well the giants are now above us and it looks like the saints are going to beat the eagles its 17th on the ladder for richmond the next two weeks will tell alland number 1 draft pick thanks. but we wont be tanking
Its staggering to think how far we get have fallen..
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
Nothing is guaranteed with the RFC
lol not really, look the vast majority of people on here are actually most likely pretty measured in reality, but on the "interwebz" they just vent their frustrations at the season a bit more. I'm probably the opposite of this tbh, I rage pretty hard in real life when we lose close games or games we should win, and earlier in the year I was livid with what I was seeing (the Bulldogs game pissed me off to the point of tears, because I just do not rate them at ALL), but after taking time to cool down and re-evaluate our situation, I realized that the world is not over, and nor is the future of our footy club.
Haha cheers!
Sometimes I wonder why I am on here too...
The thing that frustrates me on here, is that whilst people have every right to be frustrated about this year's results (and I am one of them), you cannot attribute past failures to them, and you also cannot attribute future results with them either.
3 key points regarding this:
1) Past results came from past administrations and past players, and even though Richmond has had a few failures one after another, it still doesn't make them the responsibility of the current administration. Therefore the comments of "30 years of failure", "same old Richmond", etc, is annoying to me, because Dimma's failure this year is NOT 30 years of failure, it's 1 year of failure, after 4 years of reasonable growth and improvement. In the heat of the moment, this can be forgotten.
2) The future of our club does not have to be defined by this year in a negative way, in-fact if used correctly, this year could be a great opportunity to teach our relatively young list a valuable lesson; that if you do not bring top notch work-rate and attitude to the table, your talent can only get you so far. I expect a hungry and motivated Richmond team in 2015, due to the disgrace of this season.
3) The footballing landscape changes on almost a yearly or bi-yearly basis, and sometimes even on a month to month basis within a season. If you went back in time to the end of 2012, and told somebody that in 18 months time, Port Adelaide would be top of the ladder after 13 games in 2014, you'd be laughed out of the room by any reasonable footy fan. Likewise, if you went back to the end of 2010, and told people that by the end of 2013, the Saints would be a basket-case, people would doubt you as well. So anything is possible, and I'd say that if you predicted Richmond to be in the Top 4 in two years time, most people would laugh, but I don't think it's a stretch at all given how our list is shaping up.
Now, regarding our list and development, the bottom line is, we do need to make some changes, and more importantly we do need more accountability to a few of the senior players that continually gets games when they may not warrant it (such as Grigg, Hampson, Chaplin, etc). However at the same time, we can't also just throw our young players to the wolves before they are ready either. It's a delicate balancing act, and if it takes a year or two of these types of results to shield our kids and develop them properly, well I am willing to take it.
We gave a guy like Miles time in the 2's, and it made him hungrier than he would have been if we just gifted him a game in Round 1. Same goes with McDonough. Those 2 players are now clearly part of our future, and if we can unearth that type of hunger in guys like McBean, Elton, Griffiths, O'Hanlon, Batchelor, Helbig, McIntosh, etc, by not just "gifting" them games but making them push other guys out of the side, we'll be better for it.
And those aforementioned senior guys that seem to get gifted games, like Grigg for example, ARE the senior players, and it's their right of way when it comes to playing in the side because they have runs on the board.
To put it another way, they are the "default" lineup, and what we truly want to see is a guy like Grigg being PUSHED out by a younger player, not just dropped because he had a bad game and we want to "play the kids" due to the notion that "anything would be better than playing Grigg in the side again"
It's ironic, because that type of culture CREATES guys like Grigg. If a young player believes he can do better in our side than Grigg can, let him PROVE IT where he's at right now, and when he finally does get his chance, he'll be better and more grateful for it. This is what PROPER development is, not just throwing players to the wolves because our default isn't getting the job done.
There will be no surprise............. the stench that was there when he left has just fermented a few weeks!
PooHaha cheers!
Sometimes I wonder why I am on here too...
The thing that frustrates me on here, is that whilst people have every right to be frustrated about this year's results (and I am one of them), you cannot attribute past failures to them, and you also cannot attribute future results with them either.
3 key points regarding this:
1) Past results came from past administrations and past players, and even though Richmond has had a few failures one after another, it still doesn't make them the responsibility of the current administration. Therefore the comments of "30 years of failure", "same old Richmond", etc, is annoying to me, because Dimma's failure this year is NOT 30 years of failure, it's 1 year of failure, after 4 years of reasonable growth and improvement. In the heat of the moment, this can be forgotten.
2) The future of our club does not have to be defined by this year in a negative way, in-fact if used correctly, this year could be a great opportunity to teach our relatively young list a valuable lesson; that if you do not bring top notch work-rate and attitude to the table, your talent can only get you so far. I expect a hungry and motivated Richmond team in 2015, due to the disgrace of this season.
3) The footballing landscape changes on almost a yearly or bi-yearly basis, and sometimes even on a month to month basis within a season. If you went back in time to the end of 2012, and told somebody that in 18 months time, Port Adelaide would be top of the ladder after 13 games in 2014, you'd be laughed out of the room by any reasonable footy fan. Likewise, if you went back to the end of 2010, and told people that by the end of 2013, the Saints would be a basket-case, people would doubt you as well. So anything is possible, and I'd say that if you predicted Richmond to be in the Top 4 in two years time, most people would laugh, but I don't think it's a stretch at all given how our list is shaping up.
Now, regarding our list and development, the bottom line is, we do need to make some changes, and more importantly we do need more accountability to a few of the senior players that continually gets games when they may not warrant it (such as Grigg, Hampson, Chaplin, etc). However at the same time, we can't also just throw our young players to the wolves before they are ready either. It's a delicate balancing act, and if it takes a year or two of these types of results to shield our kids and develop them properly, well I am willing to take it.
We gave a guy like Miles time in the 2's, and it made him hungrier than he would have been if we just gifted him a game in Round 1. Same goes with McDonough. Those 2 players are now clearly part of our future, and if we can unearth that type of hunger in guys like McBean, Elton, Griffiths, O'Hanlon, Batchelor, Helbig, McIntosh, etc, by not just "gifting" them games but making them push other guys out of the side, we'll be better for it.
And those aforementioned senior guys that seem to get gifted games, like Grigg for example, ARE the senior players, and it's their right of way when it comes to playing in the side because they have runs on the board.
To put it another way, they are the "default" lineup, and what we truly want to see is a guy like Grigg being PUSHED out by a younger player, not just dropped because he had a bad game and we want to "play the kids" due to the notion that "anything would be better than playing Grigg in the side again"
It's ironic, because that type of culture CREATES guys like Grigg. If a young player believes he can do better in our side than Grigg can, let him PROVE IT where he's at right now, and when he finally does get his chance, he'll be better and more grateful for it. This is what PROPER development is, not just throwing players to the wolves because our default isn't getting the job done.
