Political intrigue a club health gauge
Jake Niall | August 14, 2008
RICHMOND won 3½ matches last year. Carlton was blessed to win just four, earning a priority pick that made it possible to recruit Chris Judd and Matthew Kreuzer.
In 2008, the Tigers have won 8½ games, while Carlton has nine victories with three rounds remaining. Each has improved by exactly five wins. While neither is likely to play finals, both have outstripped external expectations: the Tigers, remember, were favourites for the wooden spoon, while Carlton was still seen as bottom four or five.
In 2007, the Blues made a huge seven-figure profit after several years in the poor house. The Tigers likewise posted a significant profit — though not quite as impressive as Carlton's — despite a terrible season.
The superficial profiles of the clubs are not dissimilar. Yet, one club is seen to be on the rise and on the brink of a restoration, the other is viewed with less optimism; a sizeable portion of the Richmond faithful remain in their semi-permanent state of dissatisfaction.
In part, the Carlton people are more upbeat because they have belief in their club's capacity to become a powerhouse. The Blues had six shocking years. The Tiges haven't been much chop for a quarter-century; a record of two finals appearances in 25 seasons is not conducive to confidence about the future.
I suspect that Carlton has the greater momentum because it appears settled. Greg Swann is entrenched as chief executive, Brett Ratten is showing early promise as senior coach. Dick Pratt might be gone, but his influence — and money — remains in the background; Pratt is a kind of security blanket for the club's finances.
Despite the major strides they've made, the Tigers don't project the same sense of stability. Their coach, Terry Wallace, has one year to run on his contract and it's clear that the Richmond board is uncertain of whether he'll be retained beyond 2009.
Football department head Greg Miller has been sacked, his powerbase having been steadily eroded over the past two years. There is a push from past player elements for Miller's job to be filled by "a Richmond person" and, it is to be hoped, for the sake of the club, that the board's priority is to find the most able candidate; if he happens to have a yellow-and-black streak, all the better.
The football director on the board, Tony Free, is up for election, having been, in effect, put on notice by the president for exceeding his authority in the wake of Miller's dismissal. Free is an ex-Tiger captain, but he, too, cannot be considered safe.
Chief executive Steven Wright has presided over a solid financial performance and has millions coming from government for the re-development of Punt Road. Wright, who is a Richmond Person, SHOULD be safe.
President Gary March appears to have consolidated his position — given the turnaround, it would not be easy to tip him out. Another year out of the finals in 2009, however, and the rumblings will begin from within the coteries and past players.
March has been careful to appease the various RPs (Richmond Persons), recognising that his predecessor, Clinton Casey, did not display sufficient Richmond-ness; Casey brought Miller, a hired gun from another club, on to the board, which is supposed to be exclusively RP.
Wallace has had four years and must deliver in his fifth. Fair enough. But the Richmond board has to support him unconditionally for the remainder of his contract; it cannot, as past boards have, insist on certain assistants or undermine the coach's authority by issuing subtle — or overt — instructions.
Joel Bowden is out of contract at season's end. Bowden has probably done enough to warrant another year, but the coach — and list manager — should make this call alone.
That Bowden is a son of a premiership player and a prominent RP means that there is potential for past players et al to agitate on his behalf. It's this kind of political intrigue that has made the Richmond coaching position akin to being Sheriff of Sicily; happily, Wallace is versed enough in football politics to negotiate his way through the factional maze.
Richmond is a political club because people think it's a political club. Officials assume that to survive, you need to engage the factions, work the room, keep your friends close and your enemies closer. Would Wallace have invited past players to "mentor" players on the list if he was coaching Hawthorn?
Punt Road might or might not turn out to be at such a dangerous intersection in club history. The point, perhaps, is that at Richmond, you can never be sure.
http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/political-intrigue-a-club-health-gauge/2008/08/13/1218307010868.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1
