Richmond v Collingwood - Rd 20, 2016 - 7:50 @ MCG

[Ron The Bear]

I agree with you RTB.

However, some of your own supporters heavily imply we made a mistake with the Treloar trade:

I'm happy we secured Treloar and pick 28 instead of a first round pick in the lottery.
I was actually amazed that a Richmond supporter made this comment given their player selection history in previous drafts with top 10 picks.

Obviously it wasn't a mistake, he would've been a fit for every club. But Collingwood did spend up in the off-season and were expected to progress. Aish has come on since the start of the year, but overall I thought you guys performed better last year.

Yeah but with your dominance of play you should have belted us not crawled across the line.

40-point turnaround from 12 minutes in is a pretty solid beating.

 

[Hauker]

This might explain the pies problem.

 

[TiggerMan22]

INSIDE 50's - what don't you understand? Thats how many ENTRIES into the forward line not shots or free kicks given within the zone once you get the ball in there.That's irrelevant to the inside 50's count.

Richmond spend so much time racking up possessions with dinky little kicks, switching play sideways and back across the ground, passing backwards etc without moving the ball foward at all.

Oh sorry I didn't realize that to win you needed to be have as little disposals per inside 50 as possible.
Clearly we moved it forward if we kicked a winning score.

 

[Madtiger2006]

Should have beaten them twice this season.

 

[SterlingArcher]

I mean like Lucas and Cornes telling Richmond to give up on Dion Prestia, we need to perform a full rebuild and there's no point chasing a 23yo. People read that s**t and regurgitate it here.

Is anyone saying Collingwood made a mistake landing Treloar?

To be fair if anyone thinks Richmond wouldn't do well to get Prestia then they probably aren't worth listening too. Haven't seen many comments like Lucas'/Cornes' here.

 

[PieLebo87]

Should have beaten them twice this season.

In hindsight, who cares?

 

[Ron The Bear]

To be fair if anyone thinks Richmond wouldn't do well to get Prestia then they probably aren't worth listening too. Haven't seen many comments like Lucas'/Cornes' here.

'Full rebuild required' is standard fare. An old-style Richmond revolution would blot out the sun in today's hyper-sensationalised media coverage, and the board challenge story sent them into a frenzy. Even the umpires seemed to catch a whiff of insanity. Opinions on what Richmond needs to do have covered the full spectrum, and not many have been well thought out.

 

[JoondalupJ]

50 m for encroachment seems to have disappeared again

Are you talking about the the big American running past the free kick player with the ball in the last few minutes?

That encroachment rule must be canned. The 50 metre over kill, is killing the game too. And the terrible free to Cox was not a free kick.

Worst umpiring ever, and last night just proved it.

 

[JoondalupJ]

He was

Why do Richmond just keep giving the ball to Martin, despite him being in a worse position and under pressure. I know his fend off is good, but f#$k me they are dumb

He was OK last night but still some of his kicks go no where.

 

[grouse mate]

Rubbish, that's a perception because of Eddies high media profile. Never heard of Gary Pert our CEO either I suppose? Or Ian McMullin, or Alisa Camplin, or Christina Holgate?
I bet you couldn't even name your president or any on the GWS board without googling them - does that mean you have a no-man-show?

 

[DemonZombie_001]

As a neutral...

I really enjoyed:-

• Riewoldt being shown on t.v providing advice on handballing, it was a great bit of realness. Unlike that recorded stuff.
• Loved Rances game.
• Aish is really starting to show why Collingwood wanted him.
• Thought Cotchin played an outstanding Captains game.
• Lloyd was brilliant.
• Rioli showed flashes of brilliance.
• Markov was great, and showed good ball use.
• Mason Cox, is a very exciting prospect. For all his frees he was still able to put those shots away.

I did not enjoy:-

• Those umpiring decisions everyone has already mentioned.
• Houlis kicking
• Griffiths, I can't imagine he will be there next year.
• Richmond really don't work hard enough for each other.
• Pendlebury getting injured.
• Taylor Hunt gets the ball but makes decisions too slow.

Overall it was a fairly low quality game to be honest, but enough stars had been playing to keep me interested.

 

[Ron The Bear]

Why do Richmond just keep giving the ball to Martin, despite him being in a worse position and under pressure. I know his fend off is good, but f#$k me they are dumb

They've gone overboard with it the last three weeks, since the media hype reached a peak. As the one in-form player in the side, they're putting the onus on him to do everything (or he's taking it upon himself). The opposition's also working to limit his possessions to parts of the ground where he's less damaging.

A good game, not great, but still probably in the best few on the ground.

 

[The Filth]

This might explain the pies problem.

More a reflection of your maturity.
Your humour is about as good as your photoshopping skills.
How old are you?

 

[Damon_3388]

Is anyone saying Collingwood made a mistake landing Treloar?

It's died down as the season has gone on, but plenty said we "sold the farm" and "pissed away our future" to get Treloar.

 

[Ron The Bear]

It's died down as the season has gone on, but plenty said we "sold the farm" and "pissed away our future" to get Treloar.

You don't get something for nothing (unless COLA etc). But no first-rounder this year, is that right? People expected to see Collingwood taking tangible strides this year given recent investments, similar to what Geelong has taken. I still don't think Collingwood's list is in bad shape, but Buckley seems to be eternally rebuilding, like a student with x degrees who's afraid to go out and earn a living.

 

[Damon_3388]

You don't get something for nothing (unless COLA etc). But no first-rounder this year, is that right? People expected to see Collingwood taking tangible strides this year given recent investments, similar to what Geelong has taken. I still don't think Collingwood's list is in bad shape, but Buckley seems to be eternally rebuilding, like a student with x degrees who's afraid to go out and earn a living.

Well by going and getting a proven (but still young) star, isn't that a step away from the "eternal rebuild"?

 

[Ron The Bear]

Well by going and getting a proven (but still young) star, isn't that a step away from the "eternal rebuild"?

A good 23yo is a good fit for any club, though it's not like Treloar has reached his peak (or Prestia, who apparently would be a "top-up" at Richmond). Where Collingwood has suffered is Swan's injury + older staples like Toovey, Goldsack and Cloke falling off the map, leaving Pendlebury as the team's senior citizen much of the time. Hard to progress when your top end is falling away. Frankly the next group in White/Macaffer/Varcoe/Brown/Greenwood don't look like premiership anchors either, and Howe was a curious acquisition.

Collingwood players appear to come into the team well drilled and show early promise, but the production line doesn't seem to be finishing the job and producing the core of 200-gamers needed to win a flag (much like Richmond), and it probably doesn't help that Thomas/Shaw/Lumumba were traded out.

 

[Sidebottom2Beams]

A good 23yo is a good fit for any club. Where Collingwood has suffered is Swan's injury + older staples like Toovey, Goldsack and Cloke falling off the map, leaving Pendlebury as the team's senior citizen much of the time. Hard to progress when your top end is falling away. Frankly the next group in White/Macaffer/Varcoe/Brown/Greenwood don't look like premiership anchors either, and Howe was a curious acquisition.

Collingwood players seem to come into the team well drilled and show early promise, but the production line doesn't seem to be finishing the job and producing the core of 200-gamers needed to win a flag (much like Richmond), and it probably doesn't help that Thomas/Shaw/Lumumba were traded out.

None of those trades were bad Lumumba wasn't good, Thomas was broken in 2013 and still is and Heater had to go. Other than experience loss they were the right calls. Beams hurt but was understandable why he left.

 

[Ron The Bear]

None of those trades were bad Lumumba wasn't good, Thomas was broken in 2013 and still is and Heater had to go. Other than experience loss they were the right calls. Beams hurt but was understandable why he left.

Still, Lumumba finished in the top ten of the b&f 8 times (top five 4 times), while Shaw is showing strong form again after being AA/b&f last year. You can't deny they represent an on-field loss of talent. While not what he was, Thomas has been passable this year. Forgot about Beams.

 

[Sidebottom2Beams]

Still, Lumumba finished in the top ten of the b&f 8 times (top five 4 times), while Shaw is showing strong form again after being AA/b&f last year. You can't deny they represent an on-field loss of talent. While not what he was, Thomas has been passable this year. Forgot about Beams.

Shaw's issue wasn't his football and was not the reason he was traded it was off field behavior. Thomas is on close to 700K a year and has barely been able to get on the park and it has ust been unfortunate our half back flankers have been dropping like flies with injuries.
Scharenburg was expected to be the answer in the position it just hasn't worked out.

 

[PieLebo87]

As a neutral...

I really enjoyed:-

• Riewoldt being shown on t.v providing advice on handballing, it was a great bit of realness. Unlike that recorded stuff.
• Loved Rances game.
• Aish is really starting to show why Collingwood wanted him.
• Thought Cotchin played an outstanding Captains game.
• Lloyd was brilliant.
• Rioli showed flashes of brilliance.
• Markov was great, and showed good ball use.
• Mason Cox, is a very exciting prospect. For all his frees he was still able to put those shots away.

I did not enjoy:-

• Those umpiring decisions everyone has already mentioned.
• Houlis kicking
• Griffiths, I can't imagine he will be there next year.
• Richmond really don't work hard enough for each other.
• Pendlebury getting injured.
• Taylor Hunt gets the ball but makes decisions too slow.

Overall it was a fairly low quality game to be honest, but enough stars had been playing to keep me interested.

What the hell is this?! A proper dissection of a game on a Gameday thread? I'm confused...

 

[PendlePie]

A good 23yo is a good fit for any club, though it's not like Treloar has reached his peak (or Prestia, who apparently would be a "top-up" at Richmond). Where Collingwood has suffered is Swan's injury + older staples like Toovey, Goldsack and Cloke falling off the map, leaving Pendlebury as the team's senior citizen much of the time. Hard to progress when your top end is falling away. Frankly the next group in White/Macaffer/Varcoe/Brown/Greenwood don't look like premiership anchors either, and Howe was a curious acquisition.

Collingwood players appear to come into the team well drilled and show early promise, but the production line doesn't seem to be finishing the job and producing the core of 200-gamers needed to win a flag (much like Richmond), and it probably doesn't help that Thomas/Shaw/Lumumba were traded out.

This year has shown that our senior brigade isn't good enough. Compare our rough best 22 to Richmond, for arguments' sake. Richmond's core group include Riewoldt, Rance, Deledio, Cotchin, Martin, Edwards, Houli (he is vital for Richmond). Take the game last night - the best 3-4 players on the ground were from this group. Richmond have quite a good half-dozen players who are, as a collective, in their prime right now. The challenge for Richmond is to get it right before this core group is over the hill - which will probably be in 3 years max when Deledio/Houli are likely done, Edwards is 30+ and Rance/Cotchin are 28/29.

Buckley's issue is that he's a s**t coach - but he's built a decent young list. We don't have a senior core comparable to Richmond's but that's not simply down to Buckley. A few premiership players have departed but only Beams and Shaw would make us better right now (Beams had to leave for family reasons but netted us De Goey, Crisp and Pick 25, while Shaw was traded for Adams. Not too bad I would've thought - despite the fact we currently miss a few consistent senior performers). As you mentioned, a fair few premiership players have remained, but only Reid, Pendlebury and Sidebottom have performed to expectation. Cloke, Brown, Goldsack, Macaffer, Blair - they've declined naturally and in hindsight most of them were simply limited footballers playing solid roles in MM's machine back in 2010/11.

Richmond's core group is here right now. Our core group - the group that will essentially define Buckley's success or failure - should naturally peak in 18-24 months. Grundy, Moore, Adams, Treloar, Crisp, Elliot, Fasolo, Sidebottom - with Reid/Pendlebury contributing at ages 28-29. This group - bar Sidebottom (25) and Fasolo (24) - are all 23 or under. I would think that our young players are as good as any bar GWS and maybe the Bulldogs, and the natural upside in them is pretty obvious.

Richmond are comfortably 2-3 years ahead in regards to development. That said, a better coach would've got more out of our list in 2014/15, but this year was a total shitstorm of injuries and the decline in form of a bulk of our senior players. As a Richmond supporter watching last night, you've probably never seen a younger team take the field. Well, our team was actually even younger and also full of first or second-year players - most of them in key positions that our senior players were relied on to occupy last season and the beginning of this season.

A majority of supporters know Buckley isn't the right guy, but the young talent and potential on our list is indisputable I would've thought - we just need a competent coach to mould it into a finals side and add a couple of KPPs.

Essentially (and this is the tl;dr version of my post) a positive for us is that, looking at the age profile of our list, we have a lot of time to get things right. The negative is that the guy in charge now isn't the one to make it happen.

 

[telsor]

Richmond are comfortably 2-3 years ahead in regards to development. That said, a better coach would've got more out of our list in 2014/15, but this year was a total shitstorm of injuries and the decline in form of a bulk of our senior players. As a Richmond supporter watching last night, you've probably never seen a younger team take the field. Well, our team was actually even younger and also full of first or second-year players - most of them in key positions that our senior players were relied on to occupy last season and the beginning of this season.

Last nights teams were roughly the same age (Richmond average 1 month older) and the Pies were 6.6 games avg more experienced.

 

[PendlePie]

Last nights teams were roughly the same age (Richmond average 1 month older) and the Pies were 6.6 games avg more experienced.

Way to completely miss the point.

 

[telsor]

Way to completely miss the point.

That selective use of stats can 'prove' whatever you like? No, you did a very good job on that.