Mega Thread Hardwick Vent Thread

[Rayzorwire]

What's with all this Tuck love? After the Dreamtime game where he was subbed off,

He went off injured.

He was absolutely shocking!!! He missed a man by foot only 20m away by grubbering the kick and wasn't under a lot of pressure. How could Hardwick play him after that?

I've watched every game Tuck's played and I have never once seen him even come close to producing as many clangers within a short space of time to such detriment to the team as Martin did on Sunday, and Cotchin's done it numerous times this season too.

How can Hardwick play them - they're killing us!! Shocking!!

And we had shown reasonable form before that game without him!

Our midfield had been thrashed for several weeks prior to the Port game. The warning signs were there loud and clear, instead of bringing Tuck in full-time we responded by dumping Graham and made things much worse instead of better.

 

[tugga]

Wallace coached for Wallace and Wallace only. That's it in a nutshell.
Too ego driven and too blind to see the mistakes he made. And then when it was time to go, he basked in his 'glory' with a shameful farewell match that confirmed everything. He lost the respect of everyone at the club in the 5th year of his miserable tenure.
Wallace 'failed' because he failed. In every aspect of the job. He was a disaster and an unmitigated shameful chapter in this history of the club.
Hardwick is still learning the caper.
But Wallace had a long stint at Whitten Oval and when he came to us, he should have had the experience behind him to do a half decent job. But instead, he delivered more abject failure.

 

[tugga]

He went off injured.

He was not injured in the Dreamtime Game.

 

[nut]

Wallace coached for Wallace and Wallace only. That's it in a nutshell.
Too ego driven and too blind to see the mistakes he made. And then when it was time to go, he basked in his 'glory' with a shameful farewell match that confirmed everything. He lost the respect of everyone at the club in the 5th year of his miserable tenure.
Wallace 'failed' because he failed. In every aspect of the job. He was a disaster and an unmitigated shameful chapter in this history of the club.
Hardwick is still learning the caper.
But Wallace had a long stint at Whitten Oval and when he came to us, he should have had the experience behind him to do a half decent job. But instead, he delivered more abject failure.

Hardwick needs to coach .... He needs to take control..... and he needs to learn from his mistakes.... It worries me that when he speaks it's almost orchestrated.... like he has already spent the time going over what he is going to say with someone else before he speaks...

Like the loss in Darwin when he comes out and blames the players for the loss and saying we had a good prep... but then admits about a week later we should have travelled up earlier.

This worries me because
1. this might not have even been HIS decision and he is left to justify it... In that case he is not steering the ship...
or
2. he actually thought that going upto Darwin 30 hours before a match was good prep???

Either way it's a sign that we have coach who clearly not fully in charge of the our fortunes...

 

[The Goon]

Hardwick needs to coach .... He needs to take control..... and he needs to learn from his mistakes.... It worries me that when he speaks it's almost orchestrated.... like he has already spent the time going over what he is going to say with someone else before he speaks...

Like the loss in Darwin when he comes out and blames the players for the loss and saying we had a good prep... but then admits about a week later we should have travelled up earlier.

This worries me because
1. this might not have even been HIS decision and he is left to justify it... In that case he is not steering the ship...
or
2. he actually thought that going upto Darwin 30 hours before a match was good prep???

Either way it's a sign that we have coach who clearly not fully in charge of the our fortunes...

Bit of a contradiction there Nut - looks like he did learn from the mistake. Plus, you should take what is said right after a game with a grain of salt. I'm sure Dimma was ropable after the PA game and was focussed on what he thought was the main problem - the players didn't come to play. Finally, a good media performer is a good media performer, and can make anything they say look rehearsed.

 

[tugga]

Hardwick needs to coach .... He needs to take control..... and he needs to learn from his mistakes.... It worries me that when he speaks it's almost orchestrated.... like he has already spent the time going over what he is going to say with someone else before he speaks...

Like the loss in Darwin when he comes out and blames the players for the loss and saying we had a good prep... but then admits about a week later we should have travelled up earlier.

This worries me because
1. this might not have even been HIS decision and he is left to justify it... In that case he is not steering the ship...
or
2. he actually thought that going upto Darwin 30 hours before a match was good prep???

Either way it's a sign that we have coach who clearly not fully in charge of the our fortunes...

I doubt whether Hardwick had much say in when the squad travelled up to Darwin. I'm sure given the chance he would have been up there for several days.
Even if he did have a say in it, I am not sure what you mean by not learning from mistakes.
The squad travelled to Cairns a day earlier than what they did to Darwin. Exactly the day you wanted them to. So he obviously did learn from the Darwin mistake and rectified it for Cairns?
As far as his speaking goes. I couldn't care less what he says to us plebs. Wallace spun us all the bullshit in the world. You seriously can't compare a public persona to what goes on behind closed doors.
Even ih he does go over what he has to say beforehand, I call that preparation.
You say that we have a coach who is 'clearly not fully in charge of the our fortunes' but all you have done is provide two poor examples why you think this way - his speaking and a decision to travel to Darwin on the Friday, when it might not have been his decision in the first place, and one that was changed the next time around.

 

[_RT_]

He's deviating right now to appease fans by playing Tuck instead of one of the kids at Coburg, just like he did last year. He wants some wins to finish the year off because he's made a right mess of the rest of it.

I'd suggest it has more to do with the fact that we have only 28 players to pick from rather than trying to appease the fans. When we had a bigger list to pick from Tuck was left to play at Coburg and kids were given the chance to play at AFL level.

Things have gone pear shaped for him at the precise moments in seasons when he's refused to play Tuck in the middle. When things have got really bad and his coaching has been questioned, he's been forced to play Tuck and things have improved markedly. Only you could possibly pretend that the club becoming a laughing stock twice in two seasons, then having to call on Tuck to bail him out both times, was all part of Hardwick's plan.

Gee who would have thought that a side, that is in the second year of a complete rebuild, and that is trying to fix the damage left behind by the previous coachs half assed rebuild, would struggle to be competitive through full seasons.

It is also to be expected that a seasoned veteran with several seasons behind him is obviously going to perform better than a bunch of wet behind the ears kids when he finally gets a crack at it towards the end of the season.

Wallace tried to make finals every year, good coaches do that. From the stars like Richo and Brown through to journeymen like Simmonds and Stafford, a heck of a lot of players played the best football of their careers under him. Every year he got a better performance out of our list than seemed possible on paper, while his 'failures' came when he could barely field even a bad side.

You're drawing a long bow suggesting that Stafford played the best footy of his career under TW. In the 2 seasons under him Stafford played 28 of 44 games for a grand total of 195 disposals, 97 marks, 141 hitouts & 31 goals.

Take a look at the side Wallace coached against the previous season's premiers Port in '05 when we kicked 18 goals to 5 in the last three quarters and massacred them:

B: Kellaway Gaspar Graham
HB: Bowden Hall Newman
C: Tivendale Johnson Campbell
HF: Pettifer Simmonds Deledio
F: Brown Richardson Stafford
Foll: Knobel Tuck Coughlan
Int: Chaffey, Krakouer, Tambling, Meyer

There's a ton of rubbish in that lineup RT as you're well aware, probably a dozen players Hardwick wouldn't take for free, they were wooden spooners the year before, but Wallace had them all jumping out of their skins and we were the form side of the competition until injuries and bad luck caught up with us.

Hardwick hasn't even come close to getting results like that as a senior coach, so it's pretty silly to even try to compare them IMO.

Wallace has always achieved better results than could have reasonably been expected from the list he had to work with, Hardwick has done nothing and his reputation is based almost solely on the fact that he gets along well with everyone and has a plan to stop losing games at some distant point in the future.

In that side you posted above I've highlighted all the players that were established AFL players when that game was played. The following is the side we fielded on Sunday against the Swans:

B: Dea Rance Batchelor
HB: Houli Post Deledio
C: Cotchin Martin Grigg
HF: Jackson Vickery Edwards
F: Nahas Riewoldt King
R: Graham Tuck Foley
I/C: Thursfield Farmer Miller Morton
Highlighted players are those with at least 50 games to their names. Pretty far cry from the team TW had at his disposal in terms of experience and I'd also suggest class.

Therein lies the difference between the path Hardwick is taking and the one that TW chose to go down. Hardwick is pumping games into as many kids as possible with one thing in mind and that is the long term future of the club rather than short term results as he said himself on Sunday in the paper:

"I can understand the supporters' frustrations," he said. "Don't get me wrong, I like to win."
"But you can either choose to compete or choose to win. I would rather win.
"You can sit there and put out a side that will compete week in and week out or you can actually try to do it right so that we can get to the big one.

TW never bothered putting games into kids unless they were a Deledio or Tambling or Cotchin. Players like Griffiths Batchelor Astbury Helbig Grimes Nason & co would have been treated like Connors Casserley Rance Hughes Meyer Polo & co were. Now I'm sure you're going to come back with some reason as to why TW was right to do that and how Hardwick is wrong to try and find out sooner rather than later which kids can be part of our next successful era.

 

[YellowandBlackBlood]

He went off injured.



I've watched every game Tuck's played and I have never once seen him even come close to producing as many clangers within a short space of time to such detriment to the team as Martin did on Sunday, and Cotchin's done it numerous times this season too.

How can Hardwick play them - they're killing us!! Shocking!!



Our midfield had been thrashed for several weeks prior to the Port game. The warning signs were there loud and clear, instead of bringing Tuck in full-time we responded by dumping Graham and made things much worse instead of better.

Can you not see a big difference? Tuck is how old? If he hasn't reached his peak in skill and execution by now he never will! Cotchin and Martin have got many years to hone their skills. Because of this, they MUST be given so much more leeway than Tuck. Isn't this obvious to you or are you too stubborn to admit this?

 

[nut]

I doubt whether Hardwick had much say in when the squad travelled up to Darwin. I'm sure given the chance he would have been up there for several days.
Even if he did have a say in it, I am not sure what you mean by not learning from mistakes.
The squad travelled to Cairns a day earlier than what they did to Darwin. Exactly the day you wanted them to. So he obviously did learn from the Darwin mistake and rectified it for Cairns?
As far as his speaking goes. I couldn't care less what he says to us plebs. Wallace spun us all the bullshit in the world. You seriously can't compare a public persona to what goes on behind closed doors.
Even ih he does go over what he has to say beforehand, I call that preparation.
You say that we have a coach who is 'clearly not fully in charge of the our fortunes' but all you have done is provide two poor examples why you think this way - his speaking and a decision to travel to Darwin on the Friday, when it might not have been his decision in the first place, and one that was changed the next time around.

So it's not his decision to go to Darwin late but it's his decision to go Cairns earlier???
What I meant from the mistake was that I received an email placing the blame on the players and that he thought he preparation to the Darwin trip was good.... when it was clear to the whole football world that we were under prepared... can you see the worry I have?? Infact he was apparently blinded by the "good prep" until he talked to the worst coach in the comp and primus put him right. You need to travel to Darwin early. It worries me that he/club didn't research why clubs go to Darwin early.... alarm bells would have rang pretty hard when Port were there on the Wednesday??? it was either stupidity or arrogance... at the end of the day it cost a spot in the eight at the time and ruined any momentum we had..... and it took an opposition coach who's side sits on the bottom of the ladder to show us. For someone who has seen this club in the twice in 32 years I have a right to be a little annoyed.

You dont care what he says to us but you care what Wallace said to us??? thats abit unfair on Wallace.... did you know what Wallace was saying to the players behind closed doors??

I'll also add his selection decisions have been terrible at times too... which I'd expect from a young coach.... but I'd also expect the coach admitting those mistakes also and his explanantion that Foley, Martin and Cotchin were keeping Tuck out also shows a coach that is struggling.

Tuck is 29 years old..... not 30 like we continually hear.

I am 100% behind Hardwick.... I'm also very aware that finals was never in the coaches plans... wrong or right thats clear. Personally I couldn't think anything better for this group to be now warming up for their first finals series... hopefully with many more to come. But thats life.... hopefully we have a better showing next season because if we dont Dimma will under enormous pressure and he will be judged on his whole tenure which includes the mistakes the clubs this season.

The reason why I worry that he isn't steering the ship is that if we dont see big improvements next season he will be the one that is shown the door.... unfortunately before Craig Cameron...etc... who is the guy that is the head of the football department and most probably the bloke who sent us to Darwin Friday afternoon.

So in summary Hardwick needs to take control and demand whats right for the players.... and give himself the best chance for the club to improve...

 

[tugga]

Nut, read my post again. Either you didn't read it properly or I didn't write it properly.
I said it may not have been Hardwick's decision to go to Port the day before the game. But if it was, then he acknowledged his mistake by fixing it for Cairns.
No I don't really care what he says to us. I didn't care what Wallace said to us either.

 

[nut]

Nut, read my post again. Either you didn't read it properly or I didn't write it properly.
I said it may not have been Hardwick's decision to go to Port the day before the game. But if it was, then he acknowledged his mistake by fixing it for Cairns.
No I don't really care what he says to us. I didn't care what Wallace said to us either.

Yer I get ya....
My worry is that Hardwick isn't given the control he needs.

Basically in the similar vain as Bailey was told to "do whats right" for the Melbourne footy club... and at the end of the day that probably cost him his job, yet the power brokers that were working behind the scenes are currently still there.

 

[tugga]

Yer I get ya....
My worry is that Hardwick isn't given the control he needs.

Basically in the similar vain as Bailey was told to "do whats right" for the Melbourne footy club... and at the end of the day that probably cost him his job, yet the power brokers that were working behind the scenes are currently still there.

I understand what you are saying. I think with Melbourne, Schwab and Connolly were the last pieces of the jigsaw and they clashed with Bailey. Our situation is a bit different. I am confident Benny has the nous to know what to do. I don't have the utmost confidence in Cameron, but what do you do?
I also think that with Bailey, he came in and basically was a yes man to everything.
Hardwick identified right from the word go what needed to be done and has said he and the club will not waiver from that path.
I guess for now you have to take that on face value or at least close to it until we are given genuine reason to think otherwise.
Don't worry. I don't have blind faith in Dimma. Too many years of shitness has made this supporter wary of everything.
But I also don't see any reason to panic just yet.

 

[richoatthedisco]

We've all had our doubts about Cameron but Caro reckons he's the right man for the job. Maybe she's hoping he is, but if she thought he wasn't we'd know about it. I'm not saying she's the last word or anything like it, but she is a lot better connected than most of us. We see Cameron's Flock of Seagulls haircut and the recruitment of Thomson and Hislop and go into "eat 'em alive" mode, which has defaulted to "eat our own" since the club's 1980s visit to the dentist.

 

[Rayzorwire]

He was not injured in the Dreamtime Game.

He was given a fitness test prior to it coming back after doing his ribs against Brisbane and Hardwick said after the game that he was still a little sore during the match.

I'd suggest it has more to do with the fact that we have only 28 players to pick from rather than trying to appease the fans. When we had a bigger list to pick from Tuck was left to play at Coburg and kids were given the chance to play at AFL level.

And there's still kids to choose from, which is the point you're avoiding. O'Reilly and Nason won't play in this match because Tuck is, they're emergencies - I'm sure there's several others. If Hardwick was sticking to the 'results don't matter, it's all about getting games into as many kids as possible' policy he's so often espoused and you've so often defended on his behalf, then Tuck wouldn't play Sunday, O'Reilly would.

We have exactly the same onballers to choose from as we did earlier in the year, except Conca, who was only used for a few games and certainly not full-time. You'd think a coach who left Tuck out all year because he was superfluous to needs, would be using the last few games to try different combinations and maybe come up with the first Hardwick era midfield which works without Tuck holding it together.

Tuck's playing because he's getting Hardwick the wins he needs to make a season which was on the verge of being branded a backward step look more respectable. He's abused him all year because he actually thought we had significantly better options, now he's using him because he's belatedly realised that he was wrong.

You're drawing a long bow suggesting that Stafford played the best footy of his career under TW. In the 2 seasons under him Stafford played 28 of 44 games for a grand total of 195 disposals, 97 marks, 141 hitouts & 31 goals.

I didn't say he played his most consistent football, he was crippled towards the end and never really recovered from that sickening knee hyper-extension. He was tried mostly as a forward in his last season with Sydney because he'd lost his no.1 ruck role to Ball, Doyle was looking promising coming through, plus Goodes was still thought of as at least a part-time ruckman back then. He failed as a forward for them, they would have loved for him to succeed at it, but they preferred some very ordinary forwards ahead of him on exposed form and happily traded him to us.

If he'd been able to produce the form as a forward which he did for Wallace when he was fit and able (which was rare), they'd never have let him go. He was a weapon for Wallace when he could actually move.

The following is the side we fielded on Sunday against the Swans:

And? I see zero reason why I should bother taking up my time to engage with it when you've entirely avoided the point I was making about the merry bunch of hacks and rejects Wallace had to work with, rather than simply admit it's true.

Can you not see a big difference? Tuck is how old? If he hasn't reached his peak in skill and execution by now he never will! Cotchin and Martin have got many years to hone their skills. Because of this, they MUST be given so much more leeway than Tuck. Isn't this obvious to you or are you too stubborn to admit this?

I'm not asking for Martin or Cotchin to be excluded from the side, so obviously I'm giving them the same amount of leeway as you, or the coaching staff for that matter. Both have well and truly earned their spot and have earned the right to have poor quarters and poor games without people questioning their value or place in the side. When they do play poorly, however, their game should be judged against that of their teammates.

I'm really not into logically impossible combinations like a) asserting Cotchin and Martin are our two best onballers, b) asserting Tuck is finished because they've gone past him, then c) insisting that they be given all kinds of leeway when we judge their performances next to his.

I know many others have no problem with doing exactly the above...

 

[_RT_]

And there's still kids to choose from, which is the point you're avoiding. O'Reilly and Nason won't play in this match because Tuck is, they're emergencies - I'm sure there's several others. If Hardwick was sticking to the 'results don't matter, it's all about getting games into as many kids as possible' policy he's so often espoused and you've so often defended on his behalf, then Tuck wouldn't play Sunday, O'Reilly would.

We have exactly the same onballers to choose from as we did earlier in the year, except Conca, who was only used for a few games and certainly not full-time. You'd think a coach who left Tuck out all year because he was superfluous to needs, would be using the last few games to try different combinations and maybe come up with the first Hardwick era midfield which works without Tuck holding it together.

Tuck's playing because he's getting Hardwick the wins he needs to make a season which was on the verge of being branded a backward step look more respectable. He's abused him all year because he actually thought we had significantly better options, now he's using him because he's belatedly realised that he was wrong.

Hardwick said in last weeks article that if the kids were right to go they would be picked in preference to Tuck. It would fair to suggest that the reason the kids aren't getting picked now is because they are no longer able to produce at the level needed. As such Hardwick, the coach you seem to think has NFI as to what he is doing, has pulled the pin on their seasons and is using whats left to field a side to get us through the last month and a half of the season.

Afterall he has got what he would have wanted out of the kids with guys like Conca Batchelor & Helbig have played their 10-20 games to give them a taste at this level like he did with Webberley Nason & Astbury last year.

As for not trying to establish his own midfield, what do you think all those weeks without Tuck in the lineup were for if they were to try out different combinations for when Tuck isn't around/available? Thought it would be pretty clear what we were doing during that time but it would appear that your total dislike for Hardwick has stopped you from seeing this.

I didn't say he played his most consistent football, he was crippled towards the end and never really recovered from that sickening knee hyper-extension. He was tried mostly as a forward in his last season with Sydney because he'd lost his no.1 ruck role to Ball, Doyle was looking promising coming through, plus Goodes was still thought of as at least a part-time ruckman back then. He failed as a forward for them, they would have loved for him to succeed at it, but they preferred some very ordinary forwards ahead of him on exposed form and happily traded him to us.

If he'd been able to produce the form as a forward which he did for Wallace when he was fit and able (which was rare), they'd never have let him go. He was a weapon for Wallace when he could actually move.

Your words were:

Wallace tried to make finals every year, good coaches do that. From the stars like Richo and Brown through to journeymen like Simmonds and Stafford, a heck of a lot of players played the best football of their careers under him.

Under TW Stafford managed to kick 2+ goals in 10 of 28 games he played, in 12 other games he didn't register a goal. That makes 18 of 28 games where he has little to no impact in terms of being a weapon. Hardly what I or anyone else would call the best footy of his career.

And? I see zero reason why I should bother taking up my time to engage with it when you've entirely avoided the point I was making about the merry bunch of hacks and rejects Wallace had to work with, rather than simply admit it's true.

More likely it you who doesn't want to admit that TW had a lot more experience to work with than what Hardwick has. Due to the fact that unlike TW, Hardwick has actually embraced a full on rebuild by getting rid of as much deadwood as possible each year and replacing it with as many kids as possible. TW on the other hand had a single clean out at the end of 04 then lost focus on what he had originally set out to do and started thinking that we were better than we really were.

This led to him not playing kids and turning to recycled types to try and keep us in the hunt. Hardwick on the other hand isn't concerned with the short term glory that nearly getting us to the finals might bring. What he is concerned about is making sure that the club is set up for a sustained period of success and has done so by playing kids ahead of senior players even though it means that our chances of winning aren't as good as they could/should be each week.

Perhaps if TW had of done what Hardwick is doing now, instead of chasing glory, we would be sitting here in his 7th year discussing where we would all like to meet prior to our first final in a decade, instead of arguing about whether the club is finally getting it right after making a complete and utter mess of it when TW was in charge.

 

[tugga]

He was given a fitness test prior to it coming back after doing his ribs against Brisbane and Hardwick said after the game that he was still a little sore during the match.

He was subbed off in the Dreamtime game because he stank it up, not because he was injured. But keep making things up if you like.

 

[NQTIGER]

He was subbed off in the Dreamtime game because he stank it up, not because he was injured. But keep making things up if you like.

Come on tuggs , all season dimma has been saying its not about wins , its about the plan, and suddenly in the last 4 games its all about wins?

I know we are on opposite sides in this discussion, but i reckon we are being sold a line again, next year will tell , and we will probably know real early in the season.

 

[tugga]

Come on tuggs , all season dimma has been saying its not about wins , its about the plan, and suddenly in the last 4 games its all about wins?

I know we are on opposite sides in this discussion, but i reckon we are being sold a line again, next year will tell , and we will probably know real early in the season.

What's that got to do with Rayzor's ridiculous assertion that Tuck got subbed off through injury in the DT game?
As I said to nut in another thread, I don't listen to meaningless interviews by coaches. I stopped listening after the shit we were spoon fed by Wallace for 4 and a half years.

 

[Rayzorwire]

Hardwick said in last weeks article that if the kids were right to go they would be picked in preference to Tuck. It would fair to suggest that the reason the kids aren't getting picked now is because they are no longer able to produce at the level needed.

No, it wouldn't be fair, it'd be complete BS, because the two players I mentioned - O'Reilly and Nason - are listed as emergencies for the match, so they are well and truly ready to play in place of Tuck, if Hardwick wasn't desperately chasing some respect after blowing the rest of the year.

Afterall he has got what he would have wanted out of the kids with guys like Conca Batchelor & Helbig have played their 10-20 games to give them a taste at this level like he did with Webberley Nason & Astbury last year.

Clearly those games really fast-tracked Webberley and Nason's careers.

As for not trying to establish his own midfield, what do you think all those weeks without Tuck in the lineup were for...

To prove all over again what we learned last year and what some of us knew in advance for this year - that we didn't have enough adult bodied mids who could cut it consistently at the top level without using Tuck? Or was it to totally derail all our fundraising efforts and humiliate the club?

That makes 18 of 28 games where he has little to no impact in terms of being a weapon.

[Yawn] Listing how many games he couldn't have an impact in testifies to what I've already said about his consistency, and doesn't testify at all to the fact that far and away his best individual games of football as a forward were under Wallace. Please see if you can make an argument which vaguely relates to the topic, instead of nitpicking to the enth degree yet again and boring me to death.

Perhaps if TW had of done what Hardwick is doing now, instead of chasing glory, we would be sitting here in his 7th year discussing where we would all like to meet prior to our first final in a decade.

The only reason Hardwick has a promising list to work with, is that Wallace did the exact opposite of the glory chasing we'd always done, kept his word, kept our first round draft picks and gave this club a future. Deledio, Reiwoldt, Cotchin, Vickery - four first choices who will help form the backbone of this club for the next decade. A solid senior midfield core built from picks 70+ and the rookie list out of players nobody else wanted.

If we'd been a club with real leadership at the top, March and the board would have recognised that Wallace was the best tactical coach and football brain we were ever going to lay our hands on, taken steps to build a better working relationship between the players and the coaching staff, and launched a fundraising effort to improve our resources and spending capacity years ago when it was obvious to all there was a massive problem.

With the list he had, Wallace's game day results - right up until he was getting knifed from all directions in his last year - were nothing short of phenomenal. I've shown you the pensioners and hacks he had to play in '05, you complain that he didn't rebuild enough for us, but look at all the young players who weren't around in '05 which he developed or drafted for us, and who were playing against and beating the eventual premiers in Hawthorn late in '08, four years into his tenure:

Connors, Cotchin, Deledio, Edwards, Jackson, McGuane, Morton, Polo, Reiwoldt, Schulz, Tambling, Thursfield, Tuck, White. Fourteen of the 22 players, plus Cartledge. Plenty of other juniors played roles for us that year and the years immediately prior.

So, we're looking at the record of a coach who was way more successful than he should have been in years one and two, had turned the list around almost entirely with youth by the end of 2008, and finally succumbed in his last year to a combination of his best players not being available (the only thing which could possibly have given him the level of success being demanded), and the usual lack of support and fake pageantry which accompanies all Richmond political assassinations.

Real 'failure' he was...

He was subbed off in the Dreamtime game because he stank it up, not because he was injured. But keep making things up if you like.

As I said to nut in another thread, I don't listen to meaningless interviews by coaches.

You've got a hell of a lot of nerve to call me a liar then go on to admit you haven't seen or heard the evidence I quite readily supplied (as I always do) to back my assertion.

The only thing which stank about Tuck's game was your opinion of it - you happily and with full venom wrote him off as a player based on a game he played injured.

How's that opinion working out for you?

 

[tugga]

You've got a hell of a lot of nerve to call me a liar then go on to admit you haven't seen or heard the evidence I quite readily supplied (as I always do) to back my assertion.

The only thing which stank about Tuck's game was your opinion of it - you happily and with full venom wrote him off as a player based on a game he played injured.

How's that opinion working out for you?

12 disposals would suggest he was poor would it not? He was poor in that game and got subbed off because of it.
My evidence is that Tuck wasn't on the injury list after the game.
We are probably off topic for this thread though. Have the final say if you want as I know you will, but no more from me on this in this thread.

 

[_RT_]

No, it wouldn't be fair, it'd be complete BS, because the two players I mentioned - O'Reilly and Nason - are listed as emergencies for the match, so they are well and truly ready to play in place of Tuck, if Hardwick wasn't desperately chasing some respect after blowing the rest of the year.

Just because a player is named as an emergency it doesn't mean that they are ready to go. We have to name a squad of 25 every week, given we've only got 27-28 available to pick from a few players are going to get named in the squad that aren't quite ready to go.

To prove all over again what we learned last year and what some of us knew in advance for this year - that we didn't have enough adult bodied mids who could cut it consistently at the top level without using Tuck? Or was it to totally derail all our fundraising efforts and humiliate the club?

[Yawn] Listing how many games he couldn't have an impact in testifies to what I've already said about his consistency, and doesn't testify at all to the fact that far and away his best individual games of football as a forward were under Wallace. Please see if you can make an argument which vaguely relates to the topic, instead of nitpicking to the enth degree yet again and boring me to death.

Again you didn't say anything about consistency in your original claim, you said he played along with others played the best footy of their careers. Playing a handful of games over a 2 year period is hardly what anyone would call playing career best footy.

The only reason Hardwick has a promising list to work with, is that Wallace did the exact opposite of the glory chasing we'd always done, kept his word, kept our first round draft picks and gave this club a future. Deledio, Reiwoldt, Cotchin, Vickery - four first choices who will help form the backbone of this club for the next decade. A solid senior midfield core built from picks 70+ and the rookie list out of players nobody else wanted.

Surely you're not crediting TW with the selections of Foley Jackson and Tuck(who were all drafted by Frawley).

If we'd been a club with real leadership at the top, March and the board would have recognised that Wallace was the best tactical coach and football brain we were ever going to lay our hands on, taken steps to build a better working relationship between the players and the coaching staff, and launched a fundraising effort to improve our resources and spending capacity years ago when it was obvious to all there was a massive problem.

With the list he had, Wallace's game day results - right up until he was getting knifed from all directions in his last year - were nothing short of phenomenal. I've shown you the pensioners and hacks he had to play in '05, you complain that he didn't rebuild enough for us, but look at all the young players who weren't around in '05 which he developed or drafted for us, and who were playing against and beating the eventual premiers in Hawthorn late in '08, four years into his tenure:

Connors, Cotchin, Deledio, Edwards, Jackson, McGuane, Morton, Polo, Reiwoldt, Schulz, Tambling, Thursfield, Tuck, White. Fourteen of the 22 players, plus Cartledge. Plenty of other juniors played roles for us that year and the years immediately prior.

So, we're looking at the record of a coach who was way more successful than he should have been in years one and two, had turned the list around almost entirely with youth by the end of 2008, and finally succumbed in his last year to a combination of his best players not being available (the only thing which could possibly have given him the level of success being demanded), and the usual lack of support and fake pageantry which accompanies all Richmond political assassinations.

Real 'failure' he was...

When you have a side whose foundations were built around Richo Brown Simmonds Johnson Campbell Bowden Gaspar Kellaway Chaffey Coughlan amongst others we should have been able to perform at the level that we managed in 05/06. TWs problem was that he shouldn't have been relying on those older players to carry the side. If he was smart he would have taken the early pain like Hardwick is and put gametime into as many kids as possible and tried to find out which kids we had could possibly be part of a successful future. Like I said before if he had of done things like that early on we might be sitting here in his 7th season discussing who is going to be unlucky to miss out on our first final.

 

[Rayzorwire]

My evidence is that Tuck wasn't on the injury list after the game.

I posted after that particular game along the lines of not being happy that Tuck was subbed, then RT suggested that perhaps he was subbed due to something other than form in the game. Later in the thread, when Hardwick's comments regarding Tuck's injury came to light, I made a point out of stating that RT had been right. I remember the thread very clearly.

He wasn't listed on the injury list because he was right to play the next week (as is customary) and did play the next week.

Have the final say if you want as I know you will...

I'm sure I'm far from the only person who would reserve the right to reply after having their honesty questioned - with zero basis for doing so or anything resembling evidence to back such a claim.

 

[YellowandBlackBlood]

I have noticed the young tigerfoxgurl has been very quiet in the last couple of weeks.

It's easy to snipe at Dimma's coaching when we lose. Come out show some guts and acknowledge his coaching when we have won too. You might gain some small semblance of respect from others if you do.

 

[Jimmy6019]

With another dead rubber victory under the belt to cap off another finaless season I can't help but wonder what could have been?? Why the hell didn't we play our best team when the season was on the line??? Why was it all about developing over winning then? With Tuck and Miller out of the team in favor of younger players like Helbig and Griffiths?

Why have we waited until now to play our best team, with wins on the back of players who aren't deemed as being part of our future??

It just doesn't make any sense and can only be explained by very poor coaching and management by Hardwick and the RFC!!

 

[captain blood 17]

Well, i'm glad i stuck fat with Dimma, much egg on some faces in this thread. Flogs.