Richmond Tigers' heartbreak not Damien Hardwick's faultRohan Connolly
The Age
21 May 2017 5:00pmIt's not just comprehensive defeat which makes supporters of a losing club turn on a coach. Obvious blunders in the dying seconds of a close game, replayed as evidence of a tactical flaw or a message not getting through, can also do the trick.
Richmond have now had two such moments in consecutive weeks straight from the textbook of botched set plays. And predictably, the Tiger army has Damien Hardwick in the gun.
On Saturday night, after what appeared to be a match-sealing goal from Shai Bolton was overturned, GWS' Nathan Wilson took the kick-in. There were three Richmond players in the vicinity to the Giants' one, an unnecessary man spare, yet Wilson was still allowed to play on and gain an extra 10 metres on his speculative long bomb.
That kick went to a centre-square contest which saw the Giants' Phil Davis punch the ball another 20 metres in his team's direction. Toby Nankervis, one-out against two opponents, was bumped off his pursuit of the ball by Jeremy Cameron, who received the handball and goaled after Shane Mumford took possession.
As Cameron kicked from the 50-metre arc, there were five GWS players around the ball to Richmond's two, and only a one-on-one inside the 50. Cameron could actually have kept running, drawn the final Tiger and popped a handball over the top for a "Joe the goose".
Why Richmond hadn't lined up with a wall across the back of the centre square to meet the oncoming GWS tide, why that extra man loitered around the kick-in, and why the 80 seconds that elapsed between Bolton's "goal" and the kick-in wasn't long enough for the Tigers to get organised, particularly after conceding a goal with 21 seconds left on the clock last week, is anyone's guess.
But to what extent is that Hardwick's fault? To what extent is it the fault of the players? Or both? Opinions were split in the SEN box on Sunday, Kevin Bartlett calling it a coaching issue, Nick Dal Santo putting the heat squarely on the senior players.
I tend more towards the latter view. Whatever breakdown in communication this time, given what had happened a week previously, should the Tigers' on-field generals have needed a message from the box?
With the long bomb down the middle the Giants' only way of salvaging a win, could not skipper Trent Cotchin, his vice-captains Jack Riewoldt and Alex Rance, or one of the Tigers' other six 100-games-plus players, have organised a defensive wall along the back end of the centre square in the 80 seconds available?
But even if you did blame Hardwick and the rest of the coaching box, can you really, seriously argue his message isn't getting through?
There's no evidence of that in what we've seen from Richmond so far this season, beyond even the fact the Tigers still have a 5-4 record, have been within 13 points of making that 8-1, and have lost to two flag favourites by less than a kick.
The Tigers have this year changed their game more dramatically than perhaps any other side, dispensing with much of the meaningless uncontested possession and keepings-off across half-back which blunted any effectiveness, becoming instead the longest-kicking team in the AFL.
They're still scoring two goals per game more than they did last year with fewer inside 50 entries. And they're No.1 for contested ball percentage, a habitual weakness in recent years, so much so that over the previous four seasons, which have taken in three finals appearances, their equivalent ranking in that category has been only 16th, 11th, ninth and last year 13th.
Could a coach elicit that degree of improvement making such fundamental changes to the way his side was playing if he wasn't getting the message across?
As spectacular as have been a number of Richmond disasters under Hardwick, their record in tight finishes is actually better than a lot presume. Of 28 games decided by under 10 points in his eight-season reign, the Tigers have won 11, lost 15 and drawn two. That hardly screams a debacle.
What Saturday night's disaster does make you wonder is how instinctive the game is for many Richmond players. As Dal Santo pointed out on Sunday, there's still a big difference between rehearsing such game scenarios and enacting them under actual match pressure. Indeed, Cotchin conceded after the game that the "goal" which became a point may have thrown the Tigers a little too much for the next set-up.
Instinct is an important leadership attribute. It means the on-field generals can not only read game scenarios quickly and marshal the troops accordingly, but anticipate a gathering storm and react in time to save the day.
That's been a problem for the Tigers for a while. But it's not one even the best coach can necessarily do much about.
Sheeting all the blame home to Hardwick supposes that this Richmond side should be performing a lot better than it is. But is that the case? I actually think they've done pretty well thus far with what they've got. And that opinion hasn't changed in the past fortnight, no matter how heartbreaking the last two losses have been for the fans.
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/richmond-tigers-heartbreak-not-damien-hardwicks-fault-20170521-gw9qd9.html
