Rogers, Pettifer, Hall, Zantuck, Fiora etc.

[Redford]

We've got a number of things going for us at the moment. Coughlan, Rodan and Newman show long term potential. Schulz was in Coburg's best - hopefully he'll come through. Blumfield is out injured with Richo, and when those two come back in we'll be a lot better off. We are going at it pretty hard at the moment which is also very pleasing.

However, in the LONGER TERM, RFC will go nowhere until it cleans itself out of the wad of un co-ordinated and talent lacking players that continue to let us down against the better sides. Every big game these players struggle in, and it was no more evident again than against Port Power Nap on Saturday night:

Rogers: enough is enough. For a whole host of reasons, nearly everyone on this site pegs him for not being up to it. He's tagged Crawford and Stevens the last 2 weeks and has been annihilated. If he is on our list next year, I'll spew.

Pettifer: an indication of how good a player is, is when he is pitted one on one with his opponent. Invariaby, every time this happens in a game, no matter who he's on, he inavriably gets beaten. Too slow, too small, mediocre skills, not hard enough. No future.

Hall: as much as I like his enthusiasm, and yeah, he's got a big job with Richo, Ottens and Holland out, his skill level is just deplorable. DEPLORABLE. Does anyone go to training much ? I do, and Hall stuffs up that many drills with his kicking it's sad to watch. As much as I like him, we've just got to get better players than him if we want to be a continual top 4 side.

Fiora: again, enough is enough. He has got to be the most stupidest player in the AFL, continually selecting the wrong option, getting caught with the ball etc. etc. As per his personal profile, it makes complete sense that his favourite past time is sleeping. He is as soft as butter, and his kicking to a target when running flat out is not good enough for someone of his type who has to make that part of their game a premium.

Zantuck: he's not as hard as people suggest. People are just carrying that reputation over from his father. He's slow and has mediocre skills. We need better players than him.

Bidiscombe: just not good enough. JUST NOT GOOD ENOUGH !

And forget Ben Holland being any "saviour" either, coz' he's another one who is not good enough and has been at RFC too long. He has one good half a season in 6 and all of a sudden RFC thinks he's worthy of a $400,000 per year contract ! What a joke ! Too slow (talk about running on the spot !) and mentally soft as well.

Duncan Kellaway. I don't care how hard he goes ! He is an uncordinated freak, playing a game where possesion is nine tenths of the law !!! Geez !!! Get rid of him for heaven's sake !!! He's exactly the sort of player that has been killing us for years !

Combine all these guys with the fact that we still have regulars such as Richo, Gaspar, Hilton spraying the ball all over the place and we just have to start finding BETTER PLAYERS, WITH MORE TALENT IF WE WANT TO BE IN THE TOP 4 REGULARLY !!!

C'MON RICHMOND !!! GET SERIOUS ABOUT THIS PLAYING LIST !!!!!

 

[johnson2richo2003]

And forget Ben Holland being any "saviour" either, coz' he's another one who is not good enough and has been at RFC too long. He has one good half a season in 6 and all of a sudden RFC thinks he's worthy of a $400,000 per year contract ! What a joke ! Too slow (talk about running on the spot !) and mentally soft as well.

while i agree with most of ya observations i find the one about holland way off the mark.
its now been proved for 4yrs he was played out of position.
in 2001 he olayed his best season for the club in the backline.2002 proved how much we missed him as gas and AK had to take the taller players.
the sooner dutchy is back the better off we will be.

 

[Harry]

Totally agree. We have got a few things going for us and the future does have some potential with some of our younger players and the recruits in Johnson and Blumfield. However a handful of talentless players are holding back our progress and really need to be turned over. Hopefully Miller can make frawely and co. realise this and some action can be taken.

Lets blood in McGrath, Shulz, Nicholls, Hyde etc and see what they show instead of persisting with dead wood that constantly cause the kink in the chain. Look what Newmans showing and the sooner the others can be introduced the sooner they can gain confidence and play with the likes of Campbell and Cameron before they retire.

 

[Harry]

Totally agree. We have got a few things going for us and the future does have some potential with some of our younger players and the recruits in Johnson and Blumfield. However a handful of talentless players are holding back our progress and really need to be turned over. Hopefully Miller can make frawely and co. realise this and some action can be taken.

Lets blood in McGrath, Shulz, Nicholls, Hyde etc and see what they show instead of persisting with dead wood that constantly cause the kink in the chain. Look what Newmans showing and the sooner the others can be introduced the sooner they can gain confidence and play with the likes of Campbell and Cameron before they retire.

 

[Rosy]

We can drag these names up again and again for delisting.
Don't forget we are still paying the price of previous admin bungles.
We have a short list this year, we have players on contract I'm sure the club would prefer not to have kept last season.
It will take time to sort this out. Hopefully there will be a big cleanout at the end of this season as contracts expire.
Hopefully we'll be able to afford a full list next season, and the new powers to be do a better job than has been done in recent years.
Until then they need to play any guy on our list who will best serve the teams purposes in any given game.
Go Tiges.

P.S. Getting rid of Dutchy is a ridiculous thought imo unless due to injury, or a trade we can't refuse. We are lacking in talls for starters, and look how it affected our team when Dutchy was out last year.

 

[Koalalill]

Rogers: He's tagged Crawford and Stevens the last 2 weeks and has been annihilated. If he is on our list next year, I'll spew.

Redford, you make some very fair points.

But I was at AAMI Stadium on Saturday night and Rogers did not play on Stevens. That job went to Newman and Fleming. Rogers played in the back line- alternating frequently with Chaffey as the loose man. He also spent alot of time on the bench (hold the applause). Ocassionally, he ventured into the centre usually following Peter Burgoyne. He was finally put at full forward in the final quarter.

But as Rosy mentions we are stuck with what we've got in some case because of contracts. We cannot just de-list blokes when they are contracted. We can trade them but cannot de-list them because we still have to pay the contract. If we had de-listed everyone you mentioned at the end of 2002 because we couldn't trade them - our list would now be about 30.

 

[Harry]

So rogers was played as a loose man in defence. Lets not all laugh at once, but seriously this has to be the most ridiculous move i've ever heard of. A player whose position in the team is only justified by some due to his tagging abilities, and a player who is bagged (even by the people who defend him) for his inability to deliver the ball to his teamates, was actually played as a loose man in defence whose responsibility is to rebound the ball and begin our thrusts forward similar to that of a quarter back.

If this is correct then this is another negative to the frawely scorecard. I don't like to bag players or coaches without hard evidence, however this is just one of them.

 

[Hungry]

Interesting points by everyone. I agree there are still some frustrating weaknesses to our list but it's impossible to turn it over in one season. It takes years. Anyone who's still angry should go and have a look at the list as it was in 1999 - right up there with the worst in the competition. The good news is that the list IS improving - though we still seem to get stiffed by injuries most years.

As for the players, I'd say it's simply wrong to call Zantuck slow or soft - he's out of form, that's for sure, but one thing he has going for him is mongrel, size and pace.

Ray Hall: his kicking doesn't seem to have improved, as most players do with a bit more experience. Hard to know what to make of him.

Fiora: Not the worst on our list by a long way - gets pretty harshly criticised.

Dutchy: Players of his size and quality don't grow on trees and are not dispensable. Unfairly critisised and our structure is weaker without him. Lots of clubs would love him.

Overall, agree that continuing to blood youngsters is a good idea - and I certainly think the current crop of youngsters is better than it's been for a few years - hope to see McGrath and Shulz get some games in this year.

 

[Rampaging_Richo]

I think Hall is OK. He has been forced since 2002/2003 to carry a big load, one prob beyond his ability, but he has a crack. usually his foot skills are pretty good. I am sure it is just a confidence thing. Where he really falls down is his lack of size. He gets brushed aside too easily by BIG men. His Osteitis Pubis would have stuffed up his pre season, but he needs to put on some weight quickly.

Fiora will be trade bait unless he pulls his finger out. Number 2 draft picks should be taking the game by the scruff of the neck, not floating of a HB Flank.

Pettifer, Rogers, B'scum will all be gone next year. When I see Shaun Burgoyne run around and think we could have got him instead of pettifer :'( :'(

Time to give Nicholls, McGrath and even Shultz a go.

 

[TigerFurious]

I know I sound like a broken record but Frawley should take the vast majority of blame for the state of our list.

As coach for the last 4 years all descisions regarding players would ultimately fall to him. He will rightly live or die by his choices.

 

[YeahNah]

My response to the critism of the following players...
Rogers: A good medium sized forward continually played out of position to cover injuries. Give him 6 games in a row in the forward line and watch his goal tally speak for itself. Stays.
Pettifer: Up to now, pretty flamin' hopeless. Better show something or the Tiges will cut their loses.
Hall: Tall, mobile, but still along way from where he needs to be. Kept for depth I suspect. Needs to lift in a major way.
Zantuck: Soft? That's pretty funny. ;D Good player down on for. Probably has a bit to do with the interupted preseason. Stays.
Fiora: Disappointing return from a top 10 pick. But OK otherwise. If we're not paying anymore than basic match payments then why would we get rid of him? If he's on a bigger contract he may be on shaky ground. The Juries out.
I think Greg and the boys will know who's who by the end of the season or before even. I was pretty happy with the boys on Saturday. While a loss is not what we're after, it's the first season in ages we've shown a fighting spirit and a never say die attitude. If we could field a few more of our best players, we'll go top 4.

 

[TigerFury]

Rogers always seems to get himself in trouble in defence under pressure. He does OK sometimes as a tagger but his best season of football was when playing as a small forward. Why then wasn't he thrown into this position last Saturday night? We were screaming out for a winner up there - Stafford couldn't stay there all night - and it didn't happen.

Pettifer finally lost me with that pathetic attempt to shepherd Bowden. Any other player would have had that Power player sitting on his backside without a second thought. Not Pettifer who was happier running alongside him and allowing him to run Bowden down. Having all the silky skills in the world are useless if you play petrified.

Hall is a poor kick when compared to a midfielder but not when looking at other ruckmen. He holds his place based upon his utility value though when Holland, Ottens, Stafford and Richo are all in, I would struggle to still see him getting a game. Has good pace and is getting bigger physically so may be an OK option as a tall defender.

Fiora looks very good when compared to Pettifer. At least he isn't afraid to have a crack. His decision making could be better and he still apears too light but he will stay on for at least a year or two more.

I think you've missed the mark a bit on Zantuck. No way known is he slow! He was consitently beaten by half a metre against Burgoyne, but then again, so would most people. Burgoyne would have to be one of the quickest players going around.

I think he was mismatched on Saturday night. Should have played on Cornes or been given a shot up forward. Has shown to have the knack of finding the ball up forward - that is half the battle.

On the down side, his field kicking can be a little erratic!

Biddiscombe is on the list for the sole purpose of being a reserve player. Apparently he is on some inflated contract and will be delisted once this is up. Another player who's skills let him down but who is still a better bet than Pettifer!

Sure Ben Holland has only put in 6 months of decent football - which is about 100% of the time he has spent at CHB. He's not quick but then again, neither are most of the players he would play on. As Pagan says, you need a gorilla to play on the gorillas!

I just wonder if it is already past Duncan? From being named in the first week against Collingwood - mainly for Malthouse's Buckley planning I guess - to being a late withdrawal and then not being seen again for the next 6 weeks. I just wonder if a mid-week press conference is around the corner?

I don't hold out much hope for Hyde or Nicholls either. The former has underwhelmed me as a player while the latter didn't do anything startling while at Hawthorn.

 

[hutstar]

Redford,
While some of your observations are no doubt correct, I think that panicing and turfing half the squad because they probably won't become Voss is a bit excessive. Fiora, Zantuck and probably even Pettifer are young players, who may need another year or two to prove their value. I personally think Fiora has heaps of potential, and it is the coaching staff's responsibility to teach him the disiplines you mention. Zantuck showed a bit last year, and has a rough season so far- let him settle then judge him. Pettifer is obviously harder to defend, but again i don't see how we could have delisted him last year, given he is so young and our list is so short.
It is worth remembering that our game is not blessed with unlimited talent like other international sports. We can't just draft a Van Nistelrooy to replace these guys. No point getting rid of a player and replacing him with the 3000th draft pick. In time we will build a good list, and some of the players you mention will not be on it, but a couple will. Until we get good picks to replace these guys (and use them wisely) we must work with what we have.
(but yeah- p!ss off Rogers, he's done ;D)
hutstar

 

[Redford]

There is no way in this world that I am going to accept anyone's comments that we are stuck with these players, or that we can't re-juvenate our list quickly, or that not everyone "can be a Voss" for that matter either. To be blunt, that is just garbage.

The way the draft and trading system works nowadays there is plenty of opportunity for re-establishing your playing list quickly. How did Collingwood take themselves from being a non-finals rabble to almost winning the premiership in two years ? Answer: they got a smart coach and smart bunch of off-field operators to replace appx. 22/23 duds in the space of 2 years.

The AFL draft and trading system is lossely based on the NFL's where similarly, teams that have been at the bottom one year can end up playing in a Superbowl 2 years later.

We are the most recalitrant club in the league when it comes to evaluating our playing list, opting to keep marginal players for years instead of moving them on in an attempt to find better quality players. Sure, give them a chance. But after 2 or 3 years, providing there are no extenuating circumstances, then if you don't know if they are going to be good enough, then you shouldn't be involved at a club at AFL level.

Take these players I have mentioned. Each one of them has been around long enough to evaluate. How long do you want to keep Fiora ? Hall ? As long as we kept Bourke ? As long as we kept Daffy ? As long as we have kept Rogers ?

If we don't move these sorts of players on NOW, then in 2 years time, they will have lost all possible currency within the market and be untradable. NOW is the time to be moving them on - not once they are completely valueless.

Compare these players against the best i.e. Brisbane. If people are not going to accept that these players I've mentioned are nowhere near the level of like players at Brisbane, and that we just have to "work with what we've got" etc. then we might as well just resign ourselves to eternal mediocrity and cop a flogging from those clubs that have had the guts to be more ruthless and pro-active with their lists.

How many clubs have been at the top..fallen to the bottom...re-established themselves and passed us by again whilst we continue to bumble along in mediocrity? Heaps.

Yeah, not everyone on our list can be a Voss. But somebody can be a Brown...someone else can be a Black....someone else can be an Akermanis.

I don't care if we have to take a step back to take 3 or 4 forward. Unless we start facing the truth that Hall, Pettifer, Rogers, Kellaway, Holland etc. etc. are all NEVER...read NEVER ...going to be good enough and provide us with what we want, then we are just living in denial and are as mediocre as RFC has been itself !!!!

 

[PMac]

Redford, I sort of agree that the tigers have been timid at the delisting stage but think you are mistaken that you can always turn your list around quickly. You can only delist players that are out of contract (well, not entirely true, you can delist them in contract but you still have to pay them and with a salary cap that basically means they are still on you're list) and shocking list management and fear has seen us contract very average players (Daffy, Bourke, etc) for three and four years in deals only paying out now. Until those contracts are paid out we are screwed. The pies were fortunate that a new coach arrived with a clear plan and almost a truly clean sheet of paper.

I hope, that many of our recent recruitments (Fleming, Nicolls etc) are designed not around our future but about keeping us close enough until we can wash out our list properly. At the end of 03, Daffy and Bourke are no longer liabilities, Biddsecomb and a few other fringe players drop off the list and we can seriously attack the top four, until then I suspect we're stuck in 5-10 land.

The big lesson out of this is to not run scared everytime a player is mentioned as moving. We consistently give our players long contracts and get stuck when it all goes awry.

 

[Harry]

Spot on redford.

A prime example is Westcoast. They were a champion side, then became a complete rabble - equalling RFC at its worst in the late 80's. However they made tough decisions and made them quickly and have now overtaken us by miles in becoming a consistent flag contender for years to come.

2-3 years is plenty of time to assess a player and whether they have GOT what it takes.

A lot of people are saying that we cannot get rid of the entire list right away and that we need to do it slowly, and then go on and say we need to persist with Petifer, Rogers, Fiora, Hall etc. If these players aren't turned over at year end then who do we turn over.

Last year the RFC stated that there would be a cleanout of the list. However the only players that were delisted were 3 youngsters that were never given a proper chance, and 3 retired. Yet we still persisted with the kings and rogers of this world. Yes I know that rogers' contract expires next year, but why did we give king another contract?

Why are we persisting with king? People say we are short on our list and that we couldn't delist him as we would be even shorter. Yet at the same time we passed on some of our late draft picks. Yes I know a late pick is a gamble but sometimes the gamble will pay off - look at Jame Hird. 2 examples of late draft picks this year - Brad Fisher (carlton) and Mathew Lokan (collingwood). These 2 have plyed senior footy this year and show a bit. They can go on and be anything. It is a certain that King will be nothing.

You have to turn your list quicker than what we are doing and you have to throw young players into the deep end quicker than what we are doing now, in order to see if they have got what it takes earlier. Simple as that.

I hold fears for Coughlan, Rodan and newman because they remind me of a young Lambert, Knights and Campbell when they first emerged. Champion players who were held back by playing in a team which persisted with mediocre players.

People are saying that with Miller things are gonna change. I can only comment on what I see at the moment. Frawely is persisting with rogers, pettifer and is reluctant to throw in young players at a quicker rate. This resembles the RFC of the past and not a new RFC.

 

[Tenacious Tiges]

Redford,

I sort of agree with some of your comments but many others have also come up with reasons for and against almost all of the players you have maligned.

Here's my assessment:

Holland - A fit Holland in the backline is what we missed sorely and what killed us last year and what starts to find us out against quality sides. We need him back.

Zantuck - Still needs time and would be better if there was some more quality around him. Give him a chance.

Hall/Fiora - Both need to seriously beef-up or continue to be barged off the ball by the likes of Brisbane/West Coast and now Eddiewood. One more year after this if we can't find better replacements.

B'scum - Say no more

Rogers - Yes coming to the end and kills us with turnovers in the backline, but as said previously put him in the forward line and he'll kick some goals. He's done it before and he'll do it again. Let's just get the best out of him for this year.

Pettifer - It's been agreed by all. Stand up boy or flick....

King - Last drinks please.

Having said all of that when was the last time RFC finished last on the ladder and got premium picks in the draft? If you look at the last 7 or 8 years we have pretty much finished mid table and wound up with mid picks. This leads us to the conclusion that we haven't really had the easy no-brainer picks like the Lions, Saints and Freo. Therefore we needed to find the unearthed talent that is around. Some of our picks could have been better. Hudson - Value Nil, B'scum - Value Nil. Somehow maybe the tiger's recruiting staff don't really have a good network. Having lived in Adelaide for 8 Crow bashing years, there's obviously great talent in country leagues in SA, also in WA, NT etc. etc. that the RFC don't seem to find. It seems if they haven't seen them in the State league's or been rejects from other AFL clubs then we don't recruit them. Port do it (they pick them out from all over SA and hide them and pluck them at pick no. 60 something, it's no fluke but good recruiting), Essendon do it and now Eddiewood are doing it with Malthouses connections in WA.

 

[Rampaging_Richo]

Well said Redford.

I think alot of what you have said will happen with Miller on board. He built a team at Kanga's which was comparible if not better than the current Brisbane list, so he clearlt knows what is required.

As contracts from the previous admin are finished, we will get a chance to rebuild the list with decent players.

I would expect the club to rid itself of B'scum, Rogers, Mills and Vardy. retire D Kellaway and maybe trade off some kids like Pettifer or Fiora.

I think this year we saw a glimpse of the clubs new recruiting policy in regards to Johnson and Blumfield.

The pick ups in Fleming and Nichols were forced in part by a lack of depth in the draft. I wasn't disappointed in either. Fleming adds a bit of aggression but is a bit one dimensional. Nichols has heaps of ability but is often injured. Will be a good test for him this week when he debuts for the tiges. At least we have two blokes who are ready to go from a physical POV.

 

[MC24]

Rodan, Newman and Coughlan seem to be good enough reasons to try out some of the other young players.

It might be throwing them into the deep end, but they get experience at the top level, even if it's a hand full of games.

It seems that not many of us expect that we're going to challenge the top two or three teams this season anyway.

What's the worst that can happen? They get experience and if we end up bottom four we get a reasonable draft pick. Conversely, they might actually prove better than we even hope.

It seems to me like we just hang on to the notion of finishing in the top eight and in the process only hold back the development of younger players.

We've got players in there who are just waiting to be delisted. That can not be healthy for anyone. While they get to display their own self-doubts on game day, they hold back others. But that's not entirely the fault of the players.

We should get in the real world and start playing players for the future of the Club, not the here and now. We all accept that others are so far ahead of us that it's not funny. With a full team we might threaten some, but in whose life time does that seem likely to happen?

Win or lose, our weaknesses still haunt us and until we strengthen our list we all know we are just making up the numbers.

Throw caution to the wind, I say and see who can play and who wants to play. We can all be patient if we can see that players just need time to develop. But having to watch players, season after season, make the same mistakes is just too much to ask of anyone, much less frustrated Richmond supporters.

How exciting would it be going to the game this week if Marty McGrath was going to play.

 

[Tenacious Tiges]

I agree MC24,

We have been reactive and continued to dwell on the present only to end up making the numbers up. I wouldn't mind losing if we could see we were trying to build a dynasty, because let's face it, that's what we all want. A feeling that we may once again (ahh the 70's - early, early 80's) have a side that can have a consistent crack at the finals with the chance of winning one. North are already churning over players. A step relative of mine Jeremy Clayton was picked up on the rookie list at the Roos for this year and ended up playing in the first match. They're not scared to throw them in the deep end and find out who's who in the zoo. As said by someone else, better to do that than keeping them for 2 years, not giving them a proper go and then ditching them.

I agree let's get in the real world.