Revisiting the Richmond Team of the Century

[Walt Kowalski]

Backs	Michael Green	Vic Thorp	Kevin Sheedy
Half Back	Basil McCormack	Mervyn. Keane	Gordon Strang
Centre	Francis Bourke	Bill Barrot	Dick Clay
Half Forward	Roger Dean	Royce Hart	Matthew Richardson
Forward	Dale Weightman	Jack Titus	Bill Morris
Followers	Roy Wright	Jack Dyer	Kevin Bartlett
Interchange	Matthew Knights	Geoff Raines	Des Rowe	Ian Stewart

Obviously we are playing with semantics in this exercise because what we are looking for is the Richmond all time team. This team was selected in 1999 as a representative group of the greatest Richmond players of all time to that point.

My question to the group is who would make it into this team based on performances this century, especially considering our run of success. There may be a few obvious inclusions from the last three premierships, as well as possibly some players from earlier in the 2000s. And if those players are to be included, who is left out.

Players from the modern era I can see clearly gaining spots are Dustin Martin and Trent Cotchin

9

Trent Cotchin

Age

34

Ht

185cm

Wt

86kg

Pos.

M/F

Career

Season

Last 5

D

23.4

5star

K

13.8

5star

HB

9.5

5star

M

3.4

3star

T

3.9

5star

CL

5.2

5star

D

19.0

4star

K

9.5

4star

HB

9.5

5star

M

2.7

3star

T

4.3

5star

CL

3.5

4star

D

16.6

4star

K

8.0

3star

HB

8.6

5star

M

4.6

5star

T

1.0

3star

. Then there are players like Vlaustin, Rance, Grimes, Riewoldt and Prestia to consider. Perhaps others. What are your thoughts?

 

[Frustrated Tiger]

Surely George gets a spot on the bench.

 

[TiggerMan22]

Feel like Reiwoldt should be in the locks with Martin and Cotchin.

324 games
751 goals
3x Premierships
3x Colemans
3x AA
2x B&F
11x Leading goal kicker

And still going. Crazy to think, but hes above Richo now isn't he? Will probably jump Richo in total goals before games end. Already 2nd most games in a Richmond jumper ever and will probably end on 2nd most goals too.

Prestia not at the club long enough. Rance retired too early, would've been a lock otherwise. Grimes and Vlaustin not enough accolades you would think.

 

[Bojangles17]

Backs	Michael Green	Vic Thorp	Kevin Sheedy
Half Back	Basil McCormack	Mervyn. Keane	Gordon Strang
Centre	Francis Bourke	Bill Barrot	Dick Clay
Half Forward	Roger Dean	Royce Hart	Matthew Richardson
Forward	Dale Weightman	Jack Titus	Bill Morris
Followers	Roy Wright	Jack Dyer	Kevin Bartlett
Interchange	Matthew Knights	Geoff Raines	Des Rowe	Ian Stewart

Obviously we are playing with semantics in this exercise because what we are looking for is the Richmond all time team. This team was selected in 1999 as a representative group of the greatest Richmond players of all time to that point.

My question to the group is who would make it into this team based on performances this century, especially considering our run of success. There may be a few obvious inclusions from the last three premierships, as well as possibly some players from earlier in the 2000s. And if those players are to be included, who is left out.

Players from the modern era I can see clearly gaining spots are Dustin Martin and Trent Cotchin. Then there are players like Vlaustin, Rance, Grimes, Riewoldt and Prestia to consider. Perhaps others. What are your thoughts?

When this got a run recently I stuck my neck out and said take Raines out in Prestia , I was savaged by Many on social media , I still stand by it every day of the week

 

[Grechy]

 

[Meteoric Rise]

I think Rance would be in for Michael Green.

D Martin for Des Rowe.

And Cotchin for Stewart based on body of work.

Those would be the most obvious ones imo.

Others would be interesting like Vlastuin v Merv Keane for example. Still a bit to play out for Lynch and Prestia as well.

Riewoldt is very stiff but maybe no place for him versus Titus, Hart and Richardson.

 

[tigs2010]

Bachar in for Sheedy. Get that campaigner out of there.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Bachar in for Sheedy. Get that campaigner out of there.

Sheeds was mint in a Richmond jumper. Just had to avoid bloody finessin.

 

[Wooden Robot]

Bachar in for Sheedy. Get that campaigner out of there.

Would have won two Norm Smiths had they have been presented in the 60s and early 70s, Sheedy.

 

[theyellowsash]

Backs	Michael Green	Vic Thorp	Kevin Sheedy
Half Back	Basil McCormack	Mervyn. Keane	Gordon Strang
Centre	Francis Bourke	Bill Barrot	Dick Clay
Half Forward	Roger Dean	Royce Hart	Matthew Richardson
Forward	Dale Weightman	Jack Titus	Bill Morris
Followers	Roy Wright	Jack Dyer	Kevin Bartlett
Interchange	Matthew Knights	Geoff Raines	Des Rowe	Ian Stewart

Obviously we are playing with semantics in this exercise because what we are looking for is the Richmond all time team. This team was selected in 1999 as a representative group of the greatest Richmond players of all time to that point.

My question to the group is who would make it into this team based on performances this century, especially considering our run of success. There may be a few obvious inclusions from the last three premierships, as well as possibly some players from earlier in the 2000s. And if those players are to be included, who is left out.

Players from the modern era I can see clearly gaining spots are Dustin Martin and Trent Cotchin. Then there are players like Vlaustin, Rance, Grimes, Riewoldt and Prestia to consider. Perhaps others. What are your thoughts?

youd think rance, reiwoldt, martin and cotchin are shoe-ins into the side.

not that i really know the older guys, but you think martin probably replaces dean on the hff, cotchin in for raines, rance pushes strang out and keane to the flank. reiwoldt is the hard one, because titus hart and richo are all absolute legends. given his short size titus can probably push morris out and operate from the pocket with jack at ff (because richo got up the wings better).

 

[Boston tiger]

Sheeds was mint in a Richmond jumper. Just had to avoid bloody finessin.

Well done

 

[Meteoric Rise]

youd think rance, reiwoldt, martin and cotchin are shoe-ins into the side.

not that i really know the older guys, but you think martin probably replaces dean on the hff, cotchin in for raines, rance pushes strang out and keane to the flank. reiwoldt is the hard one, because titus hart and richo are all absolute legends. given his short size titus can probably push morris out and operate from the pocket with jack at ff (because richo got up the wings better).

Morris is probably our best ever ruckman. I am pretty sure he was more highly rated than Roy Wright, despite only winning one Brownlow v Wright 2.

There was no Brownlow Medal votes awarded in 1942-45 inclusive. Morris played in 1943-44-45, winning the Richmond best & fairest in 1945, so you would presume he would have polled well in the Brownlow had it been awarded. He played only 23 games before 1945 and 1944 from what I can make out he seemed to have a decent season. From 1946 onwards he played 101 games and averaged 0.84 Brownlow votes per match. This has him sitting 9th on the all club all time list of average votes per game. One spot above Dustin Martin. At worst if he hadn’t polled so well in the years where there was no Brownlow awarded, Morris would still sit comfortably in the all time top 20.

He represented Victoria 15 times and Captained once. Beside his 1948 Brownlow Medal win, he finished second and third in other seasons. He Captained Richmond and won 3 Richmond Best & Fairests.

I would say Morris is Richmond’s greatest ruckman ever and from what I have read, along with Royce Hart, Dustin Martin, Vic Thorpe, Kevin Bartlett and Jack Dyer would be in consideration to be Richmond’s best ever player.

Imo, there is no sensible way you could leave him out of Richmond’s best ever team.

The sad thing about Bill Morris is he tragically took his own life at age 39 after his separation from his wife and apparently struggling with gambling losses.

Huge and often overlooked player in Richmond’s history.

 

[theyellowsash]

Morris is probably our best ever ruckman. I am pretty sure he was more highly rated than Roy Wright, despite only winning one Brownlow v Wright 2.

There was no Brownlow Medal votes awarded in 1942-45 inclusive. Morris played in 1943-44-45, winning the Richmond best & fairest in 1945, so you would presume he would have polled well in the Brownlow had it been awarded. He played only 23 games before 1945 and 1944 from what I can make out he seemed to have a decent season. From 1946 onwards he played 101 games and averaged 0.84 Brownlow votes per match. This has him sitting 9th on the all club all time list of average votes per game. One spot above Dustin Martin. At worst if he hadn’t polled so well in the years where there was no Brownlow awarded, Morris would still sit comfortably in the all time top 20.

He represented Victoria 15 times and Captained once. Beside his 1948 Brownlow Medal win, he finished second and third in other seasons. He Captained Richmond and won 3 Richmond Best & Fairests.

I would say Morris is Richmond’s greatest ruckman ever and from what I have read, along with Royce Hart, Dustin Martin, Vic Thorpe, Kevin Bartlett and Jack Dyer would be in consideration to be Richmond’s best ever player.

Imo, there is no sensible way you could leave him out of Richmond’s best ever team.

The sad thing about Bill Morris is he tragically took his own life at age 39 after his separation from his wife and apparently struggling with gambling losses.

Huge and often overlooked player in Richmond’s history.

View attachment 1478583

Fair summation, I don't really know much about him tbh.

Perhaps morris goes to the bench as second ruck then, in the place of knights or rowe. Again I didn't see a heap of knights, but for as good of a player he was he seems a little out of place. Perhaps just because he was in such a bad team.

 

[SavDog23]

Maurice Jnr in 3 years

 

[tugga]

Aarts

 

[JAKLAUGHING]

Feck sheedy right orff..

 

[tigerdan]

Knights was a champion, an absolute gun but you gotta remember when this team was released, he was still playing. Even Richo's place at HFF is a bit weird. But they had to put him in somewhere.

They would absolutely have to put Martin in there. Cotchin and Riewoldt (and possibly Rance) would have to be in contention but where to put them?

 

[tiger_tough]

When this got a run recently I stuck my neck out and said take Raines out in Prestia , I was savaged by Many on social media , I still stand by it every day of the week

Dion and Andrew covered comfortably....

 

[rfctigerarmy]

3 timer.

 

[Wooden Robot]

B. McCormack Thorp Sheedy
HB. Keane Rance Strang
C. Bourke Martin Clay
HF. Cotchin Hart Richardson
F. Weightman Titus Morris
Rucks Wright Dyer
Rov. Bartlett
Inter: Barrot Dean Raines Stewart

Martin, Cotchin, Rance in.
No one loves sentiment and history more than I, but you ain't playing Dusty anywhere but in the middle given he's arguably our greatest of all time, at worse top three, so you are not shunting him to the bench.
That means Barrot goes to the bench.
Michael Green is an absolute star, but have the ruck covered with Wright and Morris and a lumbering ruckman in the back pocket is an outdated concept.
Cotchin to HF, Dean to the bench.
Sadly Knighta and Rowe go from the bench ... feel original starting 18 for the most part should retain a spot.
Obviously a best 20 players in club histoiry would look much different.

 

[Infamy]

I don't see how Rance can get into the team, he retired too soon

 

[Monjike]

Knights was a champion, an absolute gun but you gotta remember when this team was released, he was still playing. Even Richo's place at HFF is a bit weird. But they had to put him in somewhere.

They would absolutely have to put Martin in there. Cotchin and Riewoldt (and possibly Rance) would have to be in contention but where to put them?

Richo to the wing?

 

[acr2751]

all of current players can go in the team of this century

 

[tigs2010]

Would have won two Norm Smiths had they have been presented in the 60s and early 70s, Sheedy.

Yeah but he's Essendon scum now. Houli would have won 2 if he didn't play with Dustin

 

[tiggywigs]

I get that this sort of thread is not meant to be taken too seriously.
But surely there is no real point in comparing the 'greatness' of players from different eras.
It is only natural that we will give greater weight to the deeds from times we have witnessed.
Our lack of understanding of the challenges and circumstances of earlier times will always diminish our understanding of the achievements of long ago champions.
Perhaps it would be better to frame the argument about the champion teams of each era.
And have an argument about what constitutes an era!