Favourites

Remove this Banner Ad

nut

nut

Brownlow Medallist
Veteran 10k Posts
Mar 16, 2002
21,715
13,435
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Richmond
Something that concerns me is what Hardwick said to Houli when he was trying to convince him to come to tigerland.

Apparently Hardwick wrote Houli's name on the wing and then put 22 games next to it. Inferring to Houli that no matter what we will play him for 22 games. This was a big reason why Houli made the move.
I'm sure the same tactic was used for Grigg......
You can argue whether they deserved 22 games or not..... but these type of decisions and policies can cause a cancer amongst the club..... especially with the players competing for those spots.

In the scheme of things it may seem trivial .... in a development year how can it hurt?? Well as much as I hate gifting games I hate making those kind of promises.... and it has nothing to do with whertehr the player deserves it or not... no one is bigger than the club.
 
nut said:
Something that concerns me is what Hardwick said to Houli when he was trying to convince him to come to tigerland.

Apparently Hardwick wrote Houli's name on the wing and then put 22 games next to it. Inferring to Houli that no matter what we will play him for 22 games. This was a big reason why Houli made the move.
I'm sure the same tactic was used for Grigg......
You can argue whether they deserved 22 games or not..... but these type of decisions and policies can cause a cancer amongst the club..... especially with the players competing for those spots.

In the scheme of things it may seem trivial .... in a development year how can it hurt?? Well as much as I hate gifting games I hate making those kind of promises.... and it has nothing to do with whertehr the player deserves it or not... no one is bigger than the club.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't this infer that Houli would play wing for 22 games? I would not think this happens at any club.... not since the Capper days at Brisbane anyway.

If this event supposedly occurred, it may well have been inferred that if Bachar worked hard enough he could play 22 games.... This is fair enough and should be true of all our players. The club is trying to build an improved list.... they are not about handing out 22 games with an iron-clad guarantee to anyone. So try not to get your knickers in a twist. ;)
 
I read the article and I got the inferrence that he would be playing on the wing for 22 games, and although he didn't he did stay in the same position the whole time- a big problem at Bomberland
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I really don't see a problem. All we did was offer a kid, who had been in and out of the Bombers line up, a chance to play 22 games. Every club would do the same thing when trying to recruit players. I'd suggest that alongside the chance to play 22 games, the club would also be saying "As long as you put in the hard work and perform, you will get 22 games". No-one would be silly enough to assure a player 22 games without performance being part of the conversation.
 
Considering where we were at when both came to the club letting these blokes know they would line up for 22 games was as much a development move as playing any of the new kids for 22 games. I would also have thought both would have been aware they needed to perform to justify this 22 games and now a year on they are on the same level as everyone else at the club.....

FWIW we also gifted games to Vickery, Griff & Rance last year when they had not done anything much until then to warrant it and in the long term I think that will pay off. Rance is now playing as good a defender as anyone else we have had back there for some time. Vicks had a breakout year and it wasn't until about rnd six that he finally stepped up and cemented his role up fwd, he has struggled so far this year but I saw enough of him last year to persevere for some time yet (at-least whilst Miller is out there). Griff is a long term investment and I expect him to again "get" some games at some time this year.

Back to Houli & Grigg, both have performed admirably until now and even though I don't ever expect them to become elite they are still well ahead of what we have running around in the two's:thumbsu:
 
Whilst we are all dissapointed with the start of the year,we shouldn't throw the baby out with the bath water.

Let's all take a chill pill until after we play the best young list of all time this weekend.


It was only a season ago that Melbourne were a lock for the 8 and look how that has turned out, I'm confident at the moment that the brains trust at tiger land knows what they are doing and if that means guarantee 22 games to a player so be it.


I'm sure that there are players who are in that group.


So take a wine people and wait till the game.
 
TheProwler said:
Considering where we were at when both came to the club letting these blokes know they would line up for 22 games was as much a development move as playing any of the new kids for 22 games. I would also have thought both would have been aware they needed to perform to justify this 22 games and now a year on they are on the same level as everyone else at the club.....

FWIW we also gifted games to Vickery, Griff & Rance last year when they had not done anything much until then to warrant it and in the long term I think that will pay off. Rance is now playing as good a defender as anyone else we have had back there for some time. Vicks had a breakout year and it wasn't until about rnd six that he finally stepped up and cemented his role up fwd, he has struggled so far this year but I saw enough of him last year to persevere for some time yet (at-least whilst Miller is out there). Griff is a long term investment and I expect him to again "get" some games at some time this year.

Back to Houli & Grigg, both have performed admirably until now and even though I don't ever expect them to become elite they are still well ahead of what we have running around in the two's:thumbsu:
Click to expand...
I agree totally however with this in mind I find it all the more puzzling why Post hasn't been afforded the same luxury .
 
TheProwler said:
Considering where we were at when both came to the club letting these blokes know they would line up for 22 games was as much a development move as playing any of the new kids for 22 games. I would also have thought both would have been aware they needed to perform to justify this 22 games and now a year on they are on the same level as everyone else at the club.....

FWIW we also gifted games to Vickery, Griff & Rance last year when they had not done anything much until then to warrant it and in the long term I think that will pay off. Rance is now playing as good a defender as anyone else we have had back there for some time. Vicks had a breakout year and it wasn't until about rnd six that he finally stepped up and cemented his role up fwd, he has struggled so far this year but I saw enough of him last year to persevere for some time yet (at-least whilst Miller is out there). Griff is a long term investment and I expect him to again "get" some games at some time this year.

Back to Houli & Grigg, both have performed admirably until now and even though I don't ever expect them to become elite they are still well ahead of what we have running around in the two's:thumbsu:
Click to expand...
Didn't really pay off though did it? Whilst Vickery got some much needed continuity and confidence he's now "gone". Not up to it and will never ever be a good player ever again. Ask the experts on bigfooty.
 
Have a feeling Dimma looked at the likely candidates that he had at his disposal and expressed to Houli that he would play 22 games, seeing the competition that he had for a spot. ;)
 
"Roar Passion" said:
I agree totally however with this in mind I find it all the more puzzling why Post hasn't been afforded the same luxury .
Click to expand...



And thats the point.....

Im sure webberly if afforded the same support and if he was shown the same confidence would also have benefited.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

nut said:
And thats the point.....

Im sure webberly if afforded the same support and if he was shown the same confidence would also have benefited.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I'm sure if Webberly was 5cm taller and 7kgs heavier he would be starting 22 every week and getting plenty of opportunity.

If you don't want to give these smaller players a go, or don't think that they have the body type to make it, why ****ing recruit them in the first place???
 
You need to remember that Hardwicks main angle was to give Houli a fair go at AFL level since he was frustrated at playing reserves for whatever reason.

It's worth noting that the start to Houlis season last year was pretty poor yet he was kept in the team. Clubs can afford to make these promises when in their "transformation" period as they need the same core group playing together to set up for the future. Probably told Maric the same thing.
 
Filthy Sanchez said:
You need to remember that Hardwicks main angle was to give Houli a fair go at AFL level since he was frustrated at playing reserves for whatever reason.

It's worth noting that the start to Houlis season last year was pretty poor yet he was kept in the team. Clubs can afford to make these promises when in their "transformation" period as they need the same core group playing together to set up for the future. Probably told Maric the same thing.
Click to expand...

fair go?.... What about the rest of the playing group?
 
nut said:
And thats the point.....

Im sure webberly if afforded the same support and if he was shown the same confidence would also have benefited.
Click to expand...
The thing you're overlooking though is guys like Houli would have been told as long as you perform you will play 22 games. While Houli did have a quietish start to last year he was still averaging around 16 disposals a game, he did come good as soon as he was moved to the HB line, averaging just over 22 disposals a game once he was moved.

Unfortunately for some others when given the chance they haven't shown enough to keep them in the side to allow them to settle.
 
For ****'s sake, why do people take things so literally and believe 2nd hand s**t so gullibly?
I am sure Bachar is intelligent enough to realise nothing in this game comes for free and nothing is taken for granted.
Pity it doesn't rub off onto the internet.
 
"Roar Passion" said:
I agree totally however with this in mind I find it all the more puzzling why Post hasn't been afforded the same luxury .
Click to expand...

It would have been a luxury indeed if Posty had played against Collingwood. If there was one clear positive on the night it was the defensive match ups worked pretty well. Rance, Grimes and Batch looked after the marking forwards very well and we weren't touched up by not having another tall in there. The addition of Posty would have unbalanced the back six.

Form clearly didn't help but "team balance" meant Posty wasn't afforded the luxury.
 
RT73 said:
The thing you're overlooking though is guys like Houli would have been told as long as you perform you will play 22 games. While Houli did have a quietish start to last year he was still averaging around 16 disposals a game, he did come good as soon as he was moved to the HB line, averaging just over 22 disposals a game once he was moved.

Unfortunately for some others when given the chance they haven't shown enough to keep them in the side to allow them to settle.
Click to expand...

No he was promised 22 games. The club backed him in to perform. It was a great strategy to entice a player..... I just feel it goes against the culture of awarding players purely on merit and it would create angst amongst the playing group. Different rules for different players......
We want competition for spots... Not less spots to fight over.
 
What continually amazes me is how dumb the footy club is.
They keep employing people with no idea about footy when of they simply logged onto this board they could have dozens of brilliant minds who see things in players that nobody else can see.
Why don't they realize Post,Webberly,etc etc are good and should be in the team?
I don't get it.
 
nut said:
No he was promised 22 games. The club backed him in to perform. It was a great strategy to entice a player..... I just feel it goes against the culture of awarding players purely on merit and it would create angst amongst the playing group. Different rules for different players......
We want competition for spots... Not less spots to fight over.
Click to expand...

The problem with all this BS is that its like he is not performing and you are questioning his inclusion in the team. Get real dude, I would be tipping that if Bachar produced the s**t some others have to date then without a doubt he would be under the pump to hold his spot. ;)
 
RodneyDangerfield said:
What continually amazes me is how dumb the footy club is.
They keep employing people with no idea about footy when of they simply logged onto this board they could have dozens of brilliant minds who see things in players that nobody else can see.
Why don't they realize Post,Webberly,etc etc are good and should be in the team?
I don't get it.
Click to expand...

It just keeps on keeping on dude.
The thing is that they dont employ people with no idea about footy, the employ people who have an idea, but that idea then makes them look like they have NFI.

As for who sees things that nobody else can see, lets put it this way, there are about 3 on this board that go around blowing the trumpet as loud as they can about the pluses of having the Tucks, Hacksons etc in the team, so there you have the definition of brilliant minds that see what no one else can see which ties in to what the brains trust can see as well.
So when you factor in that one of them wasnt wanted by any other club at the trade table and then factor in the masses here who suggest that we wont go anywhere with their inclusions, tipping when it comes to not seeing what blind freddy can see, then those who are employed are front and ****ing center. ;)
 
Livonski said:
It would have been a luxury indeed if Posty had played against Collingwood. If there was one clear positive on the night it was the defensive match ups worked pretty well. Rance, Grimes and Batch looked after the marking forwards very well and we weren't touched up by not having another tall in there. The addition of Posty would have unbalanced the back six.

Form clearly didn't help but "team balance" meant Posty wasn't afforded the luxury.
Click to expand...

Have never said he currently is a gun or even good at AFL level , however to develop talls in particular you have to be willing to except short term sub par performances .
It's no coincidence that talls who have break out years , talk of the importance of clubs giving them prolonged games and having the assurance that despite errors the club was prepared to give them time .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Aristotle Pickett
Opinion Your best ever/favourite Richmond team of all time.
2 3
Replies
62
Views
3K
Freddy Swift
Freddy Swift

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top