One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: one-eyed on February 12, 2006, 02:08:45 AM
-
Tigers to take year one month at a time
By Samantha Lane
The Age
February 12, 2006
In a break from football's traditional seven-day outlook, Richmond plans to take 2006 four weeks at a time.
Dividing the season into blocks is one of several initiatives the Tigers' leadership group presented to the team at a meeting that ended the club's community camp in Ballarat last week.
Captain Kane Johnson and deputies Nathan Brown, Matthew Richardson, Joel Bowden and Darren Gaspar ran a detailed presentation for the players and coaches that suggested team goals for the season.
While taking a more micro-perspective of the 22 home-and-away rounds is hardly a ground-breaking approach, Johnson considers the short-term goals as particularly relevant to his team which, in recent seasons, has made a habit of posting extended losing streaks.
"We all want to make finals, but you can't just say, 'We want to make finals'," Johnson said.
"We need to actually break it down and say, 'Look, the first four rounds we need to win two of those four. We've got a hard first four, we need to make sure we get two of the four.' And then after that, we can reassess and say, 'Where are we at?'. Then the goals are a bit more achievable and we can see them, and they're not too far away, because the season's so long.
"What can happen in football clubs is that you say all these things at the start of the year, and as the season goes on, it tends to get thrown out the window. They (the goals) get lost because you're so caught up in everything else. But we're actually going to set monthly meetings, and they're going to be locked in so that we have to do it."
Though a vastly improved outfit to the side that endured 14 straight losses at the end of the 2004 season, Richmond still had two sets of month-long defeats (rounds 10-13 and rounds 16-20) in 2005. In 2003, the Tigers had eight consecutive defeats, and lost nine weeks straight in 2002.
About a month ago, Richmond enlisted a facilitator to help the leadership group outline its immediate and long-term aims for the club. The entire playing list was consulted and asked to table any ideas they had heard of at other clubs.
http://www.realfooty.theage.com.au/realfooty/articles/2006/02/11/1139542446303.html
-
"We need to actually break it down and say, 'Look, the first four rounds we need to win two of those four. We've got a hard first four, we need to make sure we get two of the four.' And then after that, we can reassess and say, 'Where are we at?'. Then the goals are a bit more achievable and we can see them, and they're not too far away, because the season's so long.
Great stuff, I really love they way we are changing - forget this 1 week at a time cliche.
The first four rounds are a good test for the start of the year if we can snag 2 of the following.
Western Bulldogs Telstra Dome - This game is going to be a ripper and the way everyone is going on about the bulldogs, I am going to be really pumped up for this one and will be giving the pups supporters a bit of service if we get up for being such a bunch of cock sure fcukers.
St. Kilda Telstra Dome Home 19:40 - Had the wood on us to say the least - It's got to turn sometime - Grant Thomas gives us no respect (fair enuff I spose) time soon to start turning it around and stick it in his face.
West Coast Subiaco Away 17:40
Brisbane Lions Gabba Away 19:10 - Afraid both TV games for me this year - We have allways done ok against brissy of late - WCE well they are tough at home whoever they play.
If we can get the 8 points from the first 4 we are on the way with these to follow.
Carlton M.C.G. Home 19:40
Essendon M.C.G. Away 19:10
Sydney Telstra Dome Home 14:10
Adelaide Telstra Dome
Just cant afford to drop games against the Carltons like last year - That game cut and had to cop it sweet from those dago blues. :scream
-
For me, 2006 isn't our year, having a crap draw means our chances of finals are minimal. 2006 should be a year where we give young players like Meyer, Patto, Tambling, Polo ample oppurtunity to gain experience
-
How we go in our games against fast and hard running sides who win plenty of uncontested footy in the midfield like the Saints, Crows, Cats, Dees and Roos will decide how much we have improved in 2006. Last year it was these sides that smashed us. The Dogs and Eagles are also good in this area but we did fairly well in matching them.
The doggies game first up is definitely winnable. We match up well on them and the first few rounds always have upsets as some sides are further ahead in their preparation than others. The Lions are another team we match-up well with in recent times. Plus the Gabba should hold no fear after last year. Saints and Eagles in Perth will be bloody tough. If we come away 2-2 after the first four games it'll be a great start to the year.
-
"What can happen in football clubs is that you say all these things at the start of the year, and as the season goes on, it tends to get thrown out the window. They (the goals) get lost because you're so caught up in everything else."
That would explain a lot about the last few seasons.
Though a vastly improved outfit to the side that endured 14 straight losses at the end of the 2004 season, Richmond still had two sets of month-long defeats (rounds 10-13 and rounds 16-20) in 2005. In 2003, the Tigers had eight consecutive defeats, and lost nine weeks straight in 2002.
Even if we didn’t have the best list going around, it doesn’t really explain the long runs of losses. It had as much to do with the permanent downward spiral the team seemed to be in, which no one seemed to know how to get us out of. :help
It’s good that we seem to be doing something to minimise that sort of thing in the future. I suppose the fact we’d even consider it an issue, rather than just making excuses for the losses, says that things are changing for the better.
-
For me, 2006 isn't our year, having a crap draw means our chances of finals are minimal. 2006 should be a year where we give young players like Meyer, Patto, Tambling, Polo ample oppurtunity to gain experience
no such thing, i dont but that crap, all excuses to me. the draw is the draw. we didnt make the finals last yr, not because of the draw, bec we snuffed games we should have won.
i have seen our draw, i see no diff to any others. we have 22 games to make the 8, if we r good enough we will make it, if we arent we wont. has nothing to do with the draw.
-
Though a vastly improved outfit to the side that endured 14 straight losses at the end of the 2004 season, Richmond still had two sets of month-long defeats (rounds 10-13 and rounds 16-20) in 2005. In 2003, the Tigers had eight consecutive defeats, and lost nine weeks straight in 2002.
Even if we didn’t have the best list going around, it doesn’t really explain the long runs of losses. It had as much to do with the permanent downward spiral the team seemed to be in, which no one seemed to know how to get us out of. :help
I think it's a bit misleading in that article to throw what happened in 2005 in with the previous 3 years. Firstly losing a month of matches isn't 8,9 or 14 straight losses. Secondly under Spud, we had a list that, as Moi so eloquently put it, had alot of deadmeat as depth. We were also playing so negatively that no wonder we played with no confidence. We now have cleaned out most of that deadmeat and replaced it with youth. It's going to take a couple of years for them to mature before we can match sides with hardrunning midfields that we lost badly to in 2005. The only real pathetic effort last year was the game against Carlton. The rest were mainly close games against teams of a similar standard that could have gone either way or thumpings to superior opposition.
-
I know what you’re saying MT, but I don’t know that we can assume things will just fall into place because the list improves.
And until we prove ourselves, we’re still a bottom eight side, whatever our excuse is. Because we’ve been down for so long, we have to start building a team from scratch and players need to develop good habits and traits that can help build a good team.
Good teams are disciplined and well drilled and can withstand intense pressure. We aren’t yet able to do that. Having good players will help us get there, but having good players who are disciplined and have good habits and traits will help even more.
The senior players seem to thinks it’s something we have to look at.
…Johnson considers the short-term goals as particularly relevant to his team which, in recent seasons, has made a habit of posting extended losing streaks.
"What can happen in football clubs is that you say all these things at the start of the year, and as the season goes on, it tends to get thrown out the window. They (the goals) get lost because you're so caught up in everything else. But we're actually going to set monthly meetings, and they're going to be locked in so that we have to do it."
That last bit seems to suggest we have a way to go before we become a disciplined team. If that sort of thing can happen at any club then better players alone doesn’t guarantee anything.
Even if all these initiatives don’t help that much in the short term, in time they can help make a good team better. :yep
-
I know what you’re saying MT, but I don’t know that we can assume things will just fall into place because the list improves.
And until we prove ourselves, we’re still a bottom eight side, whatever our excuse is. Because we’ve been down for so long, we have to start building a team from scratch and players need to develop good habits and traits that can help build a good team.
Good teams are disciplined and well drilled and can withstand intense pressure. We aren’t yet able to do that. Having good players will help us get there, but having good players who are disciplined and have good habits and traits will help even more.
Agree with all that TS and no doubt we are a bottom eight side until proven otherwise.
What gives me hope we are on the right track at least in the long term is:
(i) we have an experienced coach from fairly successful background who has showed in the past he can get a group of even average players to be disciplined and execute his gameplan to the letter.
(ii) we have a recruiter who not only tries to pick up the best young footballers but also find kids who have a good attitude and preferably natural leadership skills. We are also finally thinking long-term with our recruiting now.
(iii) the Club itself appears to have everyone in the inner sanctum moving in the same direction which is something we haven't had in decades. Sugar's comments about losing sight of long-term goals not only applied in the past to the Tiges onfield but also off it. Discipline must exist right through every department of the Club.
We've obviously still got a long way to go as it's only been 18 months and there's no guarantees of ultimate success but the future at Tigerland hasn't looked as promising for a very very long time.
-
Have to agree with all that too MT. Better recruiting, coaching and having everyone on the same page is just as things should be, and those sorts of changes rightly give people hope. But, to my way of thinking, those things only put us equal with any half decent run club. And we want to have a team that’s more than just half decent. And, in most respects, Clubs seem to be run similar to one another.
What Clubs look for then is an edge that gives their team an advantage over the opposition, which good Clubs often find. Whether it be a level or non-level playing field, the only real advantage any club can have over another is its players and how much those players are prepared to sacrifice to achieve success.
If that’s correct, wouldn’t Clubs invest greater time and energy in their players to help get the best out of them? Most clubs would. However, for all intents and purposes, RFC has effectively been a dysfunctional club over a number of years, in this regard, and is only getting its act together now. We might now be ahead of some when it comes to player recruitment, but as far as player development is concerned, we’re only at the starting gate. Wouldn’t surprise me to learn that some Clubs have been so far ahead of us in this department that it would be laughable if we actually knew the truth.
Anyway, it’s interesting that we have another thread that talks about future recruiting and how our recruiting has been geared towards that. That’s all weird and wonderful, but what happens once they’ve been recruited to the Club? We’ve recruited dozens upon dozens of players over the years and I don’t remember seeing one reach anything like his true potential
It’s good then to see the new direction the leadership group has taken this year, and how TW has handed greater responsibility to the players. If nothing else it’s different, it is for RFC anyway. That alone has the potential to do more to improve the quality of football they play than any training drill ever can.
As all these initiatives take effect over time, we will get to see something really different. And we’ll easily recognise the difference between the namby pamby football we’ve been subjected to in the past and how a 'real' footy ‘team’ plays.
Even though last season was a massive improvement, something still didn’t seem quite right. I’m not sure how to explain it so I won’t even try. Except to say that, in previous seasons, players never seemed to have much input into things; they were just there, which, to me, seemed the opposite to how other successful clubs operate. That appears to be changing now, which can only be a good thing and, in time, may provide the best indication of all that things have really changed for the better.
Most will attribute any success that may follow to the good recruiting and coaching; which won’t be misplaced praise. But the biggest difference you will see won’t come about simply because we have better players and so on, but because players are being supported and allowed to use their initiative and make decisions on behalf of the team. As they are now in the driver’s seat, partly at least, we’ll get to see the difference that makes to how the footy team performs on the field.
It’s a big difference to how we’ve done things in the past, because it’s the players who now have to take responsibility for the decisions they make and their involvement in the team’s fortunes. Suddenly, it’s their reputation and their pride on the line and not just that of the coach. And it’s a whole lot more than that too.
Anyway, hopefully we’ll get to see what I mean sometime soon.
-
I know what you’re saying MT, but I don’t know that we can assume things will just fall into place because the list improves.
Only have to look at St Kilda to know that when you have a loser mentality and loser history, it takes more than a good list to win premierships. They've got the list, but i doubt they'll see many cups. If they go nowhere this year, Grant Thomas will be under pressure, and they'll start disintegrating again through infighting and going back to their old habits. You can't be in St Kilda's position and fail to take advantage of it. Makes you wonder how the Swans won it this year. They don't have a star studded team, but achieved the ultimate. Oh to know that winning formula. Maybe if we could recruit Demetriou to get stuck into us like he did them lol.
-
Just my opinion, but I think even some St. Kilda supporters underestimate the good job Grant Thomas has actually done to change their culture. He’s done a lot of the ground work that’s helped bring about changes that others before couldn’t or didn’t know how to go about.
Now that he’s done a lot of the hard stuff, it seems to be coming down to how good a match day coach he and his assistants are, as to how much on-field success they have.
If nothing else, he’s laid the foundations and cleared away a lot of the baggage from the past, for any future coaches.
-
Rod Buttress deserves alot of the praise for St Kilda in terms of creating stability for them off the park but still without the on-field results (back to back PFs) and expectations of flags they wouldn't have all their supporters hopping on the bandwagon. They now had more members signed up pre-Christmas than they did for the whole 2000 season. It's hard for us to compete with that when we've been a basketcase for two decades with only 2 finals appearances in that time and it being over 30 years since we made back-to-back finals.
The problem at Richmond was we sucked in all areas. Apart from the healthy in number and loyal supporter-base everything else was as you rightly say TS dysfunctional to the core - weak and hopeless admins, troublesome coteries, dud coaches with their 'namby pamby' gameplans, dud recruiters and weak playing lists. What's more we were ruthlessly impatient so we never had a long-term strategy and even if we did it would be thrown to the doghouse once success wasn't quickly forthcoming. While it's still only early days I feel the majority at Punt Rd have finally seen the light with the people that have been put in charge of the various areas within the Club over the past 18 months and with the focus on maintaining stability and sticking to a long-term strategy.
I agree TS that other Clubs, such as Essendon under Sheeds, have for years if not decades been doing what we've only woken up to in the past 18 months. But the nature of the system is to even out the competition (a further indictment on the RFC as we still couldn't do things right even when the system offered a way out of mediocrity :banghead ). IMO recruiting is nowdays what all clubs live and die on onfield. Sure development and matchday coaching is very important and there are many pieces to the puzzle that need to fit together for a club to be successful, but if you don't recruit highly talented and smart players with drive and a top work ethic in large enough quantities in the first place then it doesn't matter how good your development is. We just happened to be lousy at both for decades in any case :-\ .
The draft is a lottery in some sense but the better recruiters/coaches hit the mark far more often than the average/poor ones. Spotting the kid with talent that will make him a top AFL footballer in 4-5 years time instead of just a good underage or VFL player is a skill in itself. That's why alot of time and effort is spent on recruiting. There's no magic formula and that's where a club can get an edge over the rest of the comp. Most of the players we've recruited since the 1980s have simply not been good enough at the highest level and the very few that have been have been forced to carry the workload in mediocre teams.
Just back to the Saints, I still have niggling doubts over Grant Thomas as a matchday coach. He really made some dumb moves in last year's PF and if a premiership cup isn't in the trophy cabinet in October then the knives will come out for him given the list he inherited with multi-first round draftees.
-
Just back to the Saints, I still have niggling doubts over Grant Thomas as a matchday coach. He really made some dumb moves in last year's PF and if a premiership cup isn't in the trophy cabinet in October then the knives will come out for him given the list he inherited with multi-first round draftees.
I agree with MT - I think that's why Grant Thomas hired one Mick McGuane as an assistant. Mick got a great allround knowledge of the game - tactics, opposition analysis etc - something Thomas lacks IMO - he seems very reactive to things when they are not working.
And BTW I don't think they will win the premiership in 2006 :rollin ;D
-
And BTW I don't think they will win the premiership in 2006 :rollin ;D
I'm going to enjoy all their cocky supporters turning on Thomas if that happens :yep. For a club that's won just one flag in over a hundred years of their existence and not for 40 years, they make Pies' supporters sound humble :scream.
With a weak defence it's not unlikely they'll miss out on the ultimate prize again. The only one I would feel sorry for if they fail is Robert Harvey.
-
And BTW I don't think they will win the premiership in 2006 :rollin ;D
I'm going to enjoy all their cocky supporters turning on Thomas if that happens :yep. For a club that's won just one flag in over a hundred years of their existence and not for 40 years, they make Pies' supporters sound humble :scream.
With a weak defence it's not unlikely they'll miss out on the ultimate prize again. The only one I would feel sorry for if they fail is Robert Harvey.
sorry mt, im a hard bastard,
i dont think the saints will make the 8 this yr, they are going to fall hard.
and i dont feel sorry for harvey at all. and honestly i dont think anyone but tigers fans feel sorry 4 our blokes that missed out , such as knighter, gale, campbell, richo thuis far etc etc.
lets hope the saints suffer the most miserable season along side the blues pies and bumbers ;)
-
Rod Buttress deserves alot of the praise for St Kilda in terms of creating stability for them off the park…
I guess you’re right in many respects MT, because Thomas couldn’t have done the ground work he has done without the backing of the Club. As we know too well. But St. Kilda wouldn’t be where it is today either, without Thomas, regardless of whether he gets them a flag or not.
That’s not to say anyone else couldn’t have done the same job, it’s just that no one ever had before.
Just back to the Saints, I still have niggling doubts over Grant Thomas as a matchday coach. He really made some dumb moves in last year's PF and if a premiership cup isn't in the trophy cabinet in October then the knives will come out for him given the list he inherited with multi-first round draftees.
There’s always an example to blow an argument out of the water and it’s funny how we’re talking about the Saints, because they’re a team now considered to have the players to be flag contenders. However, they haven’t got there yet, even though they seem to have the areas we’re talking about covered. Maybe their time just haven’t arrived yet. I guess it’s as you say though, that:
…there are many pieces to the puzzle that need to fit together for a club to be successful, …
In many ways, this debate is a bit like the ‘chicken and egg’ theory, but I have to argue against the next bit:
…if you don't recruit highly talented and smart players with drive and a top work ethic in large enough quantities in the first place then it doesn't matter how good your development is. We just happened to be lousy at both for decades in any case :-\ .
How do we explain the Geelong of the 90’s? For all their skill, talent and ability, no flag? Most other clubs that had a number of shots at a flag managed at least one, but in several attempts they lost all of them.
And then there’s the Swans last season. Not the best list, but the best ‘team’.
Just wanted to go back to and earlier point we were discussing MT, which probably started this:
I think it's a bit misleading in that article to throw what happened in 2005 in with the previous 3 years.
I understand what you mean, because the footy department has completed changed. But even though there was a new coaching set up in place, and everything else that went with that, many of the players were the same and they don’t forget everything they’ve learned from a previous coach when a new one turns up.
Old habits don’t then suddenly disappear. To improve, players have to develop new habits. To do that they have to learn how to respond/react to certain situations so the same lame results don’t keep occurring. In our case, we saw games last year that resembled something from previous seasons. I don’t presume your saying we should ignore those situations, and I’m not saying anything you wouldn’t already know, but just wanted to make the point that the arrival of a new coach doesn’t mean players forget their old habits without first learning new ones. Which is probably what I needed to say in the first place.
-
I have two main concerns about the Saints - Thomas' matchday coaching and their defence. Losing Penny as a key defender and Aussie Jones' run off half-back will hurt them. It'll be those too things that may cost them a flag this year. If they fail in 2006, they'll also lose Gehrig and Harvey at the end of the year.
In many ways, this debate is a bit like the ‘chicken and egg’ theory
That's true TS. We could easily reverse what I said in a earlier post and say without good development, picking up the best kids will not solve our problems. But IMO recruiting the best kids comes first given the restrictions of the draft and salary cap. If you stuff up you can put a club back 5 years. Once a kid is at the Club we have more control over their destiny and it's then entirely up to the kid (their ability and work ethic to succeed) and us (to provide a good structure, culture, coaching and facilities around them to help them succeed).
How do we explain the Geelong of the 90’s? For all their skill, talent and ability, no flag? Most other clubs that had a number of shots at a flag managed at least one, but in several attempts they lost all of them.
And then there’s the Swans last season. Not the best list, but the best ‘team’.
Luck and timing also plays it part in winning a flag IMO. 99% are all the variables that we've been discussing that result towards winning a flag; the last 1% say is luck.
The years the Cats made the GF they were always the second best team behind Hawthorn (89), West Coast (92, 94) and Carlton(95). All great sides in those respective years. The Cats came third in 91 again behind super Hawk and Eagle sides and they didn't make the top 8 in 90 and 93. Ironically 90 and 93 were probably the weaker years so their "timing" was out every single year. Put simply they weren't good enough when it mattered.
Geelong also had a bad habit of reminding themselves that they hadn't won a flag in yonks by wheeling out Bobby Davis every GF week and placing unnecessary expectation and pressure on their team. That's something we need to watch out we don't do if and when we make a GF. And on top of that they choked in the 92 GF after being 4 goals up at half-time. On the back of the losing by a kick in the 89 GF, IMO that scarred that core group of Geelong players.
The Swans on the other hand had perfect timing to pinch a flag in a weak year. An even 22 that exposed and choked opponents that lacked forwards (Geelong, Eagles) or defenders (Saints). Paul Roos also kept the Swannies focussed and at ease and didn't put too much pressure on them during the finals.
Of course hindsight is a wonderful thing when judging the hows and whys.
Old habits don’t then suddenly disappear. To improve, players have to develop new habits. To do that they have to learn how to respond/react to certain situations so the same lame results don’t keep occurring. In our case, we saw games last year that resembled something from previous seasons. I don’t presume your saying we should ignore those situations, and I’m not saying anything you wouldn’t already know, but just wanted to make the point that the arrival of a new coach doesn’t mean players forget their old habits without first learning new ones. Which is probably what I needed to say in the first place.
That's also true TS. Last year under pressure from top hard-running sides we did go back to old habits of poor skills/decision making and not supporting each other. It's going to take time to "re-educate" and de-spud lol our list but with the T@FE courses, the mentor program and the rebounding and run and carry drills at training, I see a serious effort from the Club to develop these new (good) habits.