"Practice" Matches

[Tiger Spirit]

Each Club handles the pre season their own way.  But I’m getting a bit confused as to the focus and purpose of “practice” matches.

“Everyone wants to see all the star players out there, but they also want to watch a good game of footy.

“What we’ve tried to do with Fremantle is pick a same-type squad, so at least the contest should be reasonable.”  Wallace said.

http://richmondfc.com.au/default.asp?pg=news&spg=display&articleid=188108

It’s a worry if Clubs get to a stage where they feel obliged to do what’s right for the people watching, rather than what’s good for the players and their development.

Maybe some see it differently, but when you go to a practice match I don’t think anyone can expect that it’s going to be like a full on game through a season.  It’s supposed to be about experimenting and trialing.  If Clubs aren’t able to do that in these sorts of games then when can they?

Wallace, adamant he would have gone in almost full-strength if the game was in Melbourne, said the forecast had compromised the club's preparations.

"I'm quite comfortable playing interstate games and taking our blokes where we need to take them, but I'm not comfortable playing in 40 degree heat," Wallace said.

"I know the AFL's dilemma – they can't have any control over the fact it's 41 – but it's very difficult from our side of things when you're trying to get organised."

http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/footy/common/story_page/0,8033,12427114%255E19742,00.html

What’s the real purpose of playing in places such as Alice Springs?  Players aren’t machines.  Would those who scheduled this game go and play in these conditions themselves?

It’s great for the people up there, but because it’s a one-off situation, what long-term benefit can it have?  If the game is regularly televised up there, and around Australia, then giving people consistent and reasonable access to live games makes a difference.

So it seems a bit ridiculous that the AFL sells its tv rights to networks who use their rights to benefit themselves, rather than the game.  And it seems a joke when players are expected to go and play in unbelievable conditions to spread the AFL-word when the AFL doesn’t seem to be doing their bit properly.

After losing to Carlton in the first round – with a below-best line-up – Essendon was required to play at Morwell, Carrara in Brisbane this weekend, and then Bendigo the following Friday night.

"I don't mind people criticising me, and if they want me to get my gun and put my helmet on, I will go do it again. I will go to war with everyone," he said.

"But when they bitch about not taking a great team to Morwell . . . they don't understand the whole picture. It's not a protest by me, it's just commonsense. I'm here to protect the players from the workload.

"All I'm doing is working out a system the AFL has thrust upon us."

He said families, player welfare and the opportunity for young players had to be considered over the pre-season.

"My job is not to burn the players, it's to get them through and prepare what I hope will be the next best six players coming on," he said.

"How you go about it isn't going to be pleasing to everybody, but that's my job."

http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/footy/common/story_page/0,8033,12417604%255E20322,00.html

Once outside influences start affecting Clubs in their preparation then someone needs to have a good look at what’s going on.  Doesn’t seem to me like the AFL has a handle on things, or even cares.  Lucky for those Clubs who have coaches who do know what’s going on and stick to their own agenda, rather than everyone else’s.

[mightytiges]

It’s a worry if Clubs get to a stage where they feel obliged to do what’s right for the people watching, rather than what’s good for the players and their development.

Maybe some see it differently, but when you go to a practice match I don’t think anyone can expect that it’s going to be like a full on game through a season.  It’s supposed to be about experimenting and trialing.  If Clubs aren’t able to do that in these sorts of games then when can they?

I agree with what you say TS but after the last couple of years supporters will want to see signs early on that we'll be competitive and play a style of footy that doesn't send you to sleep. From a membership and marketing perspective we need to show we've changed from last year so undecided and/or disenchanted supporters jump (back) on board.

What’s the real purpose of playing in places such as Alice Springs?  Players aren’t machines.  Would those who scheduled this game go and play in these conditions themselves?

It’s great for the people up there, but because it’s a one-off situation, what long-term benefit can it have?  If the game is regularly televised up there, and around Australia, then giving people consistent and reasonable access to live games makes a difference.

So it seems a bit ridiculous that the AFL sells its tv rights to networks who use their rights to benefit themselves, rather than the game.  And it seems a joke when players are expected to go and play in unbelievable conditions to spread the AFL-word when the AFL doesn’t seem to be doing their bit properly.

Unless we play practice matches in Alice Springs each pre-season and so build up a support base through visits from players to schools ad alike (like another community camp) then there's no real benefit to the Club. Really the only way to avoid this is to win our Wizz Cup games.

As for the tv rights we know the AFL sold them to the highest bidder rather than what was best to promote the game around the country. I know I harp on about the AFL websites under Telstra but you just need to look at Bomberland to see how a Club website should be run. Guess which site had full highlights of the Morwell game - bombers.tv.  The Telstra ones are run for the benefit of Telstra not the game. Remember also that Telstra is the major sponsor of the NRL. 

Once outside influences start affecting Clubs in their preparation then someone needs to have a good look at what’s going on.  Doesn’t seem to me like the AFL has a handle on things, or even cares.  Lucky for those Clubs who have coaches who do know what’s going on and stick to their own agenda, rather than everyone else’s.

Clubs that carry weight can stick to their own agenda. We've lost that in many respects being crap for the last 20 years - reduce number of MCG and friday night games an example. It didn't help either that our former coach's gameplan combined with skills that would put the little leaguers to shame were a cure for insomnia. Once we show we are once again good value to come and watch then the crowds will come and tv ratings will go up and we as a Club will have something to barter the AFL head honchos with.   

[Tiger Spirit]

I agree with what you say TS but after the last couple of years supporters will want to see signs early on that we'll be competitive and play a style of footy that doesn't send you to sleep. From a membership and marketing perspective we need to show we've changed from last year so undecided and/or disenchanted supporters jump (back) on board.

I know what you’re saying MT and if it’s a one-off situation that’s one thing, but couldn’t we do that through the season?

Money seems to be the driving force behind just about every decision Clubs and the AFL make.  While that seems logical, it’s also dumb.  When does player welfare and what’s good for the game come into consideration?

Clubs who don’t need the money are able to use practice matches in the way they are intended and, in the long run, they benefit because of that.  But not so other Clubs, who seemingly push their players from beginning to end, not because they necessarily want to but because they think they have to, for financial reasons.

It’s this sort of mentality that keeps struggling Clubs struggling.  How and when do those Clubs get to a stage of not needing to use practice matches as a marketing tool?

It may never happen for some.  So, in the interests of player welfare, wouldn’t Clubs be better served by doing what’s in the best long-term interests of players?  Without them they have nothing much to market themselves with.

Unless we play practice matches in Alice Springs each pre-season and so build up a support base through visits from players to schools ad alike (like another community camp) then there's no real benefit to the Club. Really the only way to avoid this is to win our Wizz Cup games.

I don’t begrudge other regions from getting games, good luck to them.  I just don’t understand some of the conditions that the AFL is prepared to subject players to.  In order to develop and maintain relations with various regions, do Clubs actually need to play games there?  Wouldn’t visits and community camps be just as effective, if not moreso, because people get the opportunity to meet and interact with players?  It’s hard to understand the AFL’s logic, if you can call it that, at times.

Clubs that carry weight can stick to their own agenda.

Do you need to be a successful team before you can set your own agenda and how do you get to set your own agenda if you’re always following someone else’s?  That I don’t understand.

It’s a worry when Clubs do things not because they want to, but because they have to.  And it’s that small-time mentality that keeps some Clubs struggling.  At what point do some think they can follow the guidelines of a successful Club?  And how do some of them expect to get to where they are going if they are prepared to deviate from their own plans, at the first sign of pressure or resistance and make decisions solely based on financial reasons?  Where and when does developing a successful team come into the equation?

[mightytiges]

From a Tiges point of view we have the ability (when we aren't our own worst enemy for 20 years) to get out of this situation of doing things because we have to since we have a large supporter base that will get behind us and generate it's own momentum when the wins come along. That's not to say we are immune from disaster (as the late 80s and last year showed) but when Richmond has been successful in the past over a number of years we don't just one of the big clubs we become the biggest club in terms of attendances etc.. It's up to us to get ourselves on track which although very early days looks to be finally the case now. Other clubs like the Dogs and Dees will constantly have to keep one eye on the finances in every football decision they make no matter where they finish on the ladder. A sad reality of modern day footy for a number of Vic clubs.

[julzqld]

Have to laugh.  Sheeds finally brings out the "big guns" in Hird and Lloyd for the clash against Brisbane up here on the weekend after rubbishing the practice games scenario.  And the Lions, missing Voss, Power and quite a few others soundly defeat the Bummers.

Beat he'll blame the humidity.

[Tiger Spirit]

Other clubs like the Dogs and Dees will constantly have to keep one eye on the finances in every football decision they make no matter where they finish on the ladder. A sad reality of modern day footy for a number of Vic clubs.

The thing with these Clubs is that they’re always trying to get to where they will never get to.  If that makes sense?  Their quick fixes don’t just stop with practice games and pre seasons comps.

Because of their financial situation, Laidley, or someone there, seems to have decided that the Roos have to be in contention for a finals berth each season, so is prepared to fill gaps in his list by drafting ready made players from other Clubs, ala the Swans, rather than developing all their own players.  Hasn’t worked for the Swans so far.

Wonder how Pagan managed at the Kangaroos in his time?  They even made a loss during a Premiership year under him, so I don’t know how much financial constraints had to do with his coaching methods, same with Matthews at Brisbane.  For over a decade Pagan was able to work around such things and still get a very competitive team out on the ground for most of his time there.  No doubt, he’ll gradually be able to do the same thing at the Blues.

Getting back to my original point about practice matches, the way some Clubs use them and the pre season comp says something about where Clubs are at.  And if Clubs don’t have their act together then short-term fixes don’t help or solve anything.

In our case, RFC has used pre season games to sign members, only for reality to hit during the season.  You have to wonder how much harder it has made the job of getting more members as the years go by, because we’ve never lived up to the pre season hype in the past?

Wouldn’t it be better for Clubs to use practice and pre season games in the way they are intended, rather than fill supporters with false hope, as we have done so many times?

[mightytiges]

The thing with these Clubs is that they’re always trying to get to where they will never get to.  If that makes sense?  Their quick fixes don’t just stop with practice games and pre seasons comps.

That's true in poorer clubs' cases TS. Unfortunately our quick fixes were our own acts of stupidity  . IMHO our financial woes over the past 25 years have mostly come as a result of our obsessed quest for quick fixes rather than other way around.

Agree TS that club's should use practice games as they are intended for. I would say we've been better this year using these games in preparing for the season ahead. We took the Wiz Cup seriously but so did Port Adelaide and a number of top clubs in their first game so nothing wrong with that. Pre-season training has revolved around cementing the new free-flowing gameplan and last week we played a number of kids in Alice Springs. This Saturday being the last practice match we're going to give the round 1 squad a final testing run as we should. The Morwell game was mickey mouse because Sheeds trialed a reserves side but it wasn't a complete waste of time as we got a good chance to work on our gameplan as well as build confidence through winning well.   

Because of their financial situation, Laidley, or someone there, seems to have decided that the Roos have to be in contention for a finals berth each season, so is prepared to fill gaps in his list by drafting ready made players from other Clubs, ala the Swans, rather than developing all their own players.  Hasn’t worked for the Swans so far.

Wonder how Pagan managed at the Kangaroos in his time?  They even made a loss during a Premiership year under him, so I don’t know how much financial constraints had to do with his coaching methods, same with Matthews at Brisbane.  For over a decade Pagan was able to work around such things and still get a very competitive team out on the ground for most of his time there.  No doubt, he’ll gradually be able to do the same thing at the Blues.

The Roos now get something like $1.5m from the competitive balance fund so that keeps them afloat each year. They made a "profit" in 2004 when you include the CBF and as a result have be able to increase their TPP this year from 94% to 98% (their paying their list now alot more $ than we are). So financial constraints won't be an excuse if they remain in mediocrity. It'll be Laidley's fault for throwing away top drafts picks which only leads to disaster as we know all too well.

In Pagan's time (1993) he was able to bring through the crop he coached at U19 level where North made the U19 GF virtually every year. So he could further develop and mould the group of talented kids (Carey and co) who had already grown up playing together and loved playing for him. Pagan as we've seen again at Carlton is also excellent at reviving careers of (cheap) discarded players from other clubs. IMO that's why North's financial problems didn't effect their on-field performances through the 90's.

The Tiges had pretty good U19 sides then as well (premiers 85,89 - R/U 87) but we never bothered to give the coach Doug Searl a chance to coach his former young players such as Knighter at senior level. Coming from Fitzroy I'd guess RFC club politics would have stopped it from happening anyway  .

Just back on our TPP. I remember hearing a rumour a month or so ago that if Cambo retires at the end of year that will takes us below the minimum TPP which would mean we would have to chase a high profile player(s) to stay above the minimum in 2006. Don't know if this is correct but the rumour also said that was so because we can't pay our kids any more next year as they are already on 2 year base draftee contracts which don't expire til the following year.

[JohnF]

Just back on our TPP. I remember hearing a rumour a month or so ago that if Cambo retires at the end of year that will takes us below the minimum TPP which would mean we would have to chase a high profile player(s) to stay above the minimum in 2006. Don't know if this is correct but the rumour also said that was so because we can't pay our kids any more next year as they are already on 2 year base draftee contracts which don't expire til the following year.

Damn... I guess Cambo will just have to play on then 

[Tiger Spirit]

Agree TS that club's should use practice games as they are intended for. I would say we've been better this year using these games in preparing for the season ahead. We took the Wiz Cup seriously but so did Port Adelaide and a number of top clubs in their first game so nothing wrong with that. Pre-season training has revolved around cementing the new free-flowing gameplan and last week we played a number of kids in Alice Springs. This Saturday being the last practice match we're going to give the round 1 squad a final testing run as we should. The Morwell game was mickey mouse because Sheeds trialed a reserves side but it wasn't a complete waste of time as we got a good chance to work on our gameplan as well as build confidence through winning well.

Have to agree with you there MT, which has been good to hear.

It just seems that some clubs use the pre season mainly as a marketing exercise, rather than what it’s intended for.  It’s been happening for years and it’ll probably continue to happen.

I know it’s happened with RFC over the years where we’ve had a reasonable pre season, whatever that means, and had expectations built up, only to be hit with reality in the first 2-5 weeks of the season.  Because I’ve seen us go through that so many times, when you see other Clubs making the same mistakes we’ve made over the years you just wonder why.

This pre season, there have even been instances where supporters, and maybe others, expected pre season games to be something other than a time to trial and experiment with players and game style.  When Coaches seem to worry more about the value supporters get from a trial game than the players do you wonder what’s going on.  And that’s my main concern.

The Roos now get something like $1.5m from the competitive balance fund so that keeps them afloat each year. They made a "profit" in 2004 when you include the CBF and as a result have be able to increase their TPP this year from 94% to 98% (their paying their list now alot more $ than we are). So financial constraints won't be an excuse if they remain in mediocrity. It'll be Laidley's fault for throwing away top drafts picks which only leads to disaster as we know all too well.

If any Club has a coach that knows what he’s doing then I just don’t reckon that financial constraints can be the big issue that some seem to think they are, as Pagan showed at the Roos.  Pagan concerns himself with developing his players and mainly leaves the marketing to someone else.

Sheedy’s the opposite and that works for him.  But in their own way, both are more about what’s good for the players.  The benefit for supporters comes from their coaching methods.  Don’t see what the real benefit for supporters of ‘unsuccessful’ Clubs is when all they are being sold is ‘hope’, mainly based on a ‘good’ pre season, which is about all we’ve had going for us.  As opposed to supporters of those Clubs who just expect a competitive team, if nothing else, regardless of how they perform through any pre season games.

In Pagan's time (1993) he was able to bring through the crop he coached at U19 level where North made the U19 GF virtually every year. So he could further develop and mould the group of talented kids (Carey and co) who had already grown up playing together and loved playing for him. Pagan as we've seen again at Carlton is also excellent at reviving careers of (cheap) discarded players from other clubs. IMO that's why North's financial problems didn't effect their on-field performances through the 90's.

The Tiges had pretty good U19 sides then as well (premiers 85,89 - R/U 87) but we never bothered to give the coach Doug Searl a chance to coach his former young players such as Knighter at senior level. Coming from Fitzroy I'd guess RFC club politics would have stopped it from happening anyway .

Just shows the difference in mentality when one Club went on to a successful decade and the other is still trying to keep its head above water.

Just back on our TPP. I remember hearing a rumour a month or so ago that if Cambo retires at the end of year that will takes us below the minimum TPP which would mean we would have to chase a high profile player(s) to stay above the minimum in 2006. Don't know if this is correct but the rumour also said that was so because we can't pay our kids any more next year as they are already on 2 year base draftee contracts which don't expire til the following year.

Seems a bit ridiculous to think that just when it looks like the days of inflated contracts are a thing of the past we’ll now have to go find someone to ‘over pay’.  I see why it could be that way, but it just don’t make sense.

[mightytiges]

I know it’s happened with RFC over the years where we’ve had a reasonable pre season, whatever that means, and had expectations built up, only to be hit with reality in the first 2-5 weeks of the season.  Because I’ve seen us go through that so many times, when you see other Clubs making the same mistakes we’ve made over the years you just wonder why.

The Club got away with this because after 1995 supporters were still hoping the same core group from that time would deliver success. Our supporters are more skeptical now. They've had their collective hearts broken too many times over the past decade to fall for false dawns and big hand-wavey promises (one of the reasons the alternative lost the election IMO). Problem is those that would take our membership well over 30,000 IMO will want to see success that real and long-lasting not just hope. Heading down the youth path is the right way to go and what was needed but that won't turn into more members and $$$ until we start winning games.   

It seems clubs that haven't won a flag in a long time are the ones that need to offer hope to their supporters so they stay on board. Even though we haven't won anything in 25 years there are other clubs who are up to 40, 50 and in the Swans case 70 years without a premiership to show for.   

Seems a bit ridiculous to think that just when it looks like the days of inflated contracts are a thing of the past we’ll now have to go find someone to ‘over pay’.  I see why it could be that way, but it just don’t make sense.

I don't think they meant overpay TS. Rather if there's an out of contract players or a homesick Victorian at the end of this season who's willing to switch clubs for a reasonable market price then they will most likely be wearing a Richmond guernsey in 2006.

LOL @ John. We can't get rid of the old man. First VFL/AFL footballer to be on the old age pension  .