Mathew Richardson

[nut]

He is our Best Player.

He is our most marketable player.

He is a born a bred Tiger.

He is also my Favourite player.

I feel that when things are not going well he is what drives us further down with his dummy spits.



The Time for Richmond to go forward is now. Just like the saints and Lockett ( and Spider ). I think it is best for club and player if the two depart.
I say trade Richo. He is a rare talent that we will be compensated for and in the long run will be the bennefit to both parties.


Unfortunately we can not. The new rule says that you can not be traded on your first year of a new contract.
Also Richmond have been hanging out to put him on the Veterans list for so long it has no plans to trade him.

So the only thing we can do is support him and hope he turns it on.

 

[kretchy]

I still reckon he's got something to offer, sure he has the occasional dummy spit, but tall forwards that can take a contested mark are hard to come by.

I didn't see the game on Saturday so I don't know what the shots were like that he missed. Since the first game against Collingwood he hasn't missed to many shots from where he should be kicking goals 30-40meters out within the 45 degrees.

It has to be remembered he leads the league in contested marks, of the leading mark takers only Chris Tarrant averages more and he is also sixth in the league in marks inside50. All this despite missing a few games.

Having said all that I don't agree with the dummy spits and he should be trying to stop them, but unfortunately I don't think it will ever be stopped.

 

[Rodan#18.]

oh

keep him...and play him away from goal...and he isn't allowed to shoot at goal under any circs.

 

[kretchy]

Re: oh

Originally posted by Rodan#18.
keep him...and play him away from goal...and he isn't allowed to shoot at goal under any circs.

If he's playing up the ground he has to be told to always kick the ball long cos his short passes just sit up and set up teamates and allow an easy spoil or mark for oppostion players.

 

[Dean3]

I've always thought that Richo was reasonably good at hitting a short target. It's the set shots that get into his head.

A question on the new rule regarding trading in the first year of a new contract — can a player be traded in the first year of a new contract if both parties agree? Seems a bit silly to prevent something happening if both player and club are keen.

 

[Rodan#18.]

the london game

remember all the scuttlebutt nearly 12 months ago about richo not signing ?

He'll be a tiger for life,,,and we all have to get used to the idea that he'll kick 1 in 3 set shots. Or we hope he might.

 

[CJH]

Richo plays his best football as a CHF. So why the hell do they persist with him running out from Full Forward where he continually leads into the pockets!

Start him 40m out from goal. Bloody hard to lead to a pocket from there!

 

[rfctigerarmy]

Originally posted by CJH
Richo plays his best football as a CHF. So why the hell do they persist with him running out from Full Forward where he continually leads into the pockets!

Start him 40m out from goal. Bloody hard to lead to a pocket from there!

I was just gonna say the same thing except start him bang on 50.

 

[GhostofJimJess]

Originally posted by nut
He is our Best Player.

He is our most marketable player.

Unfortunately we can not. The new rule says that you can not be traded on your first year of a new contract.

Point taken on the new First Year Of Contract rule, nut. Although, when did he actually sign ? Was it before or after the trading period in 2002 ?

As for the first two points, I tend to disagree.

I personally don't think he's our best player at all, and his inability to ever win a Best & Fairest lends support to this suggestion. In the meantime, Campbell has clocked up 4 B&F's for the club, and Gaspar consistently performs far more effectively and efficiently week in and week out without all of the fuss and hyperbole that tags along with Richo. I just hope we're still not waiting for that big game in three years time.

It's harder to dispute your second claim - that he's our most marketable player. What I do question is whether he's necessarily a good representative of the the kind of image we would want a Tiger superstar to portray. The dummy spits, the clumsiness, the erratic, inconsistent nature of his game etc.. He's just not ferocious enough, and it seems his passion can be terribly misdirected at (most) times.

I also agree with Dean that Richo is actually pretty decent at spotting up a target up the field, but for some reason Danny seems aversive to playing him too far up the field.

Anyway, I'm quite prepared to get off his back ... I'll admit he's far from our worst player at present.