Who should play on Richo?

[Rocco Jones]

I think Scott Bassett gives Richo too much of a size advantage. Even if Crofty plays he will be under done. Kretiuk is way too small, so I think the only option would be Wayde Skipper.

 

[stefoid]

Bandy might be an option, but richo might be too clever or quick for him.

As long as he gets all his marks in the goal square and not 50m out, we will be right

 

[Isdogisgood]

What about Hargrave?

 

[Rocco Jones]

Originally posted by Isdogisgood
What about Hargrave?

Hargrave is 9cms smaller than Richo, if we are gonna play Shags we might as well play Bassett on him.

 

[Doggiesrule1020]

My choice would be to play crofty on him if croft comes back if not the choice would be between hargrave and basset.

 

[SCRAY72]

Originally posted by stefoid
Bandy might be an option, but richo might be too clever or quick for him.

As long as he gets all his marks in the goal square and not 50m out, we will be right

Richo could be too quick or tall but I wouldn't call him clever. My order of preference.

1. CROFT (Doubts about his fitness)
2. HARRIS (Has the size and aggro to do the job)
3. HARRISON (Has the height and experience)
4. BASSETT (Too short, last resort)
5. BANDY (DB isn't as slow as people think)

Frawley could be getting desperate and could use Hall in the ruck and push Stafford forward. Midfield is still the key anyway and all I can say is lucky for us Ottens and Ben Holland are not playing for the Tigers.

 

[bulldogs1]

Crofty for me, too.

I'd give Kritter a go - I know he'd probably be killed for pace, but I've seen the guy beat opponents he had no right to, many times before. As Imran Khan would say - heart "like a tiger" (or was it lion?)

 

[LondonBulldog]

Don't stuff with the program and keep a settled backline. If Richo lines up at full forward, Bassett gets first crack. If it fails then look at other alternatives, but Bassett should be given the chance.

 

[Rocco Jones]

Originally posted by LondonBulldog
Don't stuff with the program and keep a settled backline. If Richo lines up at full forward, Bassett gets first crack. If it fails then look at other alternatives, but Bassett should be given the chance.

I would give Bassett the role on most full forwards but Richo is just a bit too tall.

 

[stefoid]

Changed my mind about bandy, we need him in attack or our forward line is too puny.

hows this for a plan, we play an extra man in defence to clog up richos leading space and create a bit more havoc which will suit our smaller defenders?

Play Basset on Richo for push and shove duels, and ease Crofty back into the game by playing him as the loose man in defence role.

If they play their own loose man, I dont think it will hurt us as much because Brown and Garlo etc... dont need so much space to cause damage.

 

[sigscotty]

I would go with Skipper on him. He is athletic, has great reach, and will learn a lot from the experience.

It also leaves our other experienced defenders to starve the rest of their forward line. The other defenders will be able to zone off and help skip out a bit, because Richmond are so one dimensional when going forward.

This one dimensional attack means we can afford to lose the richo match up comprehensively and still expect to win comfortably, so rather than say Bassett giving up 2 to 4 goals on him, i am happy for skipper to give up 6 and we make sure none of their other forwards can have an impact.

 

[jim440]

Originally posted by sigscotty
I would go with Skipper on him. He is athletic, has great reach, and will learn a lot from the experience.

Richo would push him away as easy as brushing away a fly and would take about 20 marks. He would probably kick about 1.19.

Bandy will be plan A, B & C.

Harro will play CHF. Croft will have a go at HF as well.

 

[sigscotty]

Originally posted by jim440
Richo would push him away as easy as brushing away a fly and would take about 20 marks.

He didn't manage to do that last week against a first gamer that is a full year younger than Skipper.

 

[jim440]

Originally posted by sigscotty
He didn't manage to do that last week against a first gamer that is a full year younger than Skipper.

And he kicked 1.6 and 2 out of bounds.

He could have won the game for them if he could kick.

 

[sigscotty]

Originally posted by jim440
And he kicked 1.6 and 2 out of bounds.
He could have won the game for them if he could kick.

Had he kicked at about the same as the rest of the players in the game he would have got about 3.4 instead of 1.6, certainly not enough to win them the game.

We have nobody physically equipped to go with him(no team does). At least skipper has the height and reach and will gain plenty of experience from it, as well as enabling the other defenders to dominate. Melbourne also used a rookie on him in the pre season comp, and won convincingly.

 

[Rocco Jones]

Originally posted by sigscotty

Richo is capable of as much or as little damage no matter who you have playing on him. We have nobody physically equipped to go with him. At least skipper has the height and reach.

Yeah that's the reason why I would have Skipper. If Richo is at his best no full back will stop him. Basically he is too tall for all other options so putting Skipper will eliminate potential easy goals he could get through being simply too tall.

 

[dogboy23]

Originally posted by sigscotty
Had he kicked at about the same as the rest of the players in the game he would have got about 3.4 instead of 1.6.

Richo is capable of as much or as little damage no matter who you have playing on him. We have nobody physically equipped to go with him. At least skipper has the height and reach.

You have to be smart to play on Richo because your just not going to match him physically.IMO Bandys not an option and either is Basset or Kretiuk (hes reliable but that doesn't make him any taller).I would give Croft first crack and then turn to one of our other options if he is too underdone.To be honest I dont think Hargrave is as crazy as it sounds.He has a genuinely smart football brain and if he played it the right way he could pull it off IMO.Harrison is an option aswell as despite what some think he has a reasonable leap and is pretty smart.You tend to forget he has played as a mobile ruckmen before.Only doubt I have about it working is whether he is smart enough to get around his size deficit.Dont see any real problem with Skipper as long as he plays off him a bit and jumps into him rather than trying to out muscle him.

 

[mel 40]

Id say harris as first choice then crusher, then skip, then crofty, then bass.

 

[Chops]

It all depends on where Richo plays. If he is at CHF, can Skipper, Croft (off injury) or Harris run around with him? If he plays FB who can wrestle with him? Kretiuk an option at FB.

Are we getting too Richo focused? Averaging 2 good games a year!
Who are Richmonds other good players we need to keep an eye on?
Do we need to to worry about our own game more?

 

[The Fullerman]

I believe that whoever we put on Richo he will be at an advantage for height and/or speed.

It's times like these I wish we still had Craig Ellis

Richo's Goal kicking I believe will determine the outcome of Sundays Match.

 

[Mr. Walker]

Originally posted by Rocco Jones
Yeah that's the reason why I would have Skipper. If Richo is at his best no full back will stop him. Basically he is too tall for all other options so putting Skipper will eliminate potential easy goals he could get through being simply too tall.

I said in a post long long ago, that Skipper is not the 196 cms tall quoted in the player stats. I was fortunate enough to meet both Skipper and Grant at a function and speak to both of them. Grant is taller than Skipper and if Grant is the 193 cms quoted then Skipper is no more than 192.

Its Harris as first choice for me. He was good enough to make the 22 in round 22 last year and apart from injury I dont see why he shouldn't get first crack

 

[stefoid]

Originally posted by Mr. Walker
I said in a post long long ago, that Skipper is not the 196 cms tall quoted in the player stats. I was fortunate enough to meet both Skipper and Grant at a function and speak to both of them. Grant is taller than Skipper and if Grant is the 193 cms quoted then Skipper is no more than 192.

Its Harris as first choice for me. He was good enough to make the 22 in round 22 last year and apart from injury I dont see why he shouldn't get first crack

are you sure? he does look to have a bit of a spider-burton hunchback look about him, maybe he was just quailing in the great mans presence?

 

[Mr. Walker]

Originally posted by stefoid
are you sure? he does look to have a bit of a spider-burton hunchback look about him, maybe he was just quailing in the great mans presence?

Thank you, but there is no way he would have been quailing in my presence.

I had a good look and there is no way he is 196 cms. As I said 192 maximum. i think it was either just wishful thinking on the recruiters part or we are trying to fool the opposition (like we used to do when Steve Wallis had the ball and players 50 metres up the field would call for it knowing it would drop 20 metres short)

 

[Dry Rot]

BTW, who played on Richo in the past 2 or 3 seasons?

 

[SCRAY72]

Scott Bassett didn't play many games for Port but one of his biggest scalps was against Hawthorn in a final 2 years ago when he shut down Nick Holland. I'm not saying he is the guy to play on Richo but backmen regularly play on bigger blokes and with the help of the midfileders can do a job.
I actually think it is harder for a big bloke to play on a smaller opponent.