Author Topic: How did you rate the trade period from the Richmond FC  (Read 5084 times)

Rampstar

  • Guest
How did you rate the trade period from the Richmond FC
« on: October 16, 2014, 02:33:10 PM »
My grade

0/10

Absolutely ZERO, ZILCH, NOTHING!

that's all they deserve

and coming after last years Shaun Hampson fiasco where they deserved to get say

1/10

that makes it 1 out of 20 over 2 years

and that means it was a total and comprehensive failure.

They didn't do any work at all during the last 12 months. ZERO! They will claim they did plenty and they will make up excuses like Trengove failed a medical. Big Deal. Richmonds football staff probably only did about 2% of that, the rest was done by doctors, radiographers etc etc. Its all a load of crap.

2 years running they have failed and that begs the question

What the Fk do we pay them for? Why do members and sponsors put in money? To do what? These people at Richmond aren't good enough. Tiger Fighting Fund - lol. What a joke and the joke is on the members who give there hard earned for people to get big 6 figure salaries to do stuff all.

I wont be a member until these hacks leave the club. If it was good enough for KB its good enough for me. Why should I give these people my hard earned? They don't deserve poo.

 

Offline Diocletian

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 19434
  • RWNJ / Leftist Snowflake - depends who you ask....
Re: How did you rate the trade period from the Richmond FC
« Reply #1 on: October 16, 2014, 02:36:40 PM »
n/a
"Much of the social history of the Western world, over the past three decades, has been a history of replacing what worked with what sounded good...."

- Thomas Sowell


FJ is the only one that makes sense.

Offline (•))(©™

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 8410
  • Dimalaka
Re: How did you rate the trade period from the Richmond FC
« Reply #2 on: October 16, 2014, 02:41:13 PM »
My grade

0/10

Absolutely ZERO, ZILCH, NOTHING!

that's all they deserve

and coming after last years Shaun Hampson fiasco where they deserved to get say

1/10

that makes it 1 out of 20 over 2 years

and that means it was a total and comprehensive failure.

They didn't do any work at all during the last 12 months. ZERO! They will claim they did plenty and they will make up excuses like Trengove failed a medical. Big Deal. Richmonds football staff probably only did about 2% of that, the rest was done by doctors, radiographers etc etc. Its all a load of crap.

2 years running they have failed and that begs the question

What the Fk do we pay them for? Why do members and sponsors put in money? To do what? These people at Richmond aren't good enough. Tiger Fighting Fund - lol. What a joke and the joke is on the members who give there hard earned for people to get big 6 figure salaries to do stuff all.

I wont be a member until these hacks leave the club. If it was good enough for KB its good enough for me. Why should I give these people my hard earned? They don't deserve poo.

X2

idiot of a club.
Joke of a club.
Total bullshitter of a club.

Caracella and Balmey.

Offline Phil Mrakov

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 8213
  • They said I could be anything so I became Phil
Re: How did you rate the trade period from the Richmond FC
« Reply #3 on: October 16, 2014, 02:46:46 PM »
0
hhhaaarrgghhh hhhhaaarrggghhh hhhhaaaarrrggghh
HHAAARRRGGGHHHH HHHHAAARRRGGGHHHH HHHHHAAAAARRRRGGGGGHHHHH

Offline cub

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 7359
  • "Tigertime!"
    • bantigertrade
Re: How did you rate the trade period from the Richmond FC
« Reply #4 on: October 16, 2014, 02:47:26 PM »
Not too fussed, not much around. Draft is supposed to be pretty deep this year.
Would like to see us chase a gun though!

Offline Judge Roughneck

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 11132
  • Sir
Re: How did you rate the trade period from the Richmond FC
« Reply #5 on: October 16, 2014, 02:49:36 PM »
Not too fussed, not much around. Draft is supposed to be pretty deep this year.
Would like to see us chase a gun though!

Not much around?
 :o

Offline YellowandBlackBlood

  • Long suffering….
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 10688
OER. Calling it as it is since 2004.

Offline Phil Mrakov

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 8213
  • They said I could be anything so I became Phil
hhhaaarrgghhh hhhhaaarrggghhh hhhhaaaarrrggghh
HHAAARRRGGGHHHH HHHHAAARRRGGGHHHH HHHHHAAAAARRRRGGGGGHHHHH

Offline Judge Roughneck

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 11132
  • Sir
Re: How did you rate the trade period from the Richmond FC
« Reply #8 on: October 16, 2014, 03:00:21 PM »
Amazing they didn't trade player/s out for better draft position. More so whe stanley is a pick 20 - Every club has a good young list more or less. We seems to not have a point of difference. going to be hard to be in the flag on the back of picks 50 / 70.  Given the timing of the resigning announcing, I assume Elton dea, Bach , mcdonurs were those put on the table. Not bold or inspiring enough for my liking
« Last Edit: October 16, 2014, 03:16:06 PM by Judge Roughneck »

Offline pmac21

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 4668
Re: How did you rate the trade period from the Richmond FC
« Reply #9 on: October 16, 2014, 03:03:46 PM »
I'm glad it's all over. Goes for too long and Barrett & Wallace really bug me with their interpretations of lists and trades. 

What happened to the days where you woke up and found out you had a new recruit??

Offline Tiger Tragic

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 986
Re: How did you rate the trade period from the Richmond FC
« Reply #10 on: October 16, 2014, 03:04:42 PM »
1/10

lacked imagination.  I give a point for at least not trading for that lemon Trengove and the due diligence done there.

Offline Yeahright

  • Moderator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 9394
Re: How did you rate the trade period from the Richmond FC
« Reply #11 on: October 16, 2014, 03:17:50 PM »
My grade

0/10

and coming after last years Shaun Hampson fiasco where they deserved to get say

1/10

This for me shows the ignorance of some people on this forum when it comes to trades (including free agency). All some people want is for them to do anything even if it is to the detriment of the club and trade for the sake of trading. Yes you must look around and see what's on offer and try and get a deal done (who knows whether Richmond did this) but you don't trade just for the sake of it. At least this year we have our draft picks in tact but last year we made a major stuff up and lost our 2nd round pick AND picked up a dud yet they get a higher rating? Please.

This year 3/10 due to no stuff ups
Last year 0/10 for a major stuff up

Offline Dice

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 1357
Re: How did you rate the trade period from the Richmond FC
« Reply #12 on: October 16, 2014, 03:20:04 PM »
Let's hope we start our trade period for 2016 over this summer.
RFC officials need to be heading over to Adelaide in the coming months to get Dangerfield to sign up for 2016.
 If they miss him then they go after the next gun free agent. Then head up to Sydney and get a verbal agreement from one of J.Cameron , Treloar , Hoskin-Elliot or Shiel.
 Get proactive and bloody well get it done !

 That's the only way I'll forgive them for the Hampson stuff up and the inactivity of this year.
Tanking has put the club where it's at - Paul Roos

Rampstar

  • Guest
Re: How did you rate the trade period from the Richmond FC
« Reply #13 on: October 16, 2014, 03:33:41 PM »
My grade

0/10

and coming after last years Shaun Hampson fiasco where they deserved to get say

1/10

This for me shows the ignorance of some people on this forum when it comes to trades (including free agency). All some people want is for them to do anything even if it is to the detriment of the club and trade for the sake of trading. Yes you must look around and see what's on offer and try and get a deal done (who knows whether Richmond did this) but you don't trade just for the sake of it. At least this year we have our draft picks in tact but last year we made a major stuff up and lost our 2nd round pick AND picked up a dud yet they get a higher rating? Please.

This year 3/10 due to no stuff ups
Last year 0/10 for a major stuff up

I gave them 1/10 last year coz they actually tried something, the result was bad but at least they had a go - not much of a go but a go nevertheless.  This year has resulted in nothing. My grading is actually a grading over 2 years = was 1/20 your grading over 2 years was 3/20. Anyway we cut it, the last two years have been nothing short of an abysmal failure.

Offline Yeahright

  • Moderator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 9394
Re: How did you rate the trade period from the Richmond FC
« Reply #14 on: October 16, 2014, 04:06:23 PM »
Yep either way we should be at least trying to do better. Seemed we were never contenders for anyone and if we were mentioned and someone else was, we'd pull out of the race.