Richmond have been trying to win games, thus the reason we have finished higher than Hawthorn in the past 2 years.
You won't finish higher than us this year though will you. ;)
We've already won more games than the Tiges are likely to win this year....
benny_furs
22 Apr 2007, 23:16
We've already won more games than the Tiges are likely to win this year....
The same thing happened last year ;)
I hate Hawthorn as much as any club, if they finish above us this year then yes I will be disappointed. It is looking likely atm, but neither team will win the flag for a while so what does it matter?
Phil McCreviss
22 Apr 2007, 23:40
The same thing happened last year ;)
I hate Hawthorn as much as any club, if they finish above us this year then yes I will be disappointed. It is looking likely atm, but neither team will win the flag for a while so what does it matter?
Yeah but the same thing has been happening at your club since Kevin Bartlett had hair. Its been 27 years. Dont you get it? In that time we have won 5 premierships. Loser culture breeds loser players breeds loser coaches (enter Wallet).
Anyway here is a stat for you. 0-4 v 3-1.
End of thread.
benny_furs
23 Apr 2007, 00:19
Yeah but the same thing has been happening at your club since Kevin Bartlett had hair. Its been 27 years. Dont you get it? In that time we have won 5 premierships. Loser culture breeds loser players breeds loser coaches (enter Wallet).
Anyway here is a stat for you. 0-4 v 3-1.
End of thread.
So you breed a winning culture..... yet Wallace has a losing culture :confused: :thumbsu:
lol idiot, you bred him!
ShanBoi
23 Apr 2007, 00:56
why is a move to tassie inevitable??
Hello.... we are the second richest victorian club if you take assets into account. I would be more worried if i were the doggies or kangas. Just because we play 4/22 games a year in launceston... Idiots!
Phil McCreviss
23 Apr 2007, 14:46
So you breed a winning culture..... yet Wallace has a losing culture :confused: :thumbsu:
lol idiot, you bred him!
And you hired him!
Wallace was never a gun player at Hawthorn. He was just lucky to have played with one of the all time great teams. Right place right time.
But who really cares? At the end of the day look at the ladder. We are playing schoolkids and they are cr**ping all over your rabble. Keep paying the big bucks to your coach....another superior managerial decision by the Richmond board.
And you hired him!
Wallace was never a gun player at Hawthorn. He was just lucky to have played with one of the all time great teams. Right place right time.
But who really cares? At the end of the day look at the ladder. We are playing schoolkids and they are cr**ping all over your rabble. Keep paying the big bucks to your coach....another superior managerial decision by the Richmond board.
Disagree. He was our most prolific possession winner right through the early to mid 80s. Definitely a gun.
As a coach, on the other hand.....
benny_furs
23 Apr 2007, 16:10
We just just as many kids as you, it's your 22-26 year old players that shit all over us.
Who do we have in that group?
Tuck. Newman. Krakouer. Hyde. Oh and Pettifer :)
You guys have genuine guns in Hodge, Mitchell, Brown and co and then we've still got average senior players like Gaspar and Johnson leading our kids.
Out of the 22 or so kids you've drafted the last 3 years only Lewis, Birchall and Franklin are having an impact so far. We have Lids, Foley and Polo from the same timeline.
Clearly the kids are not the reason you are playing well, I thought that was rather well known.
Phil McCreviss
23 Apr 2007, 17:59
Disagree. He was our most prolific possession winner right through the early to mid 80s. Definitely a gun.
As a coach, on the other hand.....
Yeah maybe im being a bit critical but wouldn't say Wallace was in the same league as our other centres like Dipper, Platten, Matthews, Robertson, Buckenara ahhh the list goes on. I reckon all of these players made him look a lot more average than he really was. Still was a walk up start for the Tiges and Doggies at the end of his career
Your talking utter crap about Wallace. He was absolutely insipid for the year he was with us but then went to Footscray and won a best and fairest (could've even had two if memory serves me) and was a fantastic player at Hawthorn throughout. I think the fact that he performed so well at the dogs when they weren't exactally dominating would demonstrate that it really wasn't the blokes around him 'making him look good' he was just a very good footballer.
andypie
23 Apr 2007, 18:14
It seems as though the whole site is just filled with Hawthorn and Richmond supporters arguing over who is the better side. We have seen countless threads regarding every facet of both clubs. In an attempt to settle this once and for all, I offer the following for your voting.
If you had to allign yourself with either Richmond or Hawthorn, who would it be? Imagine you are to be drafted and must choose between the two, or you have been offered the coaching job of either of them. I don't care how you do it, as long as it helps you to decide, use it. Consider the likes of:
On field talent
Chances of success
Club history
Club culture
Facilities
Chances of survival
Coaching staff
Leadership
Club ideals
How the club is perceived in the public eye
Off field issues
Future talent
Treatment of fans
etc. etc.Basically, use whatever method or criteria you want to come to a conclusion on which club you would rather be a part of.
hawks, i follow my club through thick and thin but also have a realistic outlook on its chances. dont think i would fit in at tigerland.
thatswhatimtalkinabout
24 Apr 2007, 12:24
Yeah maybe im being a bit critical but wouldn't say Wallace was in the same league as our other centres like Dipper, Platten, Matthews, Robertson, Buckenara ahhh the list goes on. I reckon all of these players made him look a lot more average than he really was. Still was a walk up start for the Tiges and Doggies at the end of his career
Terry Wallace, three time premiership player, two time club best and fairest and second in the Brownlow to Wilson in '82, from memory.
His place in Hawthorn's history will never be the same as if he didn't leave to play elsewhere, but the guy was a absolute gun who was a lynchpin of the side with his relentless running, clearances and woeful kicking.
I should know - his number was on the back of my duffle coat.
Austin_McCrabbs
24 Apr 2007, 13:09
Geelong > Hawthorn and Richmond combined:thumbsu:
That makes sense because if Hawthorn and Richmond have been poor for the last 15 and 25 years respectively, that makes Geelong extremely poor for 40 years since your last premiership.