Richmond's forward issues a familiar tale (Age)

[one-eyed]

Richmond's forward issues a familiar tale

Rohan Connolly
The Age
April 14, 2015


Midway through this year's NAB Challenge series, Richmond coach Damien Hardwick conceded the dramatic contrast between the Tigers' first and second halves of season 2014 made it difficult even for him and his coaching panel to assess exactly where his side stood.

"You look at the win-loss and it says 12-10," he said. "If that was spread evenly across the course of the year rather than winning nine in a row on the way home, would it look different? I think it probably would."

Another insider was more blunt. "Look, we're not as good as nine in a row, but we're also a lot better than a 3-10 start, too."

The task for Richmond this year was, among other things, to perhaps trade in a few of the spectacular highs for some less devastating lows. Which might have happened to an extent already in 2015, but not in a way the Tigers would like.

Their first-round win over Carlton got the job done, but wasn't the sort of victory that fills season highlights tapes. Last Saturday's loss to the Western Bulldogs, meanwhile, was by no means a shellacking, but nevertheless a game any self-respecting top-order team would expect to win.

So what happened to the Tigers? What has tended to happen in many of their losses over the past couple of years. Despite plenty of work on the flaws: over-possession, slow ball movement and inefficiency going forward.

Richmond had 403 disposals on Saturday, close to 100 more than their opponents, 54 inside 50s, six more than the Bulldogs, and took 17 marks inside the attacking zone to the Dogs' seven, for the grand total of just nine goals.

It's not like the Tigers haven't been aware of the issues. "We're probably one of the better sides at controlling the ball," Hardwick said back in March. "What we weren't great at last year was the ability to finish off inside 50, which is something we've really worked on this pre-season."

But you have to say the results of that diligence haven't been immediately apparent. Even in a defensive sense, the Richmond forward line is still a problem.

On Saturday, it was unable to exert enough pressure to lock the ball in and prevent easy access out for the Bulldogs, who were able to conjure enough easy, open goals from running players and small forwards on transition despite having key targets Tom Boyd and Ayce Cordy both soundly beaten.

Hardwick wasn't slow to point out after the loss the damning inside-50 stats of just five tackles and only three loose-ball gets. Figures that may have looked better had Jake King still been part of the equation.

King played only two senior games in his final season last year, but the Tigers are yet to really replace his defensive pressure and crumbing ability, hence the experiment with regular defender Steve Morris up forward in 2015.

And it made the absence of both the suspended Brett Deledio and another handy crumber in Shane Edwards, a late withdrawal, more costly still.

Deledio has, in fact, become something of a barometer for the Tigers. Saturday's game was only the fifth he had missed since 2007. Richmond have lost four of those and their one win in his absence was against a hardly intimidating Brisbane.

Does Richmond still have an issue with depth? Former coach Terry Wallace thinks so. "I don't think they bat deep enough," Wallace said on SEN on Monday. "I think they've got maybe four or five guys in that line-up at the moment that are very good VFL players and only average when they hit the big league. They're sort of stuck in between and can't really impact games in the AFL."

Perhaps the lack of Deledio and Edwards, in particular, made the Tigers further afield more cautious about bombing the ball in, but their propensity to go this way and that looking for a safer option simply made the Bulldogs' defensive task easier.

Deledio, along with key forward Ben Griffiths, bobs up in another interesting Richmond statistic. While the scoreboard impact of the likes of Jack Riewoldt and Dustin Martin has dropped marginally in the Tigers' losses over the past two-and-a-bit seasons, that of Deledio and Griffiths has plummeted by around 50 per cent.

Which meant Griffiths' 1.1 on Saturday, with all those other factors stacking up against Hardwick in the coaching box, might well have been the final nail in the Tiger coffin.

Right now, it's not a disaster. On Saturday night, Richmond take on the out-of-sorts Brisbane at the Gabba, where they have won their past half-dozen games. Then comes Melbourne, so two very winnable assignments.

Fix the aimless meandering forward and convert better and Hardwick's side will be at short-odds in both games. But another recurrence of a familiar problem and even the Tigers themselves will again be left pondering just how good they really are.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/richmonds-forward-issues-a-familiar-tale-20150413-1mk6cx.html

[lamington]

Unleash Knights. problem solved.

[the claw]

while rohan connolly is right about the fwd line there are plenty points in that article that is wrong.

he talks about jake king as if he was a success. jake was part of the problem he just performed at a slightly higher level to what we have now. jake didnt kick lots of goals he went at less than a goal a game and he certainly wasnt a huge  tackler under 3 a game ffs good small fwds are laying  100 a yr or more. finally jake was hardly polished or a good finisher. he played 100 games because we had no one better and didnt look like finding anyone better that in itself should be an indictment on those imbeciles in charge.

even in 2013 supposedly hardwicks best season we were riewoldt reliant and poor defensively in the fwd 50. how can connolly talk about it going backwards its never been good.

griffiths scoring impact plummeting the last two and a bit seasons,lol.   hes kicked 20 goals in his career.12 of which were last yr. hes never ever really impacted the scoreboard for it to go backwards.
similar for deledio bretts best was 28 in 2008, his next best yrs are 21 21, and 20 which he kicked last yr. hardly plummeted.

ah bugger it ive gotta stop reading these articles they are so poorly done and meaningless.

[lamington]

I'm willing to cut Jake a bit of slack because he was played out of position for a significant part of his career. He did average more than a goal a game in 2011, and 2013. As for tackling, I agree that Jake King didn't exactly set the world on fire with his tackling stats but if you look at other successful small forwards like Ballantyne or Betts, they barely crack 3 tackles a match also.

It's all speculative now but I think had king played as a forward a lot earlier in his career he would be a significantly better goal sneak. He's by no means Cyril Rioli but he did have a few tricks up his sleeve and could kick the odd left foot banana etc.

I think the thing with forwards is you need to be competent enough so the opposition is threatened/respect you. Bar Jack Riewoldt, no other forward is respected and as such he always gets double/triple teamed.

Fremantle do well because if you double team Pavlich, Ballantyne can snag a goal. You double team Roughead you have Gunston or Breust. Port have Westhoff and Schulz and so forth

Ben Griffith is building on his game and I think RFC persevering with him will pay off. Ultimately what I think would be for the best is getting a midfield good enough that Shane Edwards can play PERMANENTLY as a small forward as he is good in close and his 'quick hands' and reflexes is what we need in the F50

[the claw]

to me our problem is we find an okay player and we stop. we do this with most roles within the team. jake king was an okay player but he was not the answer.
we needed to be aiming for much more but have never really ever looked to do this once we have found that okay play. last yr sam lloyd an okay type fills a hole short term but we stop content with what we have. the fwd line doesnt function well we are one player centric lloyd has obvious deficiencies and we do very little we are content thinking we have the players.

last yr melboiurne didnt have a good sml fwdjust like we didnt.yet they played a young fella who has the attributes to be a good one in kennedy harris. they then went out got a good one in garlett as soon as he was available. a battling club has shot way past us in the blink of an eye.

we must look for better. we must give a kid like butler games he has good attributes for the role. we then need to go out and look to do better than lloyd. we must treat players like lloyd as a stop gap we must look to upgrade at all times.

im trying to find a way to say this coherently but it will probably come across as mumbo jumbo.

[crannyvegas]

to me our problem is we find an okay player and we stop. we do this with most roles within the team. jake king was an okay player but he was not the answer.
we needed to be aiming for much more but have never really ever looked to do this once we have found that okay play. last yr sam lloyd an okay type fills a hole short term but we stop content with what we have. the fwd line doesnt function well we are one player centric lloyd has obvious deficiencies and we do very little we are content thinking we have the players.

last yr melboiurne didnt have a good sml fwdjust like we didnt.yet they played a young fella who has the attributes to be a good one in kennedy harris. they then went out got a good one in garlett as soon as he was available. a battling club has shot way past us in the blink of an eye.

we must look for better. we must give a kid like butler games he has good attributes for the role. we then need to go out and look to do better than lloyd. we must treat players like lloyd as a stop gap we must look to upgrade at all times.

im trying to find a way to say this coherently but it will probably come across as mumbo jumbo.

I 100% agree. Over estimating our players. Jake is a perfect example, and Richo to a lesser extent. You would have to say we over looked Pav and Franklin because we had Richo.. It wasn't seen as essential.

Surely we rank and rate our players against the rest of the competition. We had Jake king/morris, sydney has Luke parker, port has Wingard.. We need elite players in every position.

[tdy]

I think that getting average players was part of the compromised drafts. Its hard to find a good one without paying something like the dogs with their new forward and he is pure speculation. What you do get a Chaplin and Maric and Thomas and they are the ones that work. How many have we had that didnt really work, Edwards, some ex port mid blonde I forget his name, the ex melbourne forward who played 4 or 5 games a year as second forward for 2 years. The list is pretty long.

 From last years draft and now onwards we really want 3 good players a year but thats going to be the trick isnt it. And there will be a balance between giving kids games and playing the likes of Thomas because you need a big bodied midfielder. A 2nd ruck would be nice, so would a few key tall backs who can kick. The other problem will be age gaps if we are to develop a tall back from next years draft he will take 4 years minimum to be a good player.  By that time Jack and Lids are retiring.

I suspect Hardwicks epitath will be "The best he could do under a compromised system"

[tdy]

Oh and on Lloyd, he is only geting games I reckon cos this years midfielders are too young and Knights must be underdone.

[(•))(©™]

"You look at the win-loss and it says 12-10," he said. "If that was spread evenly across the course of the year rather than winning nine in a row on the way home, would it look different? I think it probably would"

Look.........

[the claw]

"You look at the win-loss and it says 12-10," he said. "If that was spread evenly across the course of the year rather than winning nine in a row on the way home, would it look different? I think it probably would"

Look.........

the way i look at both halves of the season
1st half we lost most games playing poorly
2nd half we won most playing slightly less poorly. would only be two games in that runwhere we played real good footy. talk about winning covering over the cracks.yet hardwick cant work it out.
win lose or draw poor footy is poor footy.

[torch]

Problem is the coach!

1) Horrible game plan.

2) Forward line structure and entry horrible.

3) Playing players who have no skills to hit forwards; Grigg, Petterd.

4) No small forwards that put any pressure.

5) Plays no talent; Lennon, McDonough.

6) Plays favourites; Grigg, Batchelor, Petterd, Newman.

7) Plays players in the wrong positions; Houli HB should be Wing, Edwards MID should be Forward, Vickery FWD should be Ruck.

Relies on average to below average players; Chaplin, Newman, Grigg, Maric, Gordon.

9) No pace in midfield.

10) No midfielders that gain metres.

6 years and it's like we are at where we were in 2012.

Need a better coach who has an attacking game plan, youth/talent driven, running mentality!

[🏅Dooks]

Less draft Nason back for leg speed

[(•))(©™]

Problem is the coach!

1) Horrible game plan.

2) Forward line structure and entry horrible.

3) Playing players who have no skills to hit forwards; Grigg, Petterd.

4) No small forwards that put any pressure.

5) Plays no talent; Lennon, McDonough.

6) Plays favourites; Grigg, Batchelor, Petterd, Newman.

7) Plays players in the wrong positions; Houli HB should be Wing, Edwards MID should be Forward, Vickery FWD should be Ruck.

Relies on average to below average players; Chaplin, Newman, Grigg, Maric, Gordon.

9) No pace in midfield.

10) No midfielders that gain metres.

6 years and it's like we are at where we were in 2012.

Need a better coach who has an attacking game plan, youth/talent driven, running mentality!

Still........

[bojangles17]

What a crock, 60% win loss last two seasons , you can't handle the truth 

[the claw]

What a crock, 60% win loss last two seasons , you can't handle the truth 

why stop at the last two yrs. oh i see it suits. last yr he went at 52% 6 yrs in and he went at 52%. it went backwards. what a joke.heres a rather awkward stat he goes at 46%.

what a crock indeed.