One-Eyed Richmond Forum

Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: Judge Roughneck on June 16, 2008, 05:00:19 PM

Title: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: Judge Roughneck on June 16, 2008, 05:00:19 PM
The quest for 9th is still on!  :cheers :cheers

What else?
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: Stripes on June 16, 2008, 05:05:14 PM
Hope springs eternal!  :cheers :cheers :cheers :cheers :cheers

We're there's life there's hope and regardless of the probable finish - we have a chance to make the 8.

Enjoy a win! We haven't got a lot of them recently.  :clapping

Stripes
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: wayne on June 16, 2008, 06:04:45 PM
We have a good run home against bottom 8 teams.

Even though we were ordinary yesterday, hopefully teams will be ordinarier than us.

Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: Smokey on June 16, 2008, 06:09:13 PM

ordinarier

Word of the day!!  :thumbsup
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: Moi on June 16, 2008, 06:52:39 PM
No more talk of tanking!
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: cub on June 16, 2008, 07:45:07 PM
Moi, settle an argument what is your ave of richoman - Is he giving the bird ?
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: Francois Jackson on June 16, 2008, 07:52:09 PM
Moi, settle an argument what is your ave of richoman - Is he giving the bird ?

yes he is..i think if i remember correctly it was on the news also
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: Moi on June 16, 2008, 08:44:08 PM
Moi, settle an argument what is your ave of richoman - Is he giving the bird ?
Don't think he's smoking or picking his nose, so I guess he's giving the bird :thumbsup
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: Hellenic Tiger on June 16, 2008, 08:54:47 PM
For God's sake we beat the Dees.
Winning games against bottom 8 teams due to our charmed draw and finishing higher on the ladder will only fool us again after our 2006 exploits. Sure its good to win but gage us as a team on how we play against the Cats Crows and Hawks between rd 18-20 and whether we get any wins at that business end of the Home and Away Season. We need to keep blooding kids and maybe going into the draft with our pick 5-8 to get what we actually need in a KPP and another quality mid.
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: Francois Jackson on June 16, 2008, 09:08:21 PM
exactly HT we have been down this road once too many times before.

9th

10th

9th

seriously winning means nothing to me, personally, however if we knock off port over there, well then i would be happy because that shows improvement winning over there.

but beating the dees after we got stoned by the crows and swans, well it puts it all in perspective doesn't it.

a win is a win i guess but we should get excited only when we start beating sides that matter starting next week in adelaide..
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: Judge Roughneck on June 17, 2008, 01:01:30 AM
 +

  * Lids had another 30 touch game. Had a big impact when was important in context of match.
  * Tuck showed he is still decent

 _
 * Hyde is another Pettifer, Tivendale, Bowden type it seems.
 * Didn't miss King


What else?
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: Tigermonk on June 17, 2008, 08:35:00 AM
back from the grind  :sleep did not see any of the Richmond vs Melbourne game yet but l see they wonhope it was not ugly but a win is good news
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: tiga on June 17, 2008, 09:45:00 AM
Monk if you restrict yourself to the second quarter and the last 15 minutes of the match you'd be pleasantly surprised. The rest ummm nosogood.....
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: wayne on June 17, 2008, 10:06:41 AM
Winning games against bottom 8 teams due to our charmed draw and finishing higher on the ladder will only fool us again after our 2006 exploits.

The difference is that in 2005/6 we were beating bottom 8 sides with a team full of rejects. We are now beating teams with a quite youthful side.
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: Tigermonk on June 17, 2008, 06:40:05 PM
Monk if you restrict yourself to the second quarter and the last 15 minutes of the match you'd be pleasantly surprised. The rest ummm nosogood.....

see its on at 3.30pm Tomorrow on Foxsport so l will finish work early & l'm inviting some Tiger mates around for a Wednesday booze up  ;D & watch the game  ;D good excuse as any going by the weekend booze up
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: WilliamPowell on June 17, 2008, 07:53:18 PM
TMonk

2nd half of the 2nd qtr 15-17 minutes was great  :thumbsup

Will be taping it myself to watch tomorrow night

 :gotigers
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: jackstar on June 17, 2008, 07:57:09 PM
Monk if you restrict yourself to the second quarter and the last 15 minutes of the match you'd be pleasantly surprised. The rest ummm nosogood.....

Would think the other 3 quarters was the worst football of have seen( both teams) in a long long time. Thank god for Richo
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: Tigermonk on June 18, 2008, 07:57:14 AM
well will let you know after l watch it & disect it  ;D
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: richmondrules on June 18, 2008, 03:13:34 PM
How was beating Melbourne 'good'?

Well for a start it's a shitload better than losing.
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: Judge Roughneck on June 18, 2008, 03:18:55 PM
How was beating Melbourne 'good'?

Well for a start it's a poohload better than losing.

Pick #10 is better than pick #3?
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: richmondrules on June 18, 2008, 03:20:51 PM
How was beating Melbourne 'good'?

Well for a start it's a poohload better than losing.

Pick #10 is better than pick #3?

You seriously wanted to lose 11 games in a row? Sorry, that's not for me, I'm a simple soul and I like winning.
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: mightytiges on June 18, 2008, 05:06:36 PM
We won at the Dome for the first time in 2 years  :o. We won playing just 20 mins of good footy. The Dees had pushed the Pies and Hawks to within a couple of kicks in the last few weeks.

If we back up the win this week then we should make $$$ in the 100G at the G game with Blues fans back on the bandwagon after 7 years.
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: Smokey on June 18, 2008, 05:41:46 PM

Pick #10 is better than pick #3?

You got me thinking Bentleigh so I did a bit of checking and it makes interesting reading.  Here is the difference in Pick 3 and Pick 10 from the last 7 drafts (I didn't include 2007 as they are all still too new to be a valid comparison):

06
3 - L. Hansen - 3 games.
10 - N. Brown - 10 games.

05
3 - B. Dowler - 3 games.
10 - S. Hurn - 36 games.

04
3 - T. Williams - 18 games.
10 - M. Bate - 39 games.

03
3 - K. Bradley - 53 games.
10 - B. Stanton - 88 games.

02
3 - J. Brennan - 71 games.
10 - J. Laycock - 50 games.

01
3 - A. Sampi - 78 games.
10 - N. Del Santo - 132 games.

00
3 - D. Smith - 21 games.
10 - A. McGrath - 104 games.

So looking at this, the only year where Pick 10 wasn't better than Pick 3 was in 2002 and players that could have been taken at Pick 10 that year include B. Schammer, D. Bell, T. Selwood, W. Minson, J. Rivers, D. Merrett, B. Staker, A. Selwood and R. Shirley.

Not much of a case for tanking or losing, especially to a side that has more pressing issues with confidence and learning to win games.
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: Fishfinger on June 18, 2008, 05:48:51 PM
Very nice work, smokey.  :)

(Are the pick's from the Phantom Draft, though?)  :-X
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: Tigermonk on June 18, 2008, 06:21:48 PM
watched the game well missed the 1 st quarter & half the 2nd quarter due to customers not taking the hint to get out the door  >:( Tigers went berserk in the 2nd quarter  ;D
last half of game was ok at least good stuff to mention was Polak in the backline taking it on & Tambling looked good & White continues to play well & do the hard running, smothering, & tackling.
Shultzs looked good & Richo playing great.
Melbourne can play some good football & have some very good players & are known to push side
Overall l'm happy with what l seen, its only a matter of time before this Tiger side gives out some punishment & will smash some sides
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: mightytiges on June 18, 2008, 06:28:26 PM
You got me thinking Bentleigh so I did a bit of checking and it makes interesting reading.  Here is the difference in Pick 3 and Pick 10 from the last 7 drafts (I didn't include 2007 as they are all still too new to be a valid comparison):
How did you work out those picks smokey?

2006: 3 - Lachlan Hansen 10 - Nathan Brown
2005: 3 - Xavier Ellis        10 - Marcus Drum
2004: 3 - Ryan Griffen      10 - Chris Egan
2003: 3 - Colin Sylvia       10 - Ryley Dunn
2002: 3 - Jared Brennan   10 - Jason Laycock
2001: 3 - Chris Judd        10 - Sam Power
2000: 3 - Alan Didak        10 - Jordan McMahon
1999: 3 - Aaron Fiora       10 - Luke McPharlin
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: julzqld on June 18, 2008, 07:09:08 PM
A win is always better than losing.
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: Smokey on June 18, 2008, 07:58:13 PM
You got me thinking Bentleigh so I did a bit of checking and it makes interesting reading.  Here is the difference in Pick 3 and Pick 10 from the last 7 drafts (I didn't include 2007 as they are all still too new to be a valid comparison):
How did you work out those picks smokey?

2006: 3 - Lachlan Hansen 10 - Nathan Brown
2005: 3 - Xavier Ellis        10 - Marcus Drum
2004: 3 - Ryan Griffen      10 - Chris Egan
2003: 3 - Colin Sylvia       10 - Ryley Dunn
2002: 3 - Jared Brennan   10 - Jason Laycock
2001: 3 - Chris Judd        10 - Sam Power
2000: 3 - Alan Didak        10 - Jordan McMahon
1999: 3 - Aaron Fiora       10 - Luke McPharlin

Bentleigh's comment was us getting the 3rd pick instead of 10th so just comparing apples to apples.  There are no priority picks this year - it will be a genuine draft so I didn't count priority picks because they are somewhat outside of the scope of the ladder position and might (I didn't check if they did but it doesn't alter the thrust of the point) skew the results.  In other words if we finished 14th (3rd pick)  in each of those years what was the first possible pick and if we finished 7th (10th pick) what was the first possible pick.  I took the 3rd genuine pick and the 10th genuine pick.
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: Judge Roughneck on June 18, 2008, 08:06:28 PM
How was beating Melbourne 'good'?

Well for a start it's a poohload better than losing.

Pick #10 is better than pick #3?

You seriously wanted to lose 11 games in a row? Sorry, that's not for me, I'm a simple soul and I like winning.

The question is - do you want to win a flag (long term success) or winning meaningless games against Melbourne types (short term gain).

Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: Smokey on June 18, 2008, 08:09:07 PM

The question is - do you want to win a flag (long term success) or winning meaningless games against Melbourne types (short term gain).


I think it is more important at this stage of our list's development to learn how to win and gain the confidence and strength that goes with that, regardless of who we beat.
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: Judge Roughneck on June 18, 2008, 08:12:49 PM

Pick #10 is better than pick #3?
05
3 - B. Dowler - 3 games.
10 - S. Hurn - 36 games.

Incorrect.

Xavier Ellis was 3. Dowler 6.

Quote
04
3 - T. Williams - 18 games.
10 - M. Bate - 39 games.

Williams was pick #6, not pick #3. And will be a gun CHB.

Pick #3 was Ryan Griffen. Gun.

Quote
03
3 - K. Bradley - 53 games.
10 - B. Stanton - 88 games.

Bradley was pick #6.

Quote
02
3 - J. Brennan - 71 games.
10 - J. Laycock - 50 games.

Brennan is a gun. Laycock is a hack.

Quote
01
3 - A. Sampi - 78 games.
10 - N. Del Santo - 132 games.

pick #3 was Chris Judd. lol Sampi was #5 or so.

Quote
So looking at this, the only year where Pick 10 wasn't better than Pick 3 was in 2002 and players that could have been taken at Pick 10 that year include B. Schammer, D. Bell, T. Selwood, W. Minson, J. Rivers, D. Merrett, B. Staker, A. Selwood and R. Shirley.

Not much of a case for tanking or losing, especially to a side that has more pressing issues with confidence and learning to win games.

I disagree.

Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: Moi on June 18, 2008, 08:14:31 PM

Pick #10 is better than pick #3?

You got me thinking Bentleigh so I did a bit of checking and it makes interesting reading.  Here is the difference in Pick 3 and Pick 10 from the last 7 drafts (I didn't include 2007 as they are all still too new to be a valid comparison):

06
3 - L. Hansen - 3 games.
10 - N. Brown - 10 games.

05
3 - B. Dowler - 3 games.
10 - S. Hurn - 36 games.

04
3 - T. Williams - 18 games.
10 - M. Bate - 39 games.

03
3 - K. Bradley - 53 games.
10 - B. Stanton - 88 games.

02
3 - J. Brennan - 71 games.
10 - J. Laycock - 50 games.

01
3 - A. Sampi - 78 games.
10 - N. Del Santo - 132 games.

00
3 - D. Smith - 21 games.
10 - A. McGrath - 104 games.

So looking at this, the only year where Pick 10 wasn't better than Pick 3 was in 2002 and players that could have been taken at Pick 10 that year include B. Schammer, D. Bell, T. Selwood, W. Minson, J. Rivers, D. Merrett, B. Staker, A. Selwood and R. Shirley.

Not much of a case for tanking or losing, especially to a side that has more pressing issues with confidence and learning to win games.
Great work, Smokey  :thumbsup
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: Judge Roughneck on June 18, 2008, 08:14:46 PM

The question is - do you want to win a flag (long term success) or winning meaningless games against Melbourne types (short term gain).


I think it is more important at this stage of our list's development to learn how to win and gain the confidence and strength that goes with that, regardless of who we beat.

If we were blooding Connors, Collins types then Id agree. But we are stil playing Hyde and Bowden.
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: Judge Roughneck on June 18, 2008, 08:36:20 PM

Pick #10 is better than pick #3?

You got me thinking Bentleigh so I did a bit of checking and it makes interesting reading.  Here is the difference in Pick 3 and Pick 10 from the last 7 drafts (I didn't include 2007 as they are all still too new to be a valid comparison):

06
3 - L. Hansen - 3 games.
10 - N. Brown - 10 games.

05
3 - B. Dowler - 3 games.
10 - S. Hurn - 36 games.

04
3 - T. Williams - 18 games.
10 - M. Bate - 39 games.

03
3 - K. Bradley - 53 games.
10 - B. Stanton - 88 games.

02
3 - J. Brennan - 71 games.
10 - J. Laycock - 50 games.

01
3 - A. Sampi - 78 games.
10 - N. Del Santo - 132 games.

00
3 - D. Smith - 21 games.
10 - A. McGrath - 104 games.

So looking at this, the only year where Pick 10 wasn't better than Pick 3 was in 2002 and players that could have been taken at Pick 10 that year include B. Schammer, D. Bell, T. Selwood, W. Minson, J. Rivers, D. Merrett, B. Staker, A. Selwood and R. Shirley.

Not much of a case for tanking or losing, especially to a side that has more pressing issues with confidence and learning to win games.
Great work, Smokey  :thumbsup
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: richmondrules on June 18, 2008, 08:54:11 PM
Quote
Quote
Pick #10 is better than pick #3?

You seriously wanted to lose 11 games in a row? Sorry, that's not for me, I'm a simple soul and I like winning.

The question is - do you want to win a flag (long term success) or winning meaningless games against Melbourne types (short term gain).

I don't see why they should be mutually exclusive.
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: Ramps on June 18, 2008, 08:56:35 PM
If Carlton finish with a pick in the pick 8 or pick 9 region, then Richmond will be able to trade for it. Carlton still white hot for Newman. I imagine draft picks will be involved, whether Carlton get another pick or there is a swapping of later round picks i dont know.  ;)
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: Francois Jackson on June 18, 2008, 09:18:08 PM
If Carlton finish with a pick in the pick 8 or pick 9 region, then Richmond will be able to trade for it. Carlton still white hot for Newman. I imagine draft picks will be involved, whether Carlton get another pick or there is a swapping of later round picks i dont know.  ;)

that rumour is gaining some serious momentum.

that combined with the blues need for some mature backman, the fev connection, id say it just might be on the cards.

if a top 10 pick was thrown up should we take it??

id say yes but have we got enough quality back there to fill his spot. not sure we have
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: Ramps on June 18, 2008, 09:23:45 PM
I just put forward what I heard, im not saying that we will trade Newman, I dont know that, all Ive said is that people are saying that Carlton want Newman and at this stage it looks like they will trade for him, as to whether or not we trade with them, thats another question, and I dont have the answer to that.
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: Smokey on June 18, 2008, 09:25:05 PM

If we were blooding Connors, Collins types then Id agree. But we are stil playing Hyde and Bowden.
Yep, fair point.  The only thing I will say to it is that at least they are making them fight hard to earn a spot and that will benefit them in the long run.
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: Ekto on June 18, 2008, 09:28:38 PM
How was beating Melbourne 'good'?

2 more points than we got against the dirty dogs, and 4 more points than we should have got against the weak Saints.

You don't draw pictures on scorecards or ladders, you just post results, especially in a game in which it is vital to win, such as this one against the Demons.
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: Smokey on June 18, 2008, 09:31:25 PM

snipped it all just to respond.


I gave my reasons for listing the picks I did in an earlier post.  Most of these #3's weren't available to the side coming 14th.

Quote
Not much of a case for tanking or losing, especially to a side that has more pressing issues with confidence and learning to win games.
..........
I disagree.

What I like about forums.   :thumbsup :)
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: Tigermonk on June 18, 2008, 10:25:48 PM


I think it is more important at this stage of our list's development to learn how to win and gain the confidence and strength that goes with that, regardless of who we beat.

very important that we win games to lift confidence & moral around the club & among the supporters  :thumbsup
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: Judge Roughneck on June 18, 2008, 11:27:51 PM
Pick #10 is better than pick #3?

I don't see why they should be mutually exclusive.

Due to the system that the AFL is - with the salary cap and drafting system it rewards losing games. top 3 picks are like gold. We are a rebuilding side. It think it is pretty easy to put together.

People talk how good Deledio and Cotchin... often are the same people who are against tanking. Irony IMO.
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: wayne on June 19, 2008, 09:38:55 AM
If Carlton finish with a pick in the pick 8 or pick 9 region, then Richmond will be able to trade for it. Carlton still white hot for Newman. I imagine draft picks will be involved, whether Carlton get another pick or there is a swapping of later round picks i dont know.  ;)

The Blues and the Hawks would be prime teams to raid for high draft picks.

I actually hope Carlton really over-achieve and are a bit careless with their picks, thinking they're not far off and trade them away for a bunch of duds.
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: Francois Jackson on June 19, 2008, 06:09:31 PM
If Carlton finish with a pick in the pick 8 or pick 9 region, then Richmond will be able to trade for it. Carlton still white hot for Newman. I imagine draft picks will be involved, whether Carlton get another pick or there is a swapping of later round picks i dont know.  ;)

The Blues and the Hawks would be prime teams to raid for high draft picks.

I actually hope Carlton really over-achieve and are a bit careless with their picks, thinking they're not far off and trade them away for a bunch of duds.

i think they r still very far off the mark, however only in their defensive area. i believe they have all positions covered except here.

in saying that, fev goes down and its goodbye calrton
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: mightytiges on June 19, 2008, 11:57:58 PM
If Carlton finish with a pick in the pick 8 or pick 9 region, then Richmond will be able to trade for it. Carlton still white hot for Newman. I imagine draft picks will be involved, whether Carlton get another pick or there is a swapping of later round picks i dont know.  ;)

The Blues and the Hawks would be prime teams to raid for high draft picks.

I actually hope Carlton really over-achieve and are a bit careless with their picks, thinking they're not far off and trade them away for a bunch of duds.

i think they r still very far off the mark, however only in their defensive area. i believe they have all positions covered except here.

in saying that, fev goes down and its goodbye calrton
Yep they've got to hope trading away Josh Kennedy doesn't come back to bite them.

I don't see us trading away Newy but let's hope we don't do another Torney trade where we gave away him and traded outside the top 10 giving up pick 4 2 for just one player in return  :P.
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: Judge Roughneck on June 20, 2008, 02:04:20 AM
If Carlton finish with a pick in the pick 8 or pick 9 region, then Richmond will be able to trade for it. Carlton still white hot for Newman. I imagine draft picks will be involved, whether Carlton get another pick or there is a swapping of later round picks i dont know.  ;)

The Blues and the Hawks would be prime teams to raid for high draft picks.

I actually hope Carlton really over-achieve and are a bit careless with their picks, thinking they're not far off and trade them away for a bunch of duds.

i think they r still very far off the mark, however only in their defensive area. i believe they have all positions covered except here.

in saying that, fev goes down and its goodbye calrton
Yep they've got to hope trading away Josh Kennedy doesn't come back to bite them.

Did you see Judds last 1/4 vs the Pies?

I reckon they are pretty safe.
Title: Re: How was beating Melbourne 'good'?
Post by: mightytiges on June 20, 2008, 06:32:03 PM
If Carlton finish with a pick in the pick 8 or pick 9 region, then Richmond will be able to trade for it. Carlton still white hot for Newman. I imagine draft picks will be involved, whether Carlton get another pick or there is a swapping of later round picks i dont know.  ;)

The Blues and the Hawks would be prime teams to raid for high draft picks.

I actually hope Carlton really over-achieve and are a bit careless with their picks, thinking they're not far off and trade them away for a bunch of duds.

i think they r still very far off the mark, however only in their defensive area. i believe they have all positions covered except here.

in saying that, fev goes down and its goodbye calrton
Yep they've got to hope trading away Josh Kennedy doesn't come back to bite them.

Did you see Judds last 1/4 vs the Pies?

I reckon they are pretty safe.
I've never rated Collingwood. An even hardworking side but lacks the class to win a flag. When the Blues start being competitive against the real top sides then they'll get cred. At the moment it's all hype.