Sack Wallace!

[Diego]

hahaha I am so glad the swans never got TW on board. I am sure, no positive that we would be into our 73rd year without a flag had the great man roos not been there.

Maybe he should spend less time at the solerium..i mean does he go with browny and they get a 2 for 1 offer?

Anyway give him at least another year. Its true he doesnt really have the cattle to work with atm and maybe one more dud year and a few nice draft picks and a flag for the tiges in 2008!

One thing that puzzles me is Richo. Why o why is he still there?

 

[jmorg1]

You must be patient.

Patient.

 

[Crumden]

One thing that puzzles me is Richo. Why o why is he still there?

Dunno. Maybe its things like his 51 goals in 15 games against the Swans that keep him on the list.

Enjoy your next 72 years in the wilderness loser.

 

[Punt_Road_Roar]

Suck my left one 76 gamer !!

there is no way your a Richmond person, I'd bet your one of the many trolls from the main board.

Trolls like you should be banned from this board.

 

[76 Gamer]

OK, fellas, out of the 29 posts in this thread, here are the only reasons I can find from you blokes for not sacking Wallace.

Let's forget the insults. Thrice3, Roostertalk, Captain Brown 7, The D-Rod, Julzqld and Itsintheblood are obviously unemployed losers that left school at 12 and have nothing thoughtful to add. Runt Road Roar can't even spell! Labelling me d#ckhead/kn*b/idiot doesn't contribute to the meaningful debate regarding the future coaching staff of our club one bit.

But, however misguided their views, uneducated people are part of our club and their views reflect the passion and loyalty of Tiger supporters which is a good thing. Richmond fans, myself included, all want and expect the same thing - finals footy, if not this year then next, and genuine grand final contender status by 2008.

Another virtue represented in this thread is Tiger fans' loyalty. This again is a good thing, but there's a limit to loyalty when it holds back or brings down the entire organisation.

Let's summarise the views of the majority of Tiger fans in this discussion.

Tigerboyz thinks that it's not fair to judge Wallace because he hasn't got quality players. Yeah, sounds reasonable.

The Dice Man reckons that Richmond shouldn't sack its coaches because: a.) That's how we used to react; b.) Sacking TW would cost a fortune; c.) Sacking coaches results in instability which negatively affects on-field performance and damages the club's reputation; and d.) that Wallace is only 25 games into a 5-year plan. Makes sense.

Starkravenmad2 reckons sacking TW would be insane and Funkyzeit mit Matt believes that sacking coaches is why the Richmond Football Club hasn't done anything in recent memory. Good point.

Meanwhile, Mattyc2422 feels that we should persevere with TW because we thought he was the messiah. I thought he was the messiah too.

Metallchris probably has the most coherent opinion by correctly pointing that the Tigers aren't finals material and that drafting a good side together takes years, pointing out that Wallace notified us that it will take time and made his pledge to build a side over 5 years and that it is only year 2 at the moment.

On face value, these are mostly good solid arguments. However, if you would allow me to go through these arguments one by one, I think you will agree that the Richmond Football Club is set on the same tragic path we have been on since the early 80s. Destination: mediocracy.

1. TW hasn't got the players.
I agree that the Tiger list is not top class but there is some gold in Couglan, Deledio, Hartigan, Johnson, Newman, Richardson and Tuck - these are players who could get a game at any club. Add in Richmond's veterans and rookies and our list should at least be competitive, and you will notice that I haven't mentioned Brown. You guys seem to have forgotten that we are 0-3 and got beaten by over 110 points in round one. A good coach could get these guys firing the the point where they're at least competitive against the top sides and winning eight or nine games through the season. Eight or nine games is finals footy. Wallace is holding us back, so let's get a good coach.

2. Sacking coaches is how we used to react.
I agree that Richmond has a shocking history with coaches since Tommy Hafey. Jewell, Bourke, Bartlett, Sproule, Northy, the list goes on. Granted, plently of Tiger coaches have been treated terribly. But that is no reason to hold back from affecting change when things are going the wrong way. Assuming we win against Carlton, we're looking at 1-10 at the halfway point of this season. Is this what we want?

3. Sacking TW would cost a fortune.
There's an old saying in business that when you're in a hole, you stop digging. Yes, sacking Wallace prior to his contract's end will cost a lot. But languishing at the bottom of the ladder for the next three years will cost even more in membership, attendance and sponsorship revenues.

4. Sacking coaches causes instability which nagatively affects on-field performance.
This is a tough one. I agree that athletes perform best when they're in a routine. But athletes also perform best when they're motivated. And the most motivating thing in the world is a leader that knows what he's doing and can give the boys their fair share of winning. Three or four wins in a season is not a fair share. Of course, players play for money, it's their job, but they all want to win premierships and they will all sacrifice money for a better than even chance of winning a premiership. If the young quality players we have managed to draft only get a few wins a season, they will be out like a shot if they don't believe that premiership footy is within reach. I believe that giving Wallace an ultimatum of eight wins this year (which is finals footy) and risking destabilising the players is a fair price to pay to avoid losing Couglan, Deledio, Hartigan, Raines, Roach, Tambling, etc. Focusing on results and assuring the players that the club will stop at nothing to assure Richmond players the very best chance of playing finals footy. If you were a top 10 draft pick, where would you want to go - the club that tolerates mediocracy or the club that accepts nothing less than finals footy?

5. Sacking TW would damage the Richmond Footbal Club's reputation.
Rubbish. Sacking Wallace in the style of past Richmond administrations - lies, deception, rip-offs, etc - damages the club. My recommendation is to go about things with absolute transparency, honesty and integrity. 'Fess up to the fact that giving TW a five year deal was a mistake, that we know we're going to have to pay a fortune to get out the deal we signed, but the fact is that we're looking at finishing the season at 4-18 and that is not acceptable and that if he doesn't achieve at least eight wins, he's out. That approach is tough, but fair. Players, coaches, administrators and supporters respect that.

6. Sacking TW is the opposite direction to where we want to be heading.
Mate, we're looking at 1-10 by round 11 and 4-18 by the end of this season. That is not my chosen direction. That is not the chosen direction of the Richmond Footbal Club.

7. It's too early to judge Wallace's value to the Richmond Football Club - he's in the 25th game of a 5-year plan.
Yes, it is early, but the signs of Wallace's incompetence are plain for all to see. His inability to prepare the players both physically and mentally and his match day decision making has proven that TW is not up to the job of turning around the Richmond Football Club. We can either make a decision to cut our losses at the end of this season (if our results are below expectation), or we can wait another three years. Why f#ck around?

8. Sacking TW would be insane.
If we end this season anything less than 8-14, sticking with Wallace would be insane. Tolerating that result would send the strong message that mediocracy is OK down at the Richmond Footy Club. All our good players would leave to more professional clubs in the hope of playing in premierships whilst Tigerland would be a club for alcos, druggies and twilight season hacks. Remember St Kilda a few years ago? People thought that sacking Blight was insane.

9. Sacking coaches is why the Richmond Football Club hasn't done anything in recent memory.
Not true. Bad off-field management, including the terrible treatment of coaches and players, is one of the biggest reasons why this proud club hasn't tasted victory in so long.

10. We should keep Wallace because we thought he was the messiah.
I though Wallace was the messiah too. I know Eade pretty well and I don't like his smug attitude. The senior boys at Sydney didn't like it either so I preferred TW. I've only met Wallace a few times but it's obvious that he puts himself in the Malthouse/Matthews/Pagan mould and back in 2004 when we were talking to him, I fell for it. Now I'm not so sure. I just think that he's as smart as he comes across.

So there you go, boys.

Whilst I'm sure none of us believe that Wallace should be marched out tomorrow, surely the Richmond list is good enough, if coached well, to produce eight wins? And if eight wins is not achieved, Wallace should go. And, in order to behave with the highest integrity, TW should be informed of this as soon as possible.

PS: Diego, Richo might in his final two or three seasons, but right now he is definitely worth his place in the side at full forward. Can you imagine how many goals he'd kick if he had the Brisbane/West Coast/St Kilda midfield delivering the ball?

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Let's get a good coach.

Who do you think you're going to get?

Richmond have a reputation for eating their own. If you were to sack Wallace after less than two seasons, no established coach would take the job.

 

[Diego]

PS: Diego, Richo might in his final two or three seasons, but right now he is definitely worth his place in the side at full forward. Can you imagine how many goals he'd kick if he had the Brisbane/West Coast/St Kilda midfield delivering the ball?

So very true and a valid point.

And I challange any of you richmond boneheads to debate what was just posted in a proper way. He went out of his way to write that very good piece and i hope you boneheads give him the respect.

 

[Punt_Road_Roar]

So very true and a valid point.

And I challange any of you richmond boneheads to debate what was just posted in a proper way. He went out of his way to write that very good piece and i hope you boneheads give him the respect.

more like that very good piece of $hit

here i was thinking the troll was Vanda but he isnt intelligent enough to pull off this stunt, you on the other hand the bill fits perfectly.

 

[76 Gamer]

The fact that established coaches are not available isn't the point. The point is that Wallace needs to understand that 110 point blowouts in his second year is not acceptable.

We were competitive against Geelong last year - what happened in the off-season? I reckon that the difference between the two teams is the coaches and their preparations and match day strategies. Thomson is a better coach than Wallace and that's why the Cats are contenders whilst we're destined for more of the same.

It's not just that we might go backwards that worries me, it's how we lose. Yes, we were competitive against St Kilda but they were down on the night. We were completely outplayed against Geelong and Wallace was completely out-coached by Worsfold in the second half at Subiaco.

Who was Alistair Clarkson (sp?) before he was appointed head coach at Hawthown? Don't forget that the Hawks had their choice of Eade, Wallace and Clarkson - obviously Dermie, Dunstall & co knew something we didn't.

 

[metallichris]

However, if you would allow me to go through these arguments one by one, I think you will agree that the Richmond Football Club is set on the same tragic path we have been on since the early 80s. Destination: mediocracy.

Disagree.

You guys seem to have forgotten that we are 0 and 3 and got beaten by over 110 points in round one.

Look at the magnitude of those losses.

Sure, round one was a complete belting. It was very disheartening and probably the worst loss for the Tiger's in the last 5 years.

However, the game against the Saints was excellently fought out, and had a few minor things not occur (injuries), we were every chance to win that game. If you are unsatisfied with that night's effort, may God help you.

Last night against West Coast we were competitive for the majority of the game, with them dominating the third quarter for all but five minutes in which we kicked two goals. Be honest; no-one expects a win against West Coast at Subiaco. Certainly shouldn't be disheartened by our efforts, though.

All three of these games were against real finals contenders.

A good coach could get these guys firing the the point where they're winning eight or nine games. Eight or nine games is finals footy. Let's get a good coach.

0/3 could easily become 9/22 by years end. I seriously doubt nine wins will make the top-8 though. You'd need about twelve, but I would be happy if we won nine.

But that is no reason to hold back from affecting change when things are going the wrong way. Assuming we win against Carlton, we're looking at 1 - 10 at the halfway point of this season. Is this what we want?

We will not be 1-10 by round 11.

Round 4: vs Brisbane Lions @Gabba - Winnable but unlikely
Round 5: vs Essendon @MCG - Winnable but unlikely
Round 6: vs Carlton @MCG - Winnable
Round 7: vs Sydney @TD - Winnable but unlikely
Round 8: vs Adelaide @TD - Won't win
Round 9: vs Geelong @SS - Won't win
Round 10: vs Fremantle @Subi - Probably won't win
Round 11: vs Kangaroos @MCG - Winnable but unlikely

We aren't THAT bad to be 1-10. Even so, there are still another eleven rounds to be played after that stage.

But languishing at the bottom of the ladder for the next three years will cost even more in membership, attendance and sponsorship revenues.

Invalid point. That's just a pessimistic outlook on the next few years. Like said before, we aren't THAT bad.

Three or four wins in a season is not a fair share. If the young quality players the Tigers have managed to draft only get a few wins a season, they will be out like a shot if they don't believe that premiership footy is within reach.

Who said we will win three or four games per season. This is just another pessimistic take on things.

I believe that giving Wallace an ultimatum of eight wins (which is finals footy) this year and potentially destabilising the players is a fair price to pay to avoid losing Couglan, Deledio, Hartigan, Raines, Roach, Tambling, etc and assuring them that the club will stop at nothing to assure Richmond players the very best chance of playing finals footy.

Firstly, eight wins will not get you into the finals. You will need atleast eleven. Personally, I believe eight wins is a viable target and I would be satisfied with such.

If you were a top 10 draft pick, where would you want to go - the club that tolerates mediocracy or the club that accepts nothing less than finals footy?

*Bias* I would want to go to Richmond.

...but the fact is that we're looking at finishing the season at 4-18 and that is not acceptable and that if he doesn't achieve at least eight wins, he's out.

Yet again, YOUR pessimistic opinion.

And what for the players? Are they not accountable for their own actions and performances?

Mate, we're looking at 1-10 by round 11 and 4-18 by the end of this season.

YOUR opinion, not fact.

Yes, it is early, but the signs of Wallace's incompetence are plain for all to see. His inability to prepare the players both physically and mentally and his match day decision making has proven that TW is not up to the job of turning around the Richmond Footbal Club.

This is just a stupid comment.

We can either make a decision to cut our losses at the end of this season (if our results are below expectation), or we can wait another three years.

I believe your expectation is too high; we are NOT finals material and won't be until atleast 2007.

Patience. These kids aren't born AFL superstars.

If we end this season anything less than 8-14, sticking with Wallace would be insane. Tolerating that result would send the strong message that mediocracy is OK down at the Richmond Footy Club. All our good players would leave to more professional clubs in the hope of playing in premierships whilst Tigerland would be a club for alcos, druggies and twilight season hacks.

Stupid comment. You talk as if we are finals material.

I though Wallace was the messiah too. I know Eade pretty well and don't like his smug attitude. The senior boys at Sydney didn't like it either so I preferred TW. I've only met Wallace a few times but it's obvious that he puts himself in the Malthouse/Matthews/Pagan mould and back in 2004 when we were talking to him, I fell for it. Now I'm not so sure. I just think that he's as smart as he comes across.

What the hell is that supposed to mean? Irrelevance.

Whilst I'm sure none of us believe that Wallace should be marched out tomorrow, surely the Richmond list is good enough, if coached well, to produce eight wins? And if eight wins is not achieved, Wallace should go. And, in order to behave with the highest integrity, TW should be informed of this as soon as possible.

*Sigh*

I believe we will win eight games. Two reasons: my opinion, and to shut you up.

 

[metallichris]

I reckon that the difference between the two teams is the coaches and their preparations and match day strategies. Thomson is a better coach than Wallace and that's why the Cats are contenders whilst we're destined for more of the same.

That's just bullsh*t.

The Cats are doing better than us because they have built a side over 3-5 years and are now realising the benefits of rebuilding their list, which is BETTER than ours. They have better players than us. Simple.

Who was Alistair Clarkson (sp?) before he was appointed head coach at Hawthown? Don't forget that the Hawks had their choice of Eade, Wallace and Clarkson - obviously Dermie, Dunstall & co knew something we didn't.

Um, the Hawks waited out and missed out on their preferred targets in Wallace and Eade. They spent all of last year playing kids, bottoming out and receiving even more highly-rated youngsters. I thought you wanted us to win games?

 

[oxx]

LMAO@ This thread...

 

[76 Gamer]

Well, Metallichris, we might not agree but I respect your analysis.

And for what it's worth, I hope you're right, I really do.

If the boys can get back to 4-7 or even 3-8 I'll be straight on the site declaring myself totally uninformed when it comes to footy ... but I just can't see it happening ...

 

[metallichris]

I can...

 

[jackson_rules]

weaver, khan please do us all a favour and get rid of this thread

 

[Terry Tan]

It's not TW's fault. It's that we have a lot of young kids with lots of potential who are not ready yet, and unfortunately a lot of older players not up to the mark.

TW is probably the best coach we have had since Tommy Hafey. He's on a 5 year contract and will stay the journey. If we gave hack Frawley 5, then TW deserves at least 5.

I hope TW is there 20 years. If he is, that means we have been successful.

TW is on a 5 year contract. Richmond are not going to sack him now, pay him out $2M & send the club broke. And who's then going to be the next coach - Brian Royal!

This thread is so stupid I can't believe it. btw, the record books show there are no 76 gamers for the Tigers, so you are obviously a stirrer who supports another club. Poor form.

 

[julzqld]

Let's forget the insults. Thrice3, Roostertalk, Captain Brown 7, The D-Rod, Julzqld and Itsintheblood are obviously unemployed losers that left school at 12 and have nothing thoughtful to add. Runt Road Roar can't even spell! Labelling me d#ckhead/kn*b/idiot doesn't contribute to the meaningful debate regarding the future coaching staff of our club one bit.

Pot calling the kettle black. All from a nobody.

 

[Captain_Brown_7]

Well, Metallichris, we might not agree but I respect your analysis.

Metallichris must be stoked that an intellectually disabled person respects his analysis.

 

[Crumden]

76 gamer. I'm not sure what you means by 8 or 9 games is finals footy. Usually 11 or 12 wins is needed, but I agree that 8 or 9 wins is a fairly realistic goal that we should set as a minimum number of wins. But I don't agree that sacking the coach should be the outcome if we don't achive that goal.

You seem to be under a cloud of unrealistic expectations. We have played 12 quarters of footy in 2006. We were belted in 2 quarters against the bulldogs and in one (the 3rd) against west coast. In the other 9 quarters we have been pretty competitive, against top quality opposition. All three of our games have been played at high intensity in the first half, though not a high skill level. We have been playing around 8 or 9 young players in each match. Players with less than 50 games under their belts. Its quite common for young players not to be able to play out four quarters. They usually need 3 or 4 solid pre-seasons under their belts to build up the motor to get through games. Something people seem to forget when they keep calling play the kids. Its good to play a number of them like we have been to get games under their belt, but you have to be prepared to wear the consequences of that as well.

Yes we were belted by 110 points. No, that is not acceptable. But sometimes it happens the way the game is played in modern footy. Should we sack the coach? Should Brisbane have sacked Leigh Matthews when St Kilda beat them by 139 points last year. Of course not. You'll say you can't compare because Matthews is one of the top coaches and has four flags under his belt, even taking a rabble like Collingwood to a flag. That's right, but it shows that even the best coaches can be on the end of real beltings.

And you said that St Kilda had an off night against us. The old fall back to the easy way out - criticise us when we do poorly, and put down the opposition if we do well against them. Perhaps they had a bad night because of the pressure we were putting on them.

People point to the Bulldogs current form and say we should have got Eade. All the Sydney supporters I know (apart from Bigfooty trolls) say we would have been crazy to appoint Eade. He had a honeymoon period at the Swans where he did pretty well, but by the end neither the players nor the supporters wanted him. He has the players at the Bulldogs playing well, but they had a core of stars to build around - West, Johnson, Grant, Smith, Darcy (although he's been injured). We have Brown and Richo, and Brown has been injured most of that time. Then we have a few good solid players, lead by Bowden and Johnson. That, and the extra year or two to get the miles into young legs, is why its going to be a bit longer for us to really challenge.

 

[1980]

There would be a few on this board who would start to have doubts about Wallace if we couldnt win 8 games this year. If we have another couple of 100+ point losses, it may start earlier than that.

Personally, I dont think its such a bad idea to set the coach targets. 8 wins sounds like something to aim for this season. I hate this loosely so called 5 year plan. What the hell is a 5 year plan anyway. Are we going to win a premiership in the 5th year? Is it really a 10 year plan with the 5th year being our first finals year?

76 Gamer, would you want us to sack Wallace at risk of getting another Frawley or Geishen, or is it not better to come back on this board Round 4 2007 when you'll have a lot more friends to cheer you on? Because until then, Wallace gets to use the solarium as much as he likes.

 

[Armageddon]

Metallichris must be stoked that an intellectually disabled person respects his analysis.

Coming from teh guy who bagged Collingwood ,Derek Hine and Neil Balme for picking up Dale Thomas and Scott Pendelbury

 

[CoggaRules]

There would be a few on this board who would start to have doubts about Wallace if we couldnt win 8 games this year. If we have another couple of 100+ point losses, it may start earlier than that.

Personally, I dont think its such a bad idea to set the coach targets. 8 wins sounds like something to aim for this season. I hate this loosely so called 5 year plan. What the hell is a 5 year plan anyway. Are we going to win a premiership in the 5th year? Is it really a 10 year plan with the 5th year being our first finals year?

76 Gamer, would you want us to sack Wallace at risk of getting another Frawley or Geishen, or is it not better to come back on this board Round 4 2007 when you'll have a lot more friends to cheer you on? Because until then, Wallace gets to use the solarium as much as he likes.

1980, give you the tip, you are right that there are a few that would start havng doubs about TW if the 8 wins didnt happen, but there are a few more that dont really care about singing the song 8 times, as long as when a win is nothched it is based on the tigers skill shining through, rather than the oppositions off day shinng through.
For example, IMO, games like next weeks at the Gabba, with the Lions on the rebound, the media shelving them as goooooone, are the games where the tigers have to make their mark, bury the bastards and confirm what the experts suggest FFS.

 

[1980]

76 gamer. I'm not sure what you means by 8 or 9 games is finals footy. Usually 11 or 12 wins is needed, but I agree that 8 or 9 wins is a fairly realistic goal that we should set as a minimum number of wins. But I don't agree that sacking the coach should be the outcome if we don't achive that goal.

You seem to be under a cloud of unrealistic expectations. We have played 12 quarters of footy in 2006. We were belted in 2 quarters against the bulldogs and in one (the 3rd) against west coast. In the other 9 quarters we have been pretty competitive, against top quality opposition. All three of our games have been played at high intensity in the first half, though not a high skill level. We have been playing around 8 or 9 young players in each match. Players with less than 50 games under their belts. Its quite common for young players not to be able to play out four quarters. They usually need 3 or 4 solid pre-seasons under their belts to build up the motor to get through games. Something people seem to forget when they keep calling play the kids. Its good to play a number of them like we have been to get games under their belt, but you have to be prepared to wear the consequences of that as well.

Yes we were belted by 110 points. No, that is not acceptable. But sometimes it happens the way the game is played in modern footy. Should we sack the coach? Should Brisbane have sacked Leigh Matthews when St Kilda beat them by 139 points last year. Of course not. You'll say you can't compare because Matthews is one of the top coaches and has four flags under his belt, even taking a rabble like Collingwood to a flag. That's right, but it shows that even the best coaches can be on the end of real beltings.

And you said that St Kilda had an off night against us. The old fall back to the easy way out - criticise us when we do poorly, and put down the opposition if we do well against them. Perhaps they had a bad night because of the pressure we were putting on them.

People point to the Bulldogs current form and say we should have got Eade. All the Sydney supporters I know (apart from Bigfooty trolls) say we would have been crazy to appoint Eade. He had a honeymoon period at the Swans where he did pretty well, but by the end neither the players nor the supporters wanted him. He has the players at the Bulldogs playing well, but they had a core of stars to build around - West, Johnson, Grant, Smith, Darcy (although he's been injured). We have Brown and Richo, and Brown has been injured most of that time. Then we have a few good solid players, lead by Bowden and Johnson. That, and the extra year or two to get the miles into young legs, is why its going to be a bit longer for us to really challenge.

Thats a good post Crum

 

[76 Gamer]

Everyone agrees that the Richmond Footy Club is in a rebuillding stage and that we've got a long way to go before we're a top four or top six club. But the fact is that losing every week is demoralising for everyone - players, supporters, sponsors and coaching staff. You can justify your losses by saying we're playing kids, but if we're getting belted every week then everyone associated with the club will start to wonder what's the point.

I want to stop this happening.

We don't need to win every week, but there must be visible improvement over time to keep everyone focused and motivated. At the moment, in the second year of Wallace's grand plan, we should be competitive with the top sides and we should win more games than we won last season.

If Wallace fails to achieve that, he should be out. It's no use telling him that at the end of the season, that's why Wallace should be informed of the Club's expectations now and why we should be looking for a replacement - just so that he knows the Club is serious.

 

[Diego]

People point to the Bulldogs current form and say we should have got Eade. All the Sydney supporters I know (apart from Bigfooty trolls) say we would have been crazy to appoint Eade. He had a honeymoon period at the Swans where he did pretty well, but by the end neither the players nor the supporters wanted him.

Eade at the swans was an awesome match day coach. But he was waaay too much of a technical coach and not a players coach like the great Paul Roos. Eade also started to believe he was a supercoach and started too talk down to a lot of players, including seniors like Paul Kelly as they were naughty little boys. This was demoralising and put a lot of his senior players off side. Hence why players like Wayne Schwass retired mid season in 2002 and the first half of that season was bad.

He would have done ok at the tigers but he would not have lasted as long as TW will.