Question

[tigergal]

seriously, after the excelent season that Richmond had this year, how do you all think they'll go this year having Dragas and Biddas back for back up?

Do you think they'll come back as strong as they were or will they have to work alot harder to how the rest of the team played during the year?

 

[tigergal]

Personaly i think that were going to be guns and nobody can stop us

 

[TigerTank]

Richmond had a lot go right for them this year: they had few injuries and were lucky enough to win a quite a few close games that could have gone either way.

The year before, in contrast, Richmond had nearly everything go wrong - injuries and close losses - and finished 9th.

In my opinion the "true" performance level of the team (relative to the other 15 clubs) would be somewhere in the middle of those two results. Richmond has been around the 6th or 7th best team over the past two years.

The next thing to consider is whether the team can develop further or go backwards (as in 1996). That could go either way, although Richmond has youth on its side, and has lost no one of critical value.

Some Richmond fans ASSUME that the improvement will come, but this is because they (as all supporters do) may be overrating some of their own players. We asked our West Coast supporter to rate their players at the start of this year (out of 10) they gave their team a points rating higher than Richmond overall - it all looks very silly now! (especially the rating of Cummings as a 10?!?).

Similarly, a Bulldogs fan's response to Asgardian's accurate assessment of the Bulldogs list gave almost every player a positive comment - if the players are THAT good, they shouldn't have finished 10th.

I think, however, that Richmond supporters are doing the same by assuming Richmond will finish at least 3rd this year and could win the Premiership. That is too optimistic - too many players who are capable of being good players on occasion are not yet capable of doing it week in, week out like their Essendon or Brisbane equivalents.

If Richmond finishes fifth in 2002, but manages to improve and strengthen the playing list (especially in terms of getting consistent performance by players like Hilton, Tivendale, Holland, Chaffey and Stafford), that will be a SUCCESSFUL season ...

... and a great launching pad for a serious shot at the flag in 2003.

 

[RichmondEmma]

Originally posted by tigergal
Personaly i think that were going to be guns and nobody can stop us

i think we will finish around 4th 5th and 6th.no Gale will hurt as badly,trough i have a very strong felling we are going to win the flag in 2003

 

[Tiger_Of_Old]

Originally posted by TigerTank
Richmond had a lot go right for them this year: they had few injuries and were lucky enough to win a quite a few close games that could have gone either way.

The year before, in contrast, Richmond had nearly everything go wrong - injuries and close losses - and finished 9th.

In my opinion the "true" performance level of the team (relative to the other 15 clubs) would be somewhere in the middle of those two results. Richmond has been around the 6th or 7th best team over the past two years.

The next thing to consider is whether the team can develop further or go backwards (as in 1996). That could go either way, although Richmond has youth on its side, and has lost no one of critical value.

Some Richmond fans ASSUME that the improvement will come, but this is because they (as all supporters do) may be overrating some of their own players. We asked our West Coast supporter to rate their players at the start of this year (out of 10) they gave their team a points rating higher than Richmond overall - it all looks very silly now! (especially the rating of Cummings as a 10?!?).

Similarly, a Bulldogs fan's response to Asgardian's accurate assessment of the Bulldogs list gave almost every player a positive comment - if the players are THAT good, they shouldn't have finished 10th.

I think, however, that Richmond supporters are doing the same by assuming Richmond will finish at least 3rd this year and could win the Premiership. That is too optimistic - too many players who are capable of being good players on occasion are not yet capable of doing it week in, week out like their Essendon or Brisbane equivalents.

If Richmond finishes fifth in 2002, but manages to improve and strengthen the playing list (especially in terms of getting consistent performance by players like Hilton, Tivendale, Holland, Chaffey and Stafford), that will be a SUCCESSFUL season ...

... and a great launching pad for a serious shot at the flag in 2003.

i totally agree with ya TT this year was a step in the right direction and the games against the bombers and the lions proved we still have a way to go before we are in a position to win a flag.
while im not giving up on next year to win the flag i just think we need to do our time and then things will happen.all i want next year is another improved and consistant effort from the lads and use 2003 as the "year of the tiger".
cheers!

 

[TigerTank]

T_o_o,

I'm glad someone responded to that - I was beginning to think that others here were embarrassed that a professed Tiger would make such statements.

I certainly don't want to rain on any parade but, as you said, the Essendon and Brisbane games showed what the Tigers must aim for.

The most frustrating thing for me is that we are only one or two players away from being elite grade. But developing a Michael Voss, Brett Ratten or Mark Johnson is easier said than done.

 

[CJH]

Mark Johnson? Perhaps Jason Johnson?

I used to have trouble telling them apart, but have got it sussed out now! Jason is the one with the ability, while Mark has the brawn!

While I kind of agree with your sentiments and assesment of where we are, I still think that we must collectively get it into our minds that we are aiming for nothing less than a premiership. To my way of thinking, it is better to aim at a premiership, fail and finish third than it is to aim at top four, succeed and finish third.

The former leaves you feeling dissatisfied and hungry for more. The latter may have the effect of leaving you satisfied and lead to a downturn.

Spud said at the start of the year that Richmond aimed too low. We were only concerned with making the finals, mainly to get the monkey of our back. We were constantly close but ultimately failing in our objective. Danny wanted us to aim higher - top 4. Ironically, the problem arose that we had a shot at a premiership, but failed as we really didn't aim higher enough.

You may argue for 6-7th as being a truer indication of where we are at. I disagree!

I don't dispute that both Brisbane and Essendon are a class above us. They most certainly do occupy teams 1 an 2 based entirely on merit.

Then who? Who can you really rate as being better than us? Port Adelaide maybe, though I would occasionally like to see us play them here in Melbourne.

Carlton? We did beat them twice, both times with exactly the same game plan.

Hawthorn? Maybe. I don't see them as being any better than us, though not really any worse either. (although they ultimately were stiff not to get a place in the Grand Final)

Sydney? Adelaide? I don't think so.

Realistically, 3rd is the upper level of where we are at, but are no worse than 5th.

Any we should aim at nothing less than a premiership!

 

[Tiger_Of_Old]

geez if we had a voss in our side tt while he is only one player but he is a playmaker.its a shame we cant turn back time a tad and have knighter back to what he was 4 yrs ago.
i take your point cjh that we should aim for nothing less than the flag next year and im sure danny will drum that into the lads. i just have this feeling that 2002 will either make us or break us as any kind of threat towards a flag.
for the 1st time in many moons there has been no coach walkout [1996]or massive player walkout[1983] therefore there is no excuse to at the very least repeat our 2001 performance and if a few of the kids step up who knows.
cheers!