Preview Key to success - Hard Edge

[Love the Drake]

After two decades of heartache we have finally put together a list capable of sustained success.

• A plethora of talented youngsters
• Bona fide senior players on every line
• Exciting playing list
• Destination club
• A coach the players ‘play for’

The one thing we are missing is that nastiness all the best (premiership) teams have had. Richmond, Hawthorn, Brisbane all played tough, uncompromising footy. They were ruthless and took any opportunity to hurt their opponents, mostly within the rules.

It’s up to Teague to instill this in the players. Set standards and hold players accountable. We have to play with the self belief that we are bigger, stronger and nastier. We have to learn to play on the edge..

 

[SurreyBlue]

Not interested in playing dirty footy like Hawthorn and Richmond.
Need to play and happy to play, tough, un-compromised, ball winning footy.

 

[Love the Drake]

Not interested in playing dirty footy like Hawthorn and Richmond.
Need to play and happy to play, tough, un-compromised, ball winning footy.

Agreed. But all the best teams have played with physicality and had a presence. We need to add that.

 

[Smegger]

We have to learn to play on the edge..

...and smarter.
Less throwing it on the boot in hope. More system for fwd entries.

Agree, we need to harden up. We'll also need to learn coping with being the hunted.

 

[Brutalitops]

Not interested in playing dirty footy like Hawthorn and Richmond.
Need to play and happy to play, tough, un-compromised, ball winning footy.

Nah * that. The umps are always against us so lets smash these campaigners and make em earn it

 

[TerryWallet]

15 games to go before we can tell the footy world that we are fair dinkum and uncompromising on our attack on the footy and body.

15 games to go.

Apparently.

 

[Red Bull]

15 games to go before we can tell the footy world that we are fair dinkum and uncompromising on our attack on the footy and body.

15 games to go.

Apparently.

Rome wasn’t built in a day was it.
Seems the club see this as something that must be done i guess.

 

[BlueShift]

Agree that the team as a whole needs to play tougher, but we can do that without turning into sniping thugs like Richmond.

Just need more players to follow the examples set by Cripps, Simpson, Curnow, etc for going hard at the ball, strong tackling, breaking tackles, out-muscling and standing up in contests.

 

[TerryWallet]

Rome wasn’t built in a day was it.
Seems the club see this as something that must be done i guess.

There are plenty of reasons that it should be this way. I'm resigned to those being valid enough to complete the exercise now that we're in sight. I'm not supportive of it, but resigned to it.

It's just a frustrating wait.

 

[azlou]

I’d rather clinical dissection with skills never shirk a contest but flowing ball movement fast rebounds
Set ups to allow players to execute in space over lap runners total focus on our zones
Trying hurt or rough up you’re opponents I see as a waste of focus and intent hurt them on the score board
Leave silly frees 50 meter penalties and suspensions for others
The game is very technical and incredibly fast paced the focus needs to be concentrated on decision making and structure the rest is a distraction

 

[BlueJet]

Our club has carried the soft tag for some time.
One or two players do not change that - however, we do need buy in from the majority of the group.
Fortunately, in Cripps & Doc, we've got people perfectly suited to set the tone.
No more bleating over holds, blocks etc from opponents - when you get the chance, obliterate them with a tackle or bump.
We need Doc channelling Hodge and flying into packs, looking to take the ball and if necessary, the opponent.
It's also why I'm less desperate to bring in J.Kelly or Bont, who despite being supremely talented, have less than enviable records when the physicality goes up.

 

[thylacine60]

Not sure you can retrofit tough.

 

[Jabba73]

Thread needs more mongrel JustaBattler

 

[Michael Jezz]

After two decades of heartache we have finally put together a list capable of sustained success.

• A plethora of talented youngsters
• Bona fide senior players on every line
• Exciting playing list
• Destination club
• A coach the players ‘play for’

The one thing we are missing is that nastiness all the best (premiership) teams have had. Richmond, Hawthorn, Brisbane all played tough, uncompromising footy. They were ruthless and took any opportunity to hurt their opponents, mostly within the rules.

It’s up to Teague to instill this in the players. Set standards and hold players accountable. We have to play with the self belief that we are bigger, stronger and nastier. We have to learn to play on the edge..

Well done for leading this discussion. The topic should be 80% of the discussion on this forum as it is 80% of what is missing to drive sustained success. The other 20% are the 3 or 4 players being sought this trade period. Unfortunately, a lot of questions need to be asked regarding "C" grade board and coaching department that lacks the charisma and nous to realise the potential of "A" grade list.

 

[Burgers45]

Prefer to have pacy skillfull players with good football brains who can read the play well Also need to be have physical traits and go when it's their turn to "GO". No matter how good players are, they need to be weeded out if they like avoiding contact. Most premiership teams are not considered to be "soft".

 

[Blue and Blue]

Never saw Doull or Jezza or Kenny Hunter or Kouta or Bradley or Lance or Ratts or the vast majority in Navy Blue go the man.
A determination to win the ball and tackle hard does not equal thuggery. Play hard but play fair is what we've always done with a few rare exceptions. And 16 flags says that works.

 

[BlueTongue]

Never saw Doull or Jezza or Kenny Hunter or Kouta or Bradley or Lance or Ratts or the vast majority in Navy Blue go the man.
A determination to win the ball and tackle hard does not equal thuggery. Play hard but play fair is what weve always done with a few rare exceptions. And 16 flags says that works.

Agreed. I'd say Vossy would be right on the limit. That suits me.

 

[DangerousD]

After two decades of heartache we have finally put together a list capable of sustained success.

• A plethora of talented youngsters
• Bona fide senior players on every line
• Exciting playing list
• Destination club
• A coach the players ‘play for’

The one thing we are missing is that nastiness all the best (premiership) teams have had. Richmond, Hawthorn, Brisbane all played tough, uncompromising footy. They were ruthless and took any opportunity to hurt their opponents, mostly within the rules.

It’s up to Teague to instill this in the players. Set standards and hold players accountable. We have to play with the self belief that we are bigger, stronger and nastier. We have to learn to play on the edge..

When I look at Richmond, Hawthorn, Brisbane and Geelong Over the past 20 years, I see clubs coached by hard at it players, nasty players and it has come out in their sides, all this talk about being fair and skilful and by playing by the rules, it’s crap, you play to win and you do what needs to be done to get the job done.

People used to whinge about Essendon, Brisbane, Hawthorn and now Richmond for being dirty, unsociable, for having dirty players, do their fans or historians care? When people talk of the Hawks dominance in the 80s or 10s do they get stuck on the fact they had dirty players or is it about them winning?

I look at Cameron Smith in the NRL
Jordan in the NBA
Rodman in the NBA
Brady in the NFL
Hodge in the AFL

And all I see are winners who would throw the opposition in front of a bus to win for their team, I’m not sure if Cripps and Docherty or many of our players are like this but I agree with you that we need to get a harder edge

 

[Wickzki]

There's a difference between being and playing hard, contested, football and playing the man.

I agree that we need to harden up at times. Enough with the likes of Cripps and Walsh getting bashed in the contest by dirty flogs and nobody coming to their aid. Still, we're better in this regard than we were twelve months ago. As the younguns mature we'll get even better.

This isn't an area of concern for mine when it comes to coaching. Teaguey was accountable. Hard. Courageous. Traditionally coaches who were former players brought the style of their play to their corps. For example, we see this with Damien Hardwick. There's not going to be many non-*/Port fans out there who won't tell you that he could be a dirty flog at times. It should surprise nobody that Richmond have a team full who embody that type.

Teaguey will mold his charges to play with the same uncompromising, gutsy, hard at the ball style that characterized him.

 

[Gethelred]

Were they tough because they were good, or were they good because they were tough?

I think people confuse being ruthless with being nasty. You can clinically destroy an opposition so badly their trust in their structures fails - for evidence, see Geelong dismantle Port in the 2007 GF, or last night against Collingwood - seemingly without having that 'hard edge', because you're better, cleaner, stronger, tactically superior. You're winning on the scoreboard, and they can't stop your run.

Being unstoppable and getting on with it's the point. Hawthorn weren't good because whenever they were losing Hodge and Lewis and Mitchell would start whacking people or trying to kill them, they were good because they had the best defensive stoppage setup bar none, never gave the ball back in an era defined by turnover scoring, and when the game was against them you couldn't stop them scoring. The only difference between Hawthorn at their peak and Hawthorn at their ebb in their premiership years was 3 goals a quarter; either they'd be kicking 4-6, or they'd be kicking 2-5. And Richmond aren't good because they're hard at it or willing to hurt people; they were bloody good before Lynch arrived. They are patient and calculated, their pressure designed to cause you to panic, then exhaust yourself trying to break through it. They break you physically, willing to wait for you to make a mistake and kick the last 4 goals of a quarter in a 5 minute patch.

Being ruthless is not being nasty. I want us to develop that ruthlessness over just being an a-hole for the sake of it. It hasn't done GWS, Melbourne or Adelaide any good.

 

[thylacine60]

Never saw Doull or Jezza or Kenny Hunter or Kouta or Bradley or Lance or Ratts or the vast majority in Navy Blue go the man.
A determination to win the ball and tackle hard does not equal thuggery. Play hard but play fair is what we've always done with a few rare exceptions. And 16 flags says that works.

Bit unfair using legends as your hallmark. Or is it?

 

[BLUEALLTHRU]

Bit unfair using legends as your hallmark. Or is it?

play on I say.

 

[Blue and Blue]

Bit unfair using legends as your hallmark. Or is it?

I think Big Nick always sent a hallmark card to blokes that ran into him............

 

[bmaurizio]

Prefer to have pacy skillfull players with good football brains who can read the play well Also need to be have physical traits and go when it's their turn to "GO". No matter how good players are, they need to be weeded out if they like avoiding contact. Most premiership teams are not considered to be "soft".

Agree with you, definitely players most step into the fry and support teammates at all times but no need for bullying and thuggish behavior on the field.

 

[Dunna Heartknee]

Dominator, Wow jones, Keough, Rhys-Jones, F Brown were all equalizers and damn good ones