One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: mightytiges on March 11, 2008, 06:49:24 PM
-
Caro was just on 3aw.
She said "Most people think if a coach is in his second last year of his contract and the side has a bad year they won't see out their last year and the club will pay them out..... I can't see that happening to Terry."
-
I think she's right.
We probably won't make the eight, but we'll have a better year this year, and if we're showing improvement means Terry's plans have gone okay.
If not, he's in trouble. But too early to go there yet :-*
-
Caro was just on 3aw.
She said "Most people think if a coach is in his second last year of his contract and the side has a bad year they won't see out their last year and the club will pay them out..... I can't see that happening to Terry."
How stupid are the public or more importantly how stupid does Caro think the supporters are.
maybe just maybe caro will stop catching up with Terry for there weekly coffee ::) ::) ::)
Caro, get off the Wallace bandwagon .
-
.
If not, he's in trouble. But too early to go there yet :-*
Not for some people :rollin
maybe just maybe caro will stop catching up with Terry for there weekly coffee ::) ::) ::)
Caro, get off the Wallace bandwagon .
12 months ago you said Caro had weekly coffees with GMiller now it's Tezza .... I am confused :-\
:rollin
-
maybe shes a big coffee drinker :lol
-
.
If not, he's in trouble. But too early to go there yet :-*
Not for some people :rollin
maybe just maybe caro will stop catching up with Terry for there weekly coffee ::) ::) ::)
Caro, get off the Wallace bandwagon .
12 months ago you said Caro had weekly coffees with GMiller now it's Tezza .... I am confused :-\
:rollin
Facts of the matter that BOTH catch up with Caro, regularly! Why dont you ask precious Greg or Solarium Terry.
-
And you would be more surprised that how close the ""media"" are too certain people at punt road, :shh and you know I am on the money with that ;)
-
the rfc is that stupid that maybe she is right and terry and greg are safe.
u can talk about rebuilding all you like, the fact remains he has changed nothing since he arrived.
if he was after youth, what the hell are these old duds like tivers still on the list and why did he pick up jordy and not a 18 year old. i hate repeating the same old lines but when the spin doctor is concerned, what choice do i have.
Miller and wallace have brough this club to its worst position on the field since the 80's, thats a fact
-
.
If not, he's in trouble. But too early to go there yet :-*
Not for some people :rollin
maybe just maybe caro will stop catching up with Terry for there weekly coffee ::) ::) ::)
Caro, get off the Wallace bandwagon .
12 months ago you said Caro had weekly coffees with GMiller now it's Tezza .... I am confused :-\
:rollin
Facts of the matter that BOTH catch up with Caro, regularly! Why dont you ask precious Greg or Solarium Terry.
I would imagine she catches up with people from all clubs. What's the big deal? Nothing, just being a drama queen again :rollin
-
If you want Moi, i tell you where they meet, you might want to join them
-
Facts of the matter that BOTH catch up with Caro, regularly! Why dont you ask precious Greg or Solarium Terry.
No need. We all rely on your 'independent' observer for our facts. :shh
-
Facts of the matter that BOTH catch up with Caro, regularly! Why dont you ask precious Greg or Solarium Terry.
No need. We all rely on your 'independent' observer for our facts. :shh
:rollin
-
Facts of the matter that BOTH catch up with Caro, regularly! Why dont you ask precious Greg or Solarium Terry.
No need. We all rely on your 'independent' observer for our facts. :shh
Tell you anything you want to know , smarty
-
Facts of the matter that BOTH catch up with Caro, regularly! Why dont you ask precious Greg or Solarium Terry.
No need. We all rely on your 'independent' observer for our facts. :shh
:rollin
:rollin :rollin :rollin :rollin :rollin :rollin
:rollin :rollin :rollin :rollin :rollin :rollin :rollin :rollin ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) :birthday :birthday :birthday :birthday :birthday
-
I believe that Caro's statement is probably true, but still, a very brave assumption to make, even though she uses the word "thinks" which gives her an out.
Here are the facts (as i see them, others may have more data)
1. Richmond created a reputation in the past of burning its coaches.
2. Richmond has lost the opportunity in the past to hire the particular coaches that it desired because of the reputation it created in point 1.
3. The club recognizing the reputation it itself had created and the negative impact that it was creating on the club through the eyes of the administrative world, decided on a course of action that would revert and cause to change the public and administrative reputation of how it handles its coaches.
4. The decision was made to honor the contracts that the club entered into with its coaches.
5. The richmond football club stuck to its guns in the implementation of this new policy, witness Danny Frawley and by actually doing so did in fact gain some renewed credibility both publically and administratively.
6. The world of football administration (AFL, club level) in most cases will have a different reality on a scene than what its supporters (the mob) will have.
7. As much as supporters probably hate to admit it "the mob" is generally 90% wrong in most cases.
Taking into consideration the above points it's fair to say that, on the balance of all probability Wallace's position is safe for the duration of his contract. However, I might add that there is a point where following along a certain line of think can become more destructive than constructive. There is a time and a place for pretty much all types of decisions one can't blind themselves to ALL probable options because of the percieved and real mistakes of the past.
Richmond's position in respect to its contractural arrangements is admirable but it must realise it is a two way street and that the other side of the contract has a responsibility too.
Dont chain yourself into a line of think that you can't escape from.
-
I believe that Caro's statement is probably true, but still, a very brave assumption to make, even though she uses the word "thinks" which gives her an out.
Here are the facts (as i see them, others may have more data)
1. Richmond created a reputation in the past of burning its coaches.
2. Richmond has lost the opportunity in the past to hire the particular coaches that it desired because of the reputation it created in point 1.
3. The club recognizing the reputation it itself had created and the negative impact that it was creating on the club through the eyes of the administrative world, decided on a course of action that would revert and cause to change the public and administrative reputation of how it handles its coaches.
4. The decision was made to honor the contracts that the club entered into with its coaches.
5. The richmond football club stuck to its guns in the implementation of this new policy, witness Danny Frawley and by actually doing so did in fact gain some renewed credibility both publically and administratively.
6. The world of football administration (AFL, club level) in most cases will have a different reality on a scene than what its supporters (the mob) will have.
7. As much as supporters probably hate to admit it "the mob" is generally 90% wrong in most cases.
Taking into consideration the above points it's fair to say that, on the balance of all probability Wallace's position is safe for the duration of his contract. However, I might add that there is a point where following along a certain line of think can become more destructive than constructive. There is a time and a place for pretty much all types of decisions one can't blind themselves to ALL probable options because of the percieved and real mistakes of the past.
Richmond's position in respect to its contractural arrangements is admirable but it must realise it is a two way street and that the other side of the contract has a responsibility too.
Dont chain yourself into a line of think that you can't escape from.
Totally agree.
Although I have doubts whether we should of gone with Frawley as long as we did.
Saying all that, reckon if Wallet has a bad start, he is gone.
Its is a two way street as you say
The club cannot afford too ruin its "'branding"' much more.
All ready lost most friday night games and prime viewing etc etc
-
terry will still be here in 2009
-
u can talk about rebuilding all you like, the fact remains he has changed nothing since he arrived.
if he was after youth, what the hell are these old duds like tivers still on the list and why did he pick up jordy and not a 18 year old. i hate repeating the same old lines but when the spin doctor is concerned, what choice do i have.
Miller and wallace have brough this club to its worst position on the field since the 80's, thats a fact
This post has got more holes in it than flywire.
I wont even bother to start an discussion with you Elton's brother because it is just so far from fact it is fanciful.
-
I believe that Caro's statement is probably true, but still, a very brave assumption to make, even though she uses the word "thinks" which gives her an out.
Here are the facts (as i see them, others may have more data)
1. Richmond created a reputation in the past of burning its coaches.
2. Richmond has lost the opportunity in the past to hire the particular coaches that it desired because of the reputation it created in point 1.
3. The club recognizing the reputation it itself had created and the negative impact that it was creating on the club through the eyes of the administrative world, decided on a course of action that would revert and cause to change the public and administrative reputation of how it handles its coaches.
4. The decision was made to honor the contracts that the club entered into with its coaches.
5. The richmond football club stuck to its guns in the implementation of this new policy, witness Danny Frawley and by actually doing so did in fact gain some renewed credibility both publically and administratively.
6. The world of football administration (AFL, club level) in most cases will have a different reality on a scene than what its supporters (the mob) will have.
7. As much as supporters probably hate to admit it "the mob" is generally 90% wrong in most cases.
Taking into consideration the above points it's fair to say that, on the balance of all probability Wallace's position is safe for the duration of his contract. However, I might add that there is a point where following along a certain line of think can become more destructive than constructive. There is a time and a place for pretty much all types of decisions one can't blind themselves to ALL probable options because of the percieved and real mistakes of the past.
Richmond's position in respect to its contractural arrangements is admirable but it must realise it is a two way street and that the other side of the contract has a responsibility too.
Dont chain yourself into a line of think that you can't escape from.
Good post RR.
At the end 1999 only Spud and Tony Elshaug were left to choose from because we had cut so many coaches. Sheedy (ex-Tiger), Malthouse (ex-Tiger), Mark Thompson and a host of others wouldn't have a bar of us.
Save to say now if Plough sees out his contract that just 2 coaches in 10 years would signify a club that now backs its coach, eliminating the old sacking coaches stigma. One thing Miller is definitely right about is stability is a crucial component to become successful. We would also now argue that with the upcoming redevelopment of Punt Rd and Craigieburn training complex (both to be completed by 2009), plus boosting recruiting and development resources over the past year, plus a young list to work with, we would be an attractive proposition to any aspiring AFL coach.
In reality there's only 18 months left on Plough's contract as it ends Sept 2009. Perhaps midway through next year if progress has stalled then the club and Wallace may decide to mutually part company at the end of 2009 but until then I think Caro is right.
-
we will wait and see,
-
Elton's older brother, Darth. :)
-
He'll only be safe if we get out of the bottom four.
-
Richmond will give hime every opportunity to prove himself " his assumptions"
Failing a catastrophic 2008 he should on what we have seen go the distance. But who really knows on what management will really do.
-
Taking into consideration the above points it's fair to say that, on the balance of all probability Wallace's position is safe for the duration of his contract. However, I might add that there is a point where following along a certain line of think can become more destructive than constructive. There is a time and a place for pretty much all types of decisions one can't blind themselves to ALL probable options because of the percieved and real mistakes of the past.
Richmond's position in respect to its contractural arrangements is admirable but it must realise it is a two way street and that the other side of the contract has a responsibility too.
Dont chain yourself into a line of think that you can't escape from.
Agree with all of that Rodger.
If RFC is still living under that threat, after all this time, then they’re naïve, and have progressed nowhere.
The circumstances that prevailed in the past don’t have to haunt us for ever and a day, because, hopefully, things progress over time.
The reason coach sacking didn’t work in the past was because those running things didn’t understand the harm they were doing to the club by making one person responsible for all its problems.
There was no science to it; it was just an easy way to release the pressure from the outside.
So, as long as each individual is now accountable for their role, and not just the coach, then it shouldn’t be the issue it once was. And if it was, then this club has learned absolutely nothing.
What will determine whether a prospective coach would take on RFC, in the future, would have little to do with past history.
For whatever reason, the trend now seems to be towards ‘rookie’ coaches, rather than recycling coaches that have already coached at AFL level. The major reason for that is perhaps because ‘old’ thinking doesn’t cut it in today’s footy.
Clubs now have so many assistants and resources in the background, that we wouldn’t even know about, which doesn’t matter, but the main reason a prospective coach will now select one club over another perhaps has more to do with the resources he will have available to him, if he is to coach a particular club.
Without those resources, and the ability to embrace today’s techniques, most coaches wouldn’t survive, regardless of any past record; e.g. Denis Pagan.
-
For whatever reason, the trend now seems to be towards ‘rookie’ coaches, rather than recycling coaches that have already coached at AFL level. The major reason for that is perhaps because ‘old’ thinking doesn’t cut it in today’s footy.
There's also hardly any recycled coaches left to choose from. Most are considered damaged goods from their previous coaching stints so clubs don't go near them. Look at Grant Thomas. Will he get another gig despite not being able to get the talented St Kilda list he had at his disposal to a GF.
-
For whatever reason, the trend now seems to be towards ‘rookie’ coaches, rather than recycling coaches that have already coached at AFL level. The major reason for that is perhaps because ‘old’ thinking doesn’t cut it in today’s footy.
There's also hardly any recycled coaches left to choose from. Most are considered damaged goods from their previous coaching stints so clubs don't go near them. Look at Grant Thomas. Will he get another gig despite not being able to get the talented St Kilda list he had at his disposal to a GF.
St-Kilda were struggling with injuries to key players MT when Grant Thomas was coaching in his last few years thats why they struggled badly but always seemed to thump us
anyway regardless af the injuries its in the past that now but l want to get your opinion here
1. Do you think Grant Thomas can coach
2.if Terry Wallace was to walk away or whatever would you have Grant Thomas coach the Tigers & the reason if yes or no
3. Do you think Thomas could make them play for him seeing he gets close to his players
l'm not saying l want Wallace out & Thomas in l just like to see what some think
-
i really dont think the players play for wallace. we need someone tough like a mckenna. someone from that malthouse, worsfold mentality
-
1. Do you think Grant Thomas can coach
2.if Terry Wallace was to walk away or whatever would you have Grant Thomas coach the Tigers & the reason if yes or no
3. Do you think Thomas could make them play for him seeing he gets close to his players
1. No. He can motivate but he can't coach.
2. No. See above. May as well get Northey back if we want a motivator that can't coach.
3. Yes. But no more than I believe Wallace has now. In all the cheers and tears that our last 3 seasons under him has produced I have not seen or heard any evidence or rumours from the players of anything but 100% behind him and his staff. In fact, during our darkest hours last season there was not one peep of discontent or lack of trust, rather the contrary, and that's one of the main reasons I believe this current football department and playing list will improve rapidly and become successful in the next few years.
-
I agree with u that there is no discontent within the group but i believe they are not playing to instruction and this is wallace's fault. either he is not hard enough or something is wrong.
Surely wallace is not thats stupid to encourage this chipping around crap week in week out.
if i dont see this type of play within the first 3 rounds then maybe, just maybe i might be a little swayed to believe this group might win a few games this year.
-
1. Do you think Grant Thomas can coach
I saw him more as a manager than a coach. Thomas' H/A record was good once the Saints got going but 2 wins from 6 finals and no GFs is a poor return. Ironically similar to Plough's record at the Dogs. I always thought his Saints were front runners who beat up the poor sides like us but were exposed under finals pressure when they were made accountable by the top sides and had to run hard both ways. Thomas' moves in that PF against the Swans were woeful which IMO showed him up short as a coach. I also think he topped up once the Saints got off the bottom which meant after 2004 their list didn't improve while other clubs did.
2.if Terry Wallace was to walk away or whatever would you have Grant Thomas coach the Tigers & the reason if yes or no
Nup for the reasons above.
3. Do you think Thomas could make them play for him seeing he gets close to his players
Well Wallace got Thomas down to Punt Rd last year to tell some home truths.
To be honest there may be an initial boost in the first year but that would be so for any new coach. There's been a common trend at Richmond of a new coach coming in and achieving significant improvement in his first year before the side falls away again in subsequent seasons and then another new coach brought in and the same thing is repeated while the players escape their responsibility for poor performances. We are poor because our senior players aren't up to it and need to be replaced by a new core group. That core group is still too young no matter who the coach is. Thomas' first couple of years were crap too winning just 4-5 games.
-
There's been a common trend at Richmond of a new coach coming in and achieving significant improvement in his first year before the side falls away again in subsequent seasons and then another new coach brought in and the same thing is repeated while the players escape their responsibility for poor performances. We are poor because our senior players aren't up to it and need to be replaced by a new core group. That core group is still too young no matter who the coach is.
Who should take responsibility for that? The players? Who’s in charge here?
Nothing ever changes at Richmond coz nothing ever changes.
Think I posted something back in about 2004/2005 that the focus needed to be taken away from the senior players, so that the culture amongst them could change.
Four years later we’re still on about the same things that supporters were harping on way even before then.
The people keep changing at RFC, but nothing else it seems.
When TW came into the footy club he failed to acknowledge the task he had to re-build the list, and what he was dealing with, in terms of the culture, because he continued to play the same group of players (many that most people knew weren’t going to take us anywhere) we had before, and installed senior players as our leaders.
The main reasoning for playing experienced players was because he thought we could create a winning mentality whilst re-building the list.
How did he figure that we were suddenly gonna be world beaters with the same group of players that had failed previously? Did he have some magic tricks up his sleeve or he knew how to get something different out of those players that no one else had? History says ‘no’ to all of the above.
I agree, if the young players simply aren’t ready, then don’t play them. Why then, in 2007, when there’s no alternative, we give the young players a go out of necessity and suddenly they’re ready enough to get a game under those circumstances, ready or not.
When he left the Bulldogs, their supporters lamented that he didn’t bring through the young players. Why not? Because all he sees is what is on the surface with players. If he can literally see the ability a player has, i.e. skill, pace, etc, then that convinces him of a player’s ability and worth to the team. But if he doesn’t know a player, and can’t see his ability ‘right now’, he ain’t interested. Potential doesn’t exist, it’s what a player can do now.
Basically, I believe he sees the superficial in a player, and not what he’s actually made of, which you can’t see.
Unless he has those around him with that ability, he can be the best strategist, list manager and whatever else he likes, he ain’t taking us nowhere, no matter how long he’s at the club.
When he, or someone, puts faith in the players, real faith, then I’ll believe he’s worth sticking with.
Until then, I have way more reasons why I have no faith in him as a coach, unless he has a major overhaul.
-
1. Do you think Grant Thomas can coach
2.if Terry Wallace was to walk away or whatever would you have Grant Thomas coach the Tigers & the reason if yes or no
3. Do you think Thomas could make them play for him seeing he gets close to his players
1. No. He can motivate but he can't coach.
2. No. See above. May as well get Northey back if we want a motivator that can't coach.
3. Yes. But no more than I believe Wallace has now. In all the cheers and tears that our last 3 seasons under him has produced I have not seen or heard any evidence or rumours from the players of anything but 100% behind him and his staff. In fact, during our darkest hours last season there was not one peep of discontent or lack of trust, rather the contrary, and that's one of the main reasons I believe this current football department and playing list will improve rapidly and become successful in the next few years.
There was discontent within the group, with the senior group questioning the amount of "" meetings "" which has been adjusted this season, along with the amount of time that Wallet spends on the track, this has been adjusted as well.
Players were extremely frustrated at years end
-
There was discontent within the group, with the senior group questioning the amount of "" meetings "" which has been adjusted this season, along with the amount of time that Wallet spends on the track, this has been adjusted as well.
Players were extremely frustrated at years end
How fantastic that the playing group felt confident in it's place to raise the issues and the football department were mature and professional enough to listen and make changes where they saw fit. I'm willing to bet that the significant part of the players frustration was based around the knowledge that they weren't as bad as the results and perceptions indicated. But I could be wrong - I don't have an independent observer feeding me info - just maturity and experience.
-
There was discontent within the group, with the senior group questioning the amount of "" meetings "" which has been adjusted this season, along with the amount of time that Wallet spends on the track, this has been adjusted as well.
Players were extremely frustrated at years end
How fantastic that the playing group felt confident in it's place to raise the issues and the football department were mature and professional enough to listen and make changes where they saw fit. I'm willing to bet that the significant part of the players frustration was based around the knowledge that they weren't as bad as the results and perceptions indicated. But I could be wrong - I don't have an independent observer feeding me info - just maturity and experience.
Mate, can only tell you what actually happened
-
There was discontent within the group, with the senior group questioning the amount of "" meetings "" which has been adjusted this season, along with the amount of time that Wallet spends on the track, this has been adjusted as well.
Players were extremely frustrated at years end
How fantastic that the playing group felt confident in it's place to raise the issues and the football department were mature and professional enough to listen and make changes where they saw fit. I'm willing to bet that the significant part of the players frustration was based around the knowledge that they weren't as bad as the results and perceptions indicated. But I could be wrong - I don't have an independent observer feeding me info - just maturity and experience.
Mate, can only tell you what actually happened
:sleep
-
1. Do you think Grant Thomas can coach
2.if Terry Wallace was to walk away or whatever would you have Grant Thomas coach the Tigers & the reason if yes or no
3. Do you think Thomas could make them play for him seeing he gets close to his players
1. No. He can motivate but he can't coach.
2. No. See above. May as well get Northey back if we want a motivator that can't coach.
3. Yes. But no more than I believe Wallace has now. In all the cheers and tears that our last 3 seasons under him has produced I have not seen or heard any evidence or rumours from the players of anything but 100% behind him and his staff. In fact, during our darkest hours last season there was not one peep of discontent or lack of trust, rather the contrary, and that's one of the main reasons I believe this current football department and playing list will improve rapidly and become successful in the next few years.
There was discontent within the group, with the senior group questioning the amount of "" meetings "" which has been adjusted this season, along with the amount of time that Wallet spends on the track, this has been adjusted as well.
Players were extremely frustrated at years end
Seems the club is leaking again Jackstar ;)...and perhaps we could have those names of the senior players.
I would only like to add that your above suggestion is only partially true. :shh, this is stuff that i believe was probably told to you in confidence, perhaps thats as far as it should have gone..dont be fooled for a minute that we are the only club that deals with these situations.
Its amazing how sometimes situations within a sporting club can become distorted by the time it has gone through 3/4 people.
I know for a fact that there are posters on another RFC forum that are actively involved in the club that post and read what is posted, and have a giggle about how tall the stories sometimes become.
-
There's been a common trend at Richmond of a new coach coming in and achieving significant improvement in his first year before the side falls away again in subsequent seasons and then another new coach brought in and the same thing is repeated while the players escape their responsibility for poor performances. We are poor because our senior players aren't up to it and need to be replaced by a new core group. That core group is still too young no matter who the coach is.
Who should take responsibility for that? The players? Who’s in charge here?
Nothing ever changes at Richmond coz nothing ever changes.
Think I posted something back in about 2004/2005 that the focus needed to be taken away from the senior players, so that the culture amongst them could change.
Four years later we’re still on about the same things that supporters were harping on way even before then.
The people keep changing at RFC, but nothing else it seems.
When TW came into the footy club he failed to acknowledge the task he had to re-build the list, and what he was dealing with, in terms of the culture, because he continued to play the same group of players (many that most people knew weren’t going to take us anywhere) we had before, and installed senior players as our leaders.
The main reasoning for playing experienced players was because he thought we could create a winning mentality whilst re-building the list.
How did he figure that we were suddenly gonna be world beaters with the same group of players that had failed previously? Did he have some magic tricks up his sleeve or he knew how to get something different out of those players that no one else had? History says ‘no’ to all of the above.
I agree, if the young players simply aren’t ready, then don’t play them. Why then, in 2007, when there’s no alternative, we give the young players a go out of necessity and suddenly they’re ready enough to get a game under those circumstances, ready or not.
I think politics and our dire financial situation at the time had a lot to do with decisions made when Terry first arrived. When you've made a $2m loss, up to $5m in debt and are bleeding dry then the first thing the club had to do was cut back hard on expenditure and sell the club to boost revenue. Also another 2004 disaster in 2005 would have destroyed any chance of stability at board level with Casey still President. I agree though we paid at the 2005 draft table for Browny's superstar form in the first 9 rounds of 2005. In any case I think people still underestimate the basket case state our list was in at the end of 2004. 27 2004-Tigers gone since then and more still to go. We've had to totally start again with our list.
32: Campbell
31: D.Kellaway, Rogers
30: Stafford
29: Richo, A.Kellaway
28: Gaspar, Marsh
-------------------------
27: Blumfield, Chaffey
26: J.Bowden, Brown, Johnson, Fleming, Fletcher, Houlihan
25: Tivendale, Hilton
24: Hall, Morrison, Nicholls, Ottens
23: Tuck, Fiora, Dragga#
22: Coughlan, Hyde, Newman, Pettifer, Weller, Zantuck
-------------------------
21: Krakouer, Rodan
20: Moore#
19: Foley#, Schulz, Hartigan, Roach
18: Raines, Jackson, Archibald, Gilmour
When he left the Bulldogs, their supporters lamented that he didn’t bring through the young players. Why not? Because all he sees is what is on the surface with players. If he can literally see the ability a player has, i.e. skill, pace, etc, then that convinces him of a player’s ability and worth to the team. But if he doesn’t know a player, and can’t see his ability ‘right now’, he ain’t interested. Potential doesn’t exist, it’s what a player can do now.
They lamented more the lack of KPPs rather than young players. They also didn't like Wallace "walking-out". Plough would argue he left because the dogs cut back footy department resources.
Pre-Wallace dogs still playing AFL:
Johnson
West
Wallace doggie draftees still playing AFL: (drafts 1997-2001. Wallace left at the end of 2002)
Boyd (rookie, 2001)
Cross (pick 56, 2000)
Eagleton (trade, 1999)
Giansiracusa (pick 32, 1999)
Gilbee (pick 43, 1999)
Hahn (pick 37, 1999)
Hargrave (pick 66, 1999)
Harris-Lake (pick 71, 2001)
Murphy (pick 13, 1999)
Skipper (pick 70, 2000)
Birss (pick 26, 2000)
McMahon (pick 10, 2000)
Basically, I believe he sees the superficial in a player, and not what he’s actually made of, which you can’t see.
Unless he has those around him with that ability, he can be the best strategist, list manager and whatever else he likes, he ain’t taking us nowhere, no matter how long he’s at the club.
When he, or someone, puts faith in the players, real faith, then I’ll believe he’s worth sticking with.
Until then, I have way more reasons why I have no faith in him as a coach, unless he has a major overhaul.
I see that as something the club will judge in 2009. Given that 80% of the list would have been turned over (taking into account more changes at the end of this year) the question that will be asked is - is Plough the coach to take this young group forward and up the ladder beyond 2009.
-
the rfc is that stupid that maybe she is right and terry and greg are safe.
u can talk about rebuilding all you like, the fact remains he has changed nothing since he arrived.
if he was after youth, what the hell are these old duds like tivers still on the list and why did he pick up jordy and not a 18 year old. i hate repeating the same old lines but when the spin doctor is concerned, what choice do i have.
Miller and wallace have brough this club to its worst position on the field since the 80's, thats a fact
Come on mate- no changes?????????? Have a real good look at the list circa 2003 and compare it to now. Rather have Hilton, Houlihan, Fleming , Dragisevic etc etc?? We have also changed the recruiting staff, as well as many other off field positions. You can say what you like but the list turnover has been huge and before you say it, yes some of the recruiting both in type of player and ability has been debatable but you cannot say he has changed nothing. Also, you still have a lot of very young players on the list yet to mature.
Tivendale always gets singled out but I tell you one thing, he was more than worthy of a spot in our best 22 last year, and probably still is. He had a good year and deserved at least another.
-
1. Do you think Grant Thomas can coach
2.if Terry Wallace was to walk away or whatever would you have Grant Thomas coach the Tigers & the reason if yes or no
3. Do you think Thomas could make them play for him seeing he gets close to his players
1. No. He can motivate but he can't coach.
2. No. See above. May as well get Northey back if we want a motivator that can't coach.
3. Yes. But no more than I believe Wallace has now. In all the cheers and tears that our last 3 seasons under him has produced I have not seen or heard any evidence or rumours from the players of anything but 100% behind him and his staff. In fact, during our darkest hours last season there was not one peep of discontent or lack of trust, rather the contrary, and that's one of the main reasons I believe this current football department and playing list will improve rapidly and become successful in the next few years.
There was discontent within the group, with the senior group questioning the amount of "" meetings "" which has been adjusted this season, along with the amount of time that Wallet spends on the track, this has been adjusted as well.
Players were extremely frustrated at years end
Seems the club is leaking again Jackstar ;)...and perhaps we could have those names of the senior players.
I would only like to add that your above suggestion is only partially true. :shh, this is stuff that i believe was probably told to you in confidence, perhaps thats as far as it should have gone..dont be fooled for a minute that we are the only club that deals with these situations.
Its amazing how sometimes situations within a sporting club can become distorted by the time it has gone through 3/4 people.
I know for a fact that there are posters on another RFC forum that are actively involved in the club that post and read what is posted, and have a giggle about how tall the stories sometimes become.
It was actually quoted in the Herald Sun during October inregards to RFC review of year. The senior players wanted less meetings and more of Wallet on the track. You will find this has been rectified :shh
-
i really dont think the players play for wallace. we need someone tough like a mckenna. someone from that malthouse, worsfold mentality
McKenna has been passed over for pretty much every single senior coaching role for the past 2-3 years, doesn't that make you think that picking up a coach no one else wanted may not be such a good idea?
-
It was actually quoted in the Herald Sun during October inregards to RFC review of year. The senior players wanted less meetings and more of Wallet on the track. You will find this has been rectified :shh
You've taken a bit of artistic license with what was written. It wasn't that Wallace wasn't spending time on the track, he was there for every session. They just requested more hands-on time from him personally rather than delegating out sessions and drills with the assistant coaches.
-
It was actually quoted in the Herald Sun during October inregards to RFC review of year. The senior players wanted less meetings and more of Wallet on the track. You will find this has been rectified :shh
You've taken a bit of artistic license with what was written. It wasn't that Wallace wasn't spending time on the track, he was there for every session. They just requested more hands-on time from him personally rather than delegating out sessions and drills with the assistant coaches.
Sorry, more of Wallet taking the drills, is that better ::)
-
the rfc is that stupid that maybe she is right and terry and greg are safe.
u can talk about rebuilding all you like, the fact remains he has changed nothing since he arrived.
if he was after youth, what the hell are these old duds like tivers still on the list and why did he pick up jordy and not a 18 year old. i hate repeating the same old lines but when the spin doctor is concerned, what choice do i have.
Miller and wallace have brough this club to its worst position on the field since the 80's, thats a fact
Come on mate- no changes?????????? Have a real good look at the list circa 2003 and compare it to now. Rather have Hilton, Houlihan, Fleming , Dragisevic etc etc?? We have also changed the recruiting staff, as well as many other off field positions. You can say what you like but the list turnover has been huge and before you say it, yes some of the recruiting both in type of player and ability has been debatable but you cannot say he has changed nothing. Also, you still have a lot of very young players on the list yet to mature.
Tivendale always gets singled out but I tell you one thing, he was more than worthy of a spot in our best 22 last year, and probably still is. He had a good year and deserved at least another.
well thats the mentality that will keep us at the bottom for years to come.
tivers is not in our best 22. nice guy if wallace was so focused on our future guys like him and hyde should have been long gone.
and no wallace has not changed anything. we have still have no ticker and no skills so you tell me whats changed??
-
It was actually quoted in the Herald Sun during October inregards to RFC review of year. The senior players wanted less meetings and more of Wallet on the track. You will find this has been rectified :shh
You've taken a bit of artistic license with what was written. It wasn't that Wallace wasn't spending time on the track, he was there for every session. They just requested more hands-on time from him personally rather than delegating out sessions and drills with the assistant coaches.
Sorry, more of Wallet taking the drills, is that better ::)
Well I fail to see how that's such a big deal. You say the players don't want to play for Wallace, yet they want him more involved at training. Clearly they have respect for him if they want him to spend more time coaching them day to day.
-
It was actually quoted in the Herald Sun during October inregards to RFC review of year. The senior players wanted less meetings and more of Wallet on the track. You will find this has been rectified :shh
You've taken a bit of artistic license with what was written. It wasn't that Wallace wasn't spending time on the track, he was there for every session. They just requested more hands-on time from him personally rather than delegating out sessions and drills with the assistant coaches.
Sorry, more of Wallet taking the drills, is that better ::)
Well I fail to see how that's such a big deal. You say the players don't want to play for Wallace, yet they want him more involved at training. Clearly they have respect for him if they want him to spend more time coaching them day to day.
Put it this way, you dont have to be a genius to know that the players have problems understanding Wallets game plan, then again who wouldnt ::)
-
he talks in riddles, uses examples from other teams like geelong and their list bla bla bla.
id find it hard understanding anything this guys says to be honest