One-Eyed Richmond Forum

Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: Bulluss on September 03, 2005, 01:52:26 PM

Title: Delistings
Post by: Bulluss on September 03, 2005, 01:52:26 PM
It appears from reports doing the rounds that

Morrison, Hilton and Archibald have all been delisted.

Add to that Campbell and Graham and that makes atleast 5 places.

I suppose Foley and Thursfield will be good chances to get promoted so i would think that we would have to trade atleast one or two players to make a few more spots.
Title: Re: Delistings
Post by: Razorblade on September 03, 2005, 02:25:41 PM
Apparently this was on 3AW, but i can't confirm it.

I'm happy that Morrison and Hilton have been delisted, i think Archibald is a but unlucky though.
Title: Re: Delistings
Post by: mightytiges on September 03, 2005, 07:13:04 PM
Yep it was on 3aw and the info is correct. Agree Razor that Archibald was unlucky after missing his first year through O.P. If we wanted to would we be able to rookie list him?

Delistings/Retirees: Cambo (ret), Graham (ret), Hilton, Morrison, Archibald

National Draft Picks: 8, 24, 40, 56 .... (prior to trades)
PSD Pick: 5

Senior List: 
1. Joel Bowden 
2. Nathan Brown   
3. Mark Chaffey
4. Mark Coughlan 
5. Brett Deledio 
6. Darren Gaspar 
7. Alex Gilmour   
8. Ray Hall
9. Brent Hartigan
10. Chris Hyde
11. Daniel Jackson 
12. Kane Johnson 
13. Andrew Kellaway 
14. Trent Knobel 
15. Andrew Krakouer
16. Dean Limbach 
17. Luke McGuane
18. Danny Meyer 
19. Kelvin Moore 
20. Chris Newman
21. Adam Pattison
22. Kayne Pettifer
23. Dean Polo
24. Andrew Raines
25. Matthew Richardson 
26. Thomas Roach
27. David Rodan 
28. Jay Schulz
29. Troy Simmonds
30. Greg Stafford 
31. Richard Tambling
32. Greg Tivendale
33. Shane Tuck
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.

Rookie List: 
1. Nathan Foley
2. Will Thursfield
Title: Re: Delistings
Post by: Razorblade on September 03, 2005, 08:17:06 PM
Foley even gets promoted or given the ass because his 2 years on the rookie list is up.
Title: Re: Delistings
Post by: the_boy_jake on September 03, 2005, 09:13:18 PM
Could Foley have been given more of a run this season? I'm still not sure if he will be much long term to be honest, but given our midfield onball division is pretty weak, I would have thought he would have been given more of a run so that we had a better idea. 47 possessions in a match is exceptional, but you don't see too many midgets running around in the AFL these days. 

How does the system work? What are our options for the national draft and rookie draft w.r.d. the number of players we can take on? Does Thursfield have 1 more year as a rookie?
Title: Re: Delistings
Post by: Fishfinger on September 03, 2005, 09:16:37 PM
I believe we have another pick. We went into 2005 with a spare spot on the list. 5 off the list means 6 spots available. (39 total)

We can also have up to 5 rookies. (if we can afford them)

Thursfield has another year unless promoted Jake. He would only get senior games if there's a long-term injury to free a spot for him or if we go in with a spare spot on the senior list again.
Foley has to be either promoted or delisted.
Title: Re: Delistings
Post by: mightytiges on September 04, 2005, 02:34:47 AM
I believe we have another pick. We went into 2005 with a spare spot on the list. 5 off the list means 6 spots available. (39 total)

It's now compulsory that all 38 spots on the senior list are filled. Cambo was made a veteran but we didn't put him on the veterans' list because we wanted him included within the senior list of 38 to save costs. If we had put him on the veterans' list we would've had to pick up another player. Richo was also eligible to be named a veteran this year but we passed on it (probably because halving his salary would dip up below the 92.5% minimum in TPP). 

This year Richo and Gas(?) are eligible veterans so we could have 40 players (38 + 2 on the veterans' list). However that would allow only up to 4 rookies as for every veteran listed players you lose a rookie spot. If watching $$$ is still a priority we would just replace Cambo with one of Gas or Richo as a veteran but stick with only 38 players + up to 6 rookies (probably 3).

Foley's a difficult one as I think if he's promoted we have to give him a standard 2 year deal (?).
Title: Re: Delistings
Post by: letsgetiton! on September 04, 2005, 08:19:32 AM
dont understand why ppl think foley cant make the grade! he is more in and under than cogs, he is like a terrier in the packs and is as good and exctractoras anyone and skills are good and is nimble and quick. he was a noticeable plus for our midfield in every game he played and this would enable us to free up sugar to play half back or wing where  he belongs
Title: Re: Delistings
Post by: Fishfinger on September 04, 2005, 11:32:43 AM
38 players + up to 6 rookies
 
Thanks MT.  :) I thought it was 39 + 5, as most other clubs have, but now realise that's because they have one of the 39 on the veterans list.
Hopefully our improved finances will allow us to utilise some or all of the 4 other available spots for players that we didn't use this season.
Title: Re: Delistings
Post by: mightytiges on September 05, 2005, 04:39:30 AM
dont understand why ppl think foley cant make the grade! he is more in and under than cogs, he is like a terrier in the packs and is as good and exctractoras anyone and skills are good and is nimble and quick. he was a noticeable plus for our midfield in every game he played and this would enable us to free up sugar to play half back or wing where  he belongs

I'm just concerned he'll be another Craig Ednie. He too has good skills and footy smarts but was sadly just too small for modern day footy. 20-30 years ago these small blokes would probably be classic rovers but the bigger bodies of opponents now days can too easily push these small guys off the ball in one-on-ones.

In saying that I'd be more than happy for him to make me eat my words. And it wouldn't be the first time either as I didn't think much of Hyde before seeing him and his new found pace in our first intra-club match this year.
Title: Tigers deny talk (Herald-Sun)
Post by: one-eyed on September 06, 2005, 02:25:24 AM
Tigers deny talk
06 September 2005   
Herald Sun
Mark Stevens

RICHMOND has dismissed speculation it has delisted Rory Hilton, Shane Morrison and Kyle Archibald.

Weekend reports had the Tigers wielding the axe, but coach Terry Wallace said yesterday no final calls on players had been made.

"We won't be making any announcements until our lists need to go in on October 31," Wallace said.

"We've spoken to all players at the footy club and told them where they stand."

http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/footy/common/story_page/0,8033,16502403%255E19771,00.html
Title: Re: Tigers deny talk (Herald-Sun)
Post by: mightytiges on September 06, 2005, 03:28:54 AM
RICHMOND has dismissed speculation it has delisted Rory Hilton, Shane Morrison and Kyle Archibald.

Weekend reports had the Tigers wielding the axe, but coach Terry Wallace said yesterday no final calls on players had been made.

"We won't be making any announcements until our lists need to go in on October 31," Wallace said.

Lists have been down to 35 players by October 31. If Foley and Thursfield are promoted then 5 at least have to go from the 2005 list of 38 - Cambo , Graham + 3 delistings ;).
Title: Re: Delistings
Post by: Moi on September 06, 2005, 05:56:39 AM
Quote
If Foley and Thursfield are promoted

What are u saying here boss? lol  ;) :rollin
Title: Re: Delistings
Post by: letsgetiton! on September 06, 2005, 06:16:59 AM
dont understand why ppl think foley cant make the grade! he is more in and under than cogs, he is like a terrier in the packs and is as good and exctractoras anyone and skills are good and is nimble and quick. he was a noticeable plus for our midfield in every game he played and this would enable us to free up sugar to play half back or wing where  he belongs

I'm just concerned he'll be another Craig Ednie. He too has good skills and footy smarts but was sadly just too small for modern day footy. 20-30 years ago these small blokes would probably be classic rovers but the bigger bodies of opponents now days can too easily push these small guys off the ball in one-on-ones.

In saying that I'd be more than happy for him to make me eat my words. And it wouldn't be the first time either as I didn't think much of Hyde before seeing him and his new found pace in our first intra-club match this year.

with that logic i guess rodan is finished also , he is too small 4 modern day footy also
Title: Re: Delistings
Post by: Razorblade on September 06, 2005, 11:05:16 AM
Seems strange that the club took this long to "clarify" this.

Methinks a leaking of information is happening at Punt Road, wouldn't be the first time either!  :shh
Title: Re: Delistings
Post by: mightytiges on September 06, 2005, 05:19:26 PM
Quote
If Foley and Thursfield are promoted

What are u saying here boss? lol  ;) :rollin


Not off the Net ;) :shh

Title: Re: Delistings
Post by: mightytiges on September 06, 2005, 06:01:13 PM
dont understand why ppl think foley cant make the grade! he is more in and under than cogs, he is like a terrier in the packs and is as good and exctractoras anyone and skills are good and is nimble and quick. he was a noticeable plus for our midfield in every game he played and this would enable us to free up sugar to play half back or wing where  he belongs

I'm just concerned he'll be another Craig Ednie. He too has good skills and footy smarts but was sadly just too small for modern day footy. 20-30 years ago these small blokes would probably be classic rovers but the bigger bodies of opponents now days can too easily push these small guys off the ball in one-on-ones.

In saying that I'd be more than happy for him to make me eat my words. And it wouldn't be the first time either as I didn't think much of Hyde before seeing him and his new found pace in our first intra-club match this year.

with that logic i guess rodan is finished also , he is too small 4 modern day footy also

Footy and team sports in general evolve with time so small blokes may return one day in numbers but in recent times only those with exceptional pace, acceleration and freakish skills make it to the highest level. Remember the only reason Rodan was still available at pick 33 was because his small size put other clubs off. The good conditions of the grounds, the uncontested nature of modern footy and 6 ft+athletes playing the game mean the ball spends more time in the air and less on the ground than it ever did before.

One thing Rodan does have which other small blokes don't is he's built like a human cannonball so it's harder to push him off the ball.   
Title: Re: Delistings
Post by: Bulluss on September 06, 2005, 07:04:35 PM
The difference between Foley and Rodan is as MT stated there size but also there pace. Foley is also pretty slow, which is a concern to me as he will always get exposed defensively.

I also dont think Foley can make it or is up to it, also hope that he proves me wrong but in saying that i dont think he should be promoted either.
Title: Re: Delistings
Post by: Roar on September 07, 2005, 06:17:44 AM
What about Tiv he has one year left on his contract the perfect time to get a trade for him maybe an early 2nd Rnd pick or an experienced player, I've heard the Pies are interested as they look to let Woewodin go.
Title: Re: Delistings
Post by: mightytiges on September 07, 2005, 05:52:26 PM
Look out trade week. We may be as happy at 2pm Friday Oct 7 as we were after last year's ;). Well nearly - a bit hard to top getting Simmonds for Fiora and 2 first round picks for Otto.
Title: Re: Delistings
Post by: Bulluss on September 15, 2005, 06:28:18 PM
Craig Hutchinson just reported on Ch7 news that Rory Hilton has been told by the club that he WONT be offered another contract.

Its time to go, Rory.

About time i think, i didnt mind him at his best but he has had enough time.
Title: Re: Delistings
Post by: WilliamPowell on September 15, 2005, 06:38:04 PM
Yeah I heard Hutchy on Ch 7 news too.

So that makes the official list of departures 3

Campbell, graham and now Hilton - subject to trades I reckon 1 or 2 at the most to go
Title: Re: Delistings
Post by: PuntRdRoar on September 15, 2005, 07:14:19 PM
If Rory has gone then morrison will be gone soon as well and thatll make 4.
Title: Re: Delistings
Post by: mightytiges on September 16, 2005, 02:44:49 AM
And poor Archy will make it 5 gone with one or two others to go during trade week :shh.
Title: Re: Delistings
Post by: WilliamPowell on September 20, 2005, 01:02:23 PM
Forgot to post this the other day - been crook with a nasty infection amongst other things  :'(  :help

I think that Morrison and Archibald are gone

At the B&F (which I briefly attended :help) they were thanked for their services.

Niether Hilton or Morrison were there on Friday but full credit to Kyle - he showed what a fine young bloke he is by showing up on Friday night bloody tough for the kid I reckon - he's a class act Archie :bow :thumbsup
Title: Re: Delistings
Post by: PuntRdRoar on September 20, 2005, 02:34:52 PM
kyles a good kid, i would rookie him if that is possible. Him showing up showed courage and mental strength...sadly these things have been in short supply at Punt Rd for over 2 decades now. Rookie him, give him a chance...hes a big lump of a kid...cant do any worse than give him another chance...
Title: Re: Delistings
Post by: mightytiges on September 20, 2005, 05:29:49 PM
I think that Morrison and Archibald are gone

At the B&F (which I briefly attended :help) they were thanked for their services.

Surprised the Club haven't made an official announcement when it's been made public at the B&F  ???.

We rookie listed Dragga so Archy could be put on our rookie list next year with Thursty and Foley elevated to the senior list.
Title: It's Official: Tiger trio delisted
Post by: WilliamPowell on October 19, 2005, 04:06:46 PM
Tiger trio delisted

12:25:38 PM Wed 19 October, 2005
Matt Burgan
Sportal for afl.com.au

Richmond has delisted three players - Rory Hilton, Shane Morrison and Kyle Archibald.

The Tigers have now made five changes ahead of the October 31 deadline for clubs to submit their final lists, with former skipper Wayne Campbell and defender Mark Graham both retiring.

Richmond Director of Football Greg Miller said: "We've spoken to Rory Hilton, Kyle Archibald and Shane Morrison, to add to the two retirees. We've now confirmed that they (Hilton, Archibald and Morrison) won't be continuing with us next year."

Hilton played 91 AFL matches - including 82 with Richmond - from 1998-05. He played nine matches for the Brisbane Lions in 1998 before shifting to Punt Rd.

The third player selected in the 1996 AFL Draft by the Brisbane Lions, Hilton battled knee and hamstring injuries, particularly in the early and latter part of his career.

Miller praised Hilton's efforts to play almost 100 matches in a injury-interrupted career.

"With Rory, he's had a good career, particularly with his injuries and he played 10 senior games this year and he's been a fine servant and a great clubman around the footy club," Miller said.

"It's just been unfortunate that he hasn't had a clear run at it and probably the first clear run he had was this year, when he played the last nine games in the seniors."

Morrison, also a former Lion, played five matches for the Lions from 2002-03 before he was claimed by Richmond in the 2003 NAB AFL Draft at No.64.

Archibald spent two seasons on Richmond's list, but played just four for the Coburg Tigers in 2004, his year ruined by osteitis pubis.

He managed to play a full season in the VFL in 2005 but was unable to play a senior AFL match. He was the final player selected in the 2003 NAB AFL Draft.

Meanwhile, Coburg Tigers ruckman Michael Rix won his club's best-and-fairest award with 28 votes to pip Nathan Foley by one vote. Foley played just 10 matches for the year in the VFL, while Morrison ran third with 24 votes.

Foley has now been promoted to Richmond's senior list after two years on the rookie list. He also made his AFL debut this year, playing six matches.

Will Thursfield, Richmond's other rookie listed player in 2005, has also been promoted to the senior list for 2006. He too played six matches for Richmond this year.

http://afl.com.au/default.asp?pg=news&spg=display&articleid=234763
Title: Re: Delistings
Post by: mightytiges on October 19, 2005, 04:37:49 PM
Unless there's a fourth delisted or Rodan goes then it looks like both Richo and Gas will go onto the Veterans' list and off the seniors' list of 38. Leaving us with a maximum of 4 rookie spot available.
Title: Re: Delistings
Post by: WilliamPowell on October 19, 2005, 04:44:36 PM
Unless there's a fourth delisted or Rodan goes then it looks like both Richo and Gas will go onto the Veterans' list and off the seniors' list of 38. Leaving us with a maximum of 4 rookie spot available.

I reckon there will be a fourth delisting ;)

Who it will be - now that's the million dollar question

Title: Re: Delistings
Post by: Moi on October 19, 2005, 06:19:32 PM
Well someone at the club told me today my boy was safe  :thumbsup
Title: Re: Delistings
Post by: strav on October 19, 2005, 06:59:38 PM
Well for its worth, it was about time they were delisted. Now the next phase of the re-structure can go ahead.
Title: Re: Delistings
Post by: WilliamPowell on October 19, 2005, 07:49:46 PM
Well someone at the club told me today my boy was safe  :thumbsup


Who's that again?

Tom Raines wasn't it ;D
Title: Re: Delistings
Post by: Bulluss on October 19, 2005, 08:48:50 PM
Would have to be Gilmour is someone else was to go, he has shown nothing.
Title: Re: Delistings
Post by: mightytiges on October 20, 2005, 03:25:18 AM
Would have to be Gilmour is someone else was to go, he has shown nothing.

Gilly would be at risk as he hasn't cracked a senior game yet although he just scraped into the 2003 draft as he was at the bottom end of the age scale. Unlike Archibald who was last taken a pick 81, Gilmour was a early second round selection at pick 21. We would be admitting we stuffed up on a goodish pick if he's delisted after only 2 years. I wouldn't mind giving him one more year. 

Of course there's the option of rookie listing him or whoever it is if they are under 21 like we did with dragga.

Title: Re: Delistings
Post by: tigertough12 on October 20, 2005, 08:51:32 AM
Would have to be Gilmour is someone else was to go, he has shown nothing.

Gilly would be at risk as he hasn't cracked a senior game yet although he just scraped into the 2003 draft as he was at the bottom end of the age scale. [/font] [/color] Unlike Archibald who was last taken a pick 81, Gilmour was a early second round selection at pick 21. We would be admitting we stuffed up on a goodish pick if he's delisted after only 2 years. I wouldn't mind giving him one more year. 

Of course there's the option of rookie listing him or whoever it is if they are under 21 like we did with dragga.



I'm starting to get sick of this excuse people seem to keep making about Happy Gilmour
Title: Re: Delistings
Post by: Moi on October 20, 2005, 12:59:50 PM
Well someone at the club told me today my boy was safe  :thumbsup


Who's that again?

Tom Raines wasn't it ;D

Yep, i'm sure both boys would have been rapt to read that article lol.  I hope it's neither of them and they both come good.  I love the tradition of father/sons at the club, with a few exceptions (Bourkey lol)  :rollin
Title: Re: Delistings
Post by: mightytiges on October 20, 2005, 03:41:32 PM
  I love the tradition of father/sons at the club, with a few exceptions (Bourkey lol)  :rollin

and Mark Pitura, Nick Jewell, Sean Bowden ;)
Title: Re: Delistings
Post by: mightytiges on October 20, 2005, 04:04:32 PM
Would have to be Gilmour is someone else was to go, he has shown nothing.

Gilly would be at risk as he hasn't cracked a senior game yet although he just scraped into the 2003 draft as he was at the bottom end of the age scale. [/font] [/color] Unlike Archibald who was last taken a pick 81, Gilmour was a early second round selection at pick 21. We would be admitting we stuffed up on a goodish pick if he's delisted after only 2 years. I wouldn't mind giving him one more year. 

Of course there's the option of rookie listing him or whoever it is if they are under 21 like we did with dragga.



I'm starting to get sick of this excuse people seem to keep making about Happy Gilmour

It wasn't meant to be an excuse. Gilmour was a speculative choice given his age. We took the risk that his upside over time may be greater than his slightly older peers available at pick 21. Apart from probably Harry Miller, Jed Adcock, Ricky Dyson, Eddie Sansbury, Michael Pettigrew and Sam Fisher not too many kids picked up after Gilmour have done anything either. The main standout after pick 21 is our very own Shane Tuck at pick 76 :thumbsup. If Gilmour survives the cull this year then they'll be no excuses next year.

Going on current form the mistake we made in hindsight was giving up pick 20 instead of pick 21 to the Dogs as part of the Browny trade. We could have snagged Sam Bulter instead who went at 20. But in the end we can't change that now.