Most overated player at Richmond?

[Stuart]

Imagine how many goals he would have kicked if the Tigers had a dominant and skillful midfield that kicked it to him instead of over his head or at his feet.

Yep, if we had have any other decent forwards during his time at the club maybe he wouldn't have demanded the ball or been the only option players would look for. Richo demanding the ball & having it kicked to him only happens cos players with the ball don't have confidence in anyone else to get it.
Richo has one major flaw.... goalkicking, but to lead the compo in contested marks over 10 years shos he is doing something right.

 

[sam_reeves]

Who said Richo is overrated? How do youmanage to kick 700 goals in your career and be considered overrated?

The number of goals that he kicked is only half the story. One has to ask how many easy gettable shots he has missed that a true 'champion' would have nailed during this period (and he has been there for a very long time amassing those 700 goals). Also whether his crazed and irresistable demand for the ball has meant that our midfield have been effectively psychologically bullied to pass to him when they had better options available. (thereby of course also inflating his figures overall). The counter argument to this naturally is that he has nearly always been the best option in almost constantly poor side. But if this is true, does that really make him a champion? (which most Richmond people seem to think he is), that he was the best player in a bad lot?

And finally also question needs to be answered whether his presence now in the twilight of his career (assuming that the team is still as Richocentric as ever), far of being of benefit to the club, is actually detrimental to Richmonds fortunes by hindering Schulzs' developement as a key position forward (bearing in mind that he is considered by most the most obvious heir apparent and also bearing in mind our middling draft position we'll probably go for another crop of midgets).

Richardson has been a phenomenal athelete and an exceptional mark. Still though you have to wonder would he have been rated as highly as he has if he played during a great era at the club? Personally, I think he has been very good - but not as good as he is made out to be. Not sure if he is the most overrated, but he would sure have to come damn close.

I asked how is he overrated. no-one rates his kicking anyway so how does that make him over-rated?

 

[Tygrys]

Who said Richo is overrated? How do youmanage to kick 700 goals in your career and be considered overrated?

The number of goals that he kicked is only half the story. One has to ask how many easy gettable shots he has missed that a true 'champion' would have nailed during this period (and he has been there for a very long time amassing those 700 goals). Also whether his crazed and irresistable demand for the ball has meant that our midfield have been effectively psychologically bullied to pass to him when they had better options available. (thereby of course also inflating his figures overall). The counter argument to this naturally is that he has nearly always been the best option in almost constantly poor side. But if this is true, does that really make him a champion? (which most Richmond people seem to think he is), that he was the best player in a bad lot?

And finally also question needs to be answered whether his presence now in the twilight of his career (assuming that the team is still as Richocentric as ever), far of being of benefit to the club, is actually detrimental to Richmonds fortunes by hindering Schulzs' developement as a key position forward (bearing in mind that he is considered by most the most obvious heir apparent and also bearing in mind our middling draft position we'll probably go for another crop of midgets).

Richardson has been a phenomenal athelete and an exceptional mark. Still though you have to wonder would he have been rated as highly as he has if he played during a great era at the club? Personally, I think he has been very good - but not as good as he is made out to be. Not sure if he is the most overrated, but he would sure have to come damn close.

I asked how is he overrated. no-one rates his kicking anyway so how does that make him over-rated?

Well I did use the word 'champion' in quotation marks. Enough tiger supporters rate him to be a 'champion', if not an all time AFL great (certainly at the very least a Richmond great) that the description warrants scrutiny. Would a true champion forward miss as many close range set shots as he does, waste as many opportunities, not be able to improve his kicking over such a long period of time (and others have, Stuart Lowe being a very famous example). Not going to rehash want I wrote previously, it's simply a question whether he merits those descriptions, if he doesn't, then as good as he is, he's overrated.

 

[Harro12]

Study the conversion rates tygrys. You'll find that Richo stacks up quite favourably. He has got better with age and controlled his spats etc which is quite admirable for a guy with only 2-4 years left. Time to find some new scapegoats!

 

[tigers#7]

Richo couldve left us as well a few years back, he didnt have to stay. So his commitment says a lot.

 

[Brettstigers]

Who said Richo is overrated? How do youmanage to kick 700 goals in your career and be considered overrated?

The number of goals that he kicked is only half the story. One has to ask how many easy gettable shots he has missed that a true 'champion' would have nailed during this period (and he has been there for a very long time amassing those 700 goals). Also whether his crazed and irresistable demand for the ball has meant that our midfield have been effectively psychologically bullied to pass to him when they had better options available. (thereby of course also inflating his figures overall). The counter argument to this naturally is that he has nearly always been the best option in almost constantly poor side. But if this is true, does that really make him a champion? (which most Richmond people seem to think he is), that he was the best player in a bad lot?

And finally also question needs to be answered whether his presence now in the twilight of his career (assuming that the team is still as Richocentric as ever), far of being of benefit to the club, is actually detrimental to Richmonds fortunes by hindering Schulzs' developement as a key position forward (bearing in mind that he is considered by most the most obvious heir apparent and also bearing in mind our middling draft position we'll probably go for another crop of midgets).

Richardson has been a phenomenal athelete and an exceptional mark. Still though you have to wonder would he have been rated as highly as he has if he played during a great era at the club? Personally, I think he has been very good - but not as good as he is made out to be. Not sure if he is the most overrated, but he would sure have to come damn close.

I asked how is he overrated. no-one rates his kicking anyway so how does that make him over-rated?

Well I did use the word 'champion' in quotation marks. Enough tiger supporters rate him to be a 'champion', if not an all time AFL great (certainly at the very least a Richmond great) that the description warrants scrutiny. Would a true champion forward miss as many close range set shots as he does, waste as many opportunities, not be able to improve his kicking over such a long period of time (and others have, Stuart Lowe being a very famous example). Not going to rehash want I wrote previously, it's simply a question whether he merits those descriptions, if he doesn't, then as good as he is, he's overrated.   

Tygrys I don't agree with your post. Richo's goalkicking has been consistent for a number of years (yes consistently average I will grant you but consistent nevertheless) so has his incredible athleticism. What you have failed to talk about is also his incredible marking prowess. Richo has also consistently been one of the best contested marks in the league for a decade. The saying "Richo is Richo" didn't come about because the guy was unpredictable. Everyone knows what the guy will do right and what he will do wrong. In fact the only change I have spotted has been a positive swing in his on-field attitude which can be attributed to Wallace's no nonsense leadership. To be honest you would be hard pressed to find anyone in the club more consistent than Richo. Others improve or decline and can therefore be underated or overrated but Richo is Richo and no matter how much we would prefer a little bit more accuracy other, than a bit more on field control, what he has always given us, we are still getting.

 

[tigers#7]

Who said Richo is overrated? How do youmanage to kick 700 goals in your career and be considered overrated?

The number of goals that he kicked is only half the story. One has to ask how many easy gettable shots he has missed that a true 'champion' would have nailed during this period (and he has been there for a very long time amassing those 700 goals). Also whether his crazed and irresistable demand for the ball has meant that our midfield have been effectively psychologically bullied to pass to him when they had better options available. (thereby of course also inflating his figures overall). The counter argument to this naturally is that he has nearly always been the best option in almost constantly poor side. But if this is true, does that really make him a champion? (which most Richmond people seem to think he is), that he was the best player in a bad lot?

And finally also question needs to be answered whether his presence now in the twilight of his career (assuming that the team is still as Richocentric as ever), far of being of benefit to the club, is actually detrimental to Richmonds fortunes by hindering Schulzs' developement as a key position forward (bearing in mind that he is considered by most the most obvious heir apparent and also bearing in mind our middling draft position we'll probably go for another crop of midgets).

Richardson has been a phenomenal athelete and an exceptional mark. Still though you have to wonder would he have been rated as highly as he has if he played during a great era at the club? Personally, I think he has been very good - but not as good as he is made out to be. Not sure if he is the most overrated, but he would sure have to come damn close.

I asked how is he overrated. no-one rates his kicking anyway so how does that make him over-rated?

Well I did use the word 'champion' in quotation marks. Enough tiger supporters rate him to be a 'champion', if not an all time AFL great (certainly at the very least a Richmond great) that the description warrants scrutiny. Would a true champion forward miss as many close range set shots as he does, waste as many opportunities, not be able to improve his kicking over such a long period of time (and others have, Stuart Lowe being a very famous example). Not going to rehash want I wrote previously, it's simply a question whether he merits those descriptions, if he doesn't, then as good as he is, he's overrated.   

Tygrys I don't agree with your post.  Richo's goalkicking has been consistent for a number of years (yes consistently average I will grant you but consistent nevertheless) so has his incredible athleticism.  What you have failed to talk about is also his incredible marking prowess.  Richo has also consistently been one of the best contested marks in the league for a decade.  The saying "Richo is Richo" didn't come about because the guy was unpredictable.  Everyone knows what the guy will do right and what he will do wrong.  In fact the only change I have spotted has been a positive swing in his on-field attitude which can be attributed to Wallace's no nonsense leadership.  To be honest you would be hard pressed to find anyone in the club more consistent than Richo. Others improve or decline and can therefore be underated or overrated but Richo is Richo and no matter how much we would prefer a little bit more accuracy other, than a bit more on field control, what he has always given us, we are still getting.

Excellent post, and 200% agreed :clap

 

[sam_reeves]

Who said Richo is overrated? How do youmanage to kick 700 goals in your career and be considered overrated?

The number of goals that he kicked is only half the story. One has to ask how many easy gettable shots he has missed that a true 'champion' would have nailed during this period (and he has been there for a very long time amassing those 700 goals). Also whether his crazed and irresistable demand for the ball has meant that our midfield have been effectively psychologically bullied to pass to him when they had better options available. (thereby of course also inflating his figures overall). The counter argument to this naturally is that he has nearly always been the best option in almost constantly poor side. But if this is true, does that really make him a champion? (which most Richmond people seem to think he is), that he was the best player in a bad lot?

And finally also question needs to be answered whether his presence now in the twilight of his career (assuming that the team is still as Richocentric as ever), far of being of benefit to the club, is actually detrimental to Richmonds fortunes by hindering Schulzs' developement as a key position forward (bearing in mind that he is considered by most the most obvious heir apparent and also bearing in mind our middling draft position we'll probably go for another crop of midgets).

Richardson has been a phenomenal athelete and an exceptional mark. Still though you have to wonder would he have been rated as highly as he has if he played during a great era at the club? Personally, I think he has been very good - but not as good as he is made out to be. Not sure if he is the most overrated, but he would sure have to come damn close.

I asked how is he overrated. no-one rates his kicking anyway so how does that make him over-rated?

Well I did use the word 'champion' in quotation marks. Enough tiger supporters rate him to be a 'champion', if not an all time AFL great (certainly at the very least a Richmond great) that the description warrants scrutiny. Would a true champion forward miss as many close range set shots as he does, waste as many opportunities, not be able to improve his kicking over such a long period of time (and others have, Stuart Lowe being a very famous example). Not going to rehash want I wrote previously, it's simply a question whether he merits those descriptions, if he doesn't, then as good as he is, he's overrated.

You can't say Sturart Lowe is a champion without saying Richo is.

 

[MalenyTiger]

Seems like by reading another thread that at 2pm tomorrow Polak will be the most overated player at Tigerland!

 

[AZZORP]

People that know alot more about his comparable ability have him in the Team of the Century alongside Royce Hart and Titus and in there with guys like Bourke, Bartlett, Wright, Dwyer, Morris, Weightman etc etc etc

To me, any talk of overated is insulting to everyone in that side, including Richo.

 

[craig]

From some of the howling at Roaches impending axing i'm throwing his name up for most overated. His axing is clear cut for mine.

 

[Tygrys]

Study the conversion rates tygrys. You'll find that Richo stacks up quite favourably. He has got better with age and controlled his spats etc which is quite admirable for a guy with only 2-4 years left. Time to find some new scapegoats!

No I'm happy with the one I have thank you - for a supposed gun key position player he is a very poor kick (and even some of his biggest fans here which obviously I'm not one of them would admit to that) And can one assume the conversion rate would also include out of bounds on the full and shots that never even made the sticks from kickable positions? At any rate he'll be remembered forever for his brilliant atheticism and marking, but unfortunately also being a very unreliable kick for goal.

 

[doherz]

Most over rated player at richmond is that bloke called "no-one in particular"
According to commentators he was the highest ranked handball receives player of the comp during the 90's and early 2000's and won a lot of his posessions in open space

Number 1 for Richmond for a ver long time, yet now seems to have gone missing.
personally, hes overrated and i hope he stays off the field

:rofl :rofl :blah :hihi

 

[Tygrys]

Who said Richo is overrated? How do youmanage to kick 700 goals in your career and be considered overrated?

The number of goals that he kicked is only half the story. One has to ask how many easy gettable shots he has missed that a true 'champion' would have nailed during this period (and he has been there for a very long time amassing those 700 goals). Also whether his crazed and irresistable demand for the ball has meant that our midfield have been effectively psychologically bullied to pass to him when they had better options available. (thereby of course also inflating his figures overall). The counter argument to this naturally is that he has nearly always been the best option in almost constantly poor side. But if this is true, does that really make him a champion? (which most Richmond people seem to think he is), that he was the best player in a bad lot?

And finally also question needs to be answered whether his presence now in the twilight of his career (assuming that the team is still as Richocentric as ever), far of being of benefit to the club, is actually detrimental to Richmonds fortunes by hindering Schulzs' developement as a key position forward (bearing in mind that he is considered by most the most obvious heir apparent and also bearing in mind our middling draft position we'll probably go for another crop of midgets).

Richardson has been a phenomenal athelete and an exceptional mark. Still though you have to wonder would he have been rated as highly as he has if he played during a great era at the club? Personally, I think he has been very good - but not as good as he is made out to be. Not sure if he is the most overrated, but he would sure have to come damn close.

I asked how is he overrated. no-one rates his kicking anyway so how does that make him over-rated?

Well I did use the word 'champion' in quotation marks. Enough tiger supporters rate him to be a 'champion', if not an all time AFL great (certainly at the very least a Richmond great) that the description warrants scrutiny. Would a true champion forward miss as many close range set shots as he does, waste as many opportunities, not be able to improve his kicking over such a long period of time (and others have, Stuart Lowe being a very famous example). Not going to rehash want I wrote previously, it's simply a question whether he merits those descriptions, if he doesn't, then as good as he is, he's overrated.

Tygrys I don't agree with your post. Richo's goalkicking has been consistent for a number of years (yes consistently average I will grant you but consistent nevertheless) so has his incredible athleticism. What you have failed to talk about is also his incredible marking prowess. Richo has also consistently been one of the best contested marks in the league for a decade. The saying "Richo is Richo" didn't come about because the guy was unpredictable. Everyone knows what the guy will do right and what he will do wrong. In fact the only change I have spotted has been a positive swing in his on-field attitude which can be attributed to Wallace's no nonsense leadership. To be honest you would be hard pressed to find anyone in the club more consistent than Richo. Others improve or decline and can therefore be underated or overrated but Richo is Richo and no matter how much we would prefer a little bit more accuracy other, than a bit more on field control, what he has always given us, we are still getting.

Wasn't going to do a long winded reply, but what the hell...

In my post I don't doubt his marking at all. He has been a great mark in every meaning of the word. He has also been a sensational athlete as well. And no one doubts his aggression and desire to do the best he can (although sometimes the violin strings about how he bleeds for the club and hasn't abandoned it becomes a bit tiresome. Being absolute top dog in a club of average to poor players means has meant that he would have been extremely well renumerated - to a degree that might not have been the case at another club with a greater wealth of talent to payroll and the same salary cap restrictions).

Again it's as if I'm saying that I consider him a bad player. I definitely not saying that. The thread heading is 'most overrated player at Richmond', I just think he's overrated. Weather he is the most overrated player, that I'm not sure about (which I again I made referrence too previously- personally I would probably go for Kane Johnson but that's another story). Again remember the key words are not 'excellent player' and '100 percent trier', but 'Champion', 'Tiger great' and 'AFL great'. That's what I consistently hear the Tiger Faithful describe him as, and that's what I question.

Personally I think your post is very reasoned and balanced. In fact there is very little I could disagree about it. Simply though the problem I can't reconcile is a key position forward who is such a consistently average kick (and has remained so throughout his career) whose job is to kick goals, being an out and out champion or AFL great (personally I think you are being slightly charitable about his kicking, I think it's somewhat worse than average bearing in mind the position he plays, but that's just an opinion). I mean think about it, it would like saying he is a great golfer but a very average putter. Or a great tennis player but a very average return of serve. Well apparently with Richardson he is a great key position goal kicking forward but a very average kick. Something is wrong here...

And for the record I use to be one of Richardson biggest defenders. During the 90s and early into this century I use to have constant debates with a Roo friend of mine about the merits of Richardson versus Carey. There wasn't an excuse or defense I didn't use. But I think now toward the end of his career, might as well call a spade a spade. He has been mercurial, he has been often brilliant, and he has given 110 percent, but I still think that Richmond fans have been too prone to overlook and rationalise away his deficiencies (as I once did). I mean good luck to him, and I don't think I have been savagely critical of him, but it's just my opinion now (and again the key word is 'overrated' and not 'bad'). Anyhow that's all I write on the subject.

 

[Tigermad2005]

Polak.

 

[Bill James]

Polack.

Beat me

 

[BBC]

Polak is the most over rated player at Richmond!

 

[Tigerfan]

PRE-hysteria

 

[Tygrys]

Forget what I said about Richardson or Johnson. Polak is definitely the most overrated player at Richmond!!!