The $600,000 question: Why can't Shane Tuck and Jordan McMahon get a game? * Mark Stevens
* Herald Sun
* April 07, 2010 WHY can't Shane Tuck and Jordan McMahon get a game for Richmond? That's the question on the lips of fans as the Tigers cry out for a saviour. SO MUCH for the footy chestnut "you're only as good as your last game".
Shane Tuck's last game for Richmond was good. Very good, in fact.
In the Tigers' final game of the pre-season, against Collingwood at Visy Park, Tuck had 33 disposals and 14 of the contested variety.
The 28-year-old also featured in six score involvements, the most of any Tiger.
To cap it off, Tuck was the top-ranked SuperCoach player on the ground with 153 points.
Yet Tuck was missing in the first two rounds as the undermanned and inept Tigers were thrashed by Carlton and the Western Bulldogs.
Who was the best performer this week? Vote now and win.
Jordan McMahon, 27, who also played against the Pies that day and helped himself to 28 disposals, is also absent from the Richmond side.
McMahon is in the final year of a three-year contract and will be paid about $330,000 this year.
It is fair to estimate Tuck, a senior regular through most of Terry Wallace's reign and runner-up in the 2008 best-and-fairest, would be on $250,000-plus in his final season.
That is about $600,000 (the equivalent of one elite player) tied up in a pair seemingly destined to see out most of the year with Coburg Tigers in the VFL.
Richmond is adamant it has not put a line through the names of Tuck and McMahon, and they may yet return this week against a battle-hardened Sydney.
But right now, they must feel like the most unwanted men in Australia.
Tuck, in particular, would add much needed grunt and strength to a team too easily pushed off the ball against the Bulldogs.
As much as he keeps winning it, insiders say there are slows on Tuck because he struggles to follow instructions, which are becoming more detailed by the year.
He has, also, for a long time had a weakness for turning the ball over, but he has had plenty of Tiger mates over the years - and the trend continues.
You can sympathise with new coach Damien Hardwick's dilemma. He did not recruit Tuck or McMahon and is hell-bent on playing youngsters, but the supporters want to see competitive football.
The Tigers are uncompetitive, underlined by a 3.7 to 1.0 final term against the Dogs that could have been much uglier.
The Tigers can't get their hands on the ball.
Their average differential in the first two rounds for disposals is a whopping minus 115. The next worst, Adelaide, is minus 60.
The Tigers' average kicking efficiency is 7.3 per cent worse than its opposition. Again, 16th in the competition.
Perhaps the most telling stat is Richmond has had on average 22 fewer inside-50s.
Couple that with the fact the Tigers have scored a goal only 19 per cent of the times once inside 50, and you have a recipe for a flogging.
The Tigers have conceded the most points from turnovers: 150 points.
Almost half of Richmond's turnovers have come in the defensive half, a sure-fire way to have your pants pulled down.
Keeping Tuck out may be good for the long term, but it will test the patience of Tigers fans who have already been forced to live with applauding the smallest of things, such as a Trent Cotchin sweeping handball or a Jayden Post leap.
Is it time to stop the bleeding?
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/the-600000-question-why-cant-shane-tuck-and-jordan-mcmahon-get-a-game/story-e6frf9if-1225850677690
