Player Watch #17: Daniel Rioli - Traded to GC, picks 6&23.

[THE_GUN]

Get over it guys , Stupid decision to make captains wear #17
I personally would rather players be known for their own numbers rather than make 1 size fit all

He is a Rioli and deserves to wear the #17 if he wants it, Same as Dyer jnr did and wasnt made to earn it
Best numbers for best players - Rioli will be a best player

 

[Ancient Tiger]

What about signifigance and history of the number; if he fails to make the transition and god forbids doesnt play a senior game his name goes against that number in our history for life. I still think at his age and journey into footy the number should have come to him once it was time for him to step up into the big show.

The number is famous because of Jack Dyer. But before Jack someone wore it and after him there are a few that did not do the number proud. So what? If Daniel plays 100(?) games he will have his name on the locker and it will be there forever. If he is a dud - delist type player he won't make it and will thus not get his name on the locker. Pretty simple to me. Did Francis Bourke's son do his number proud? No. History remembers its champions. I wouldn't worry about Daniel failing to live up to the hype. Right now we just need to back the kid in and give him all of our support and encouragement. He is Tiger family now and we look after our family members.

 

[Magic17]

I for one am looking forward to seeing the number 17 tearing it up on the G again.

 

[Infamy]

Sorry, I forgot about that. But the others remain.

Yes, those players were handed their numbers back in the Wallace days when you were a coaches favourite as a high pick and he would barely speak to anyone at VFL level. Sure it worked out for Cotch & Lids, but given how many failures we had back then I'm not sure that's very good evidence of the old system working fine.
Of course I'm not blaming the number they were given for them failing, but I think the principle of it not mattering where you were drafted or where you came from is important. Every kid who walks onto our list should be treated equally.

 

[Ancient Tiger]

Yes, those players were handed their numbers back in the Wallace days when you were a coaches favourite as a high pick and he would barely speak to anyone at VFL level. Sure it worked out for Cotch & Lids, but given how many failures we had back then I'm not sure that's very good evidence of the old system working fine.
Of course I'm not blaming the number they were given for them failing, but I think the principle of it not mattering where you were drafted or where you came from is important. Every kid who walks onto our list should be treated equally.

Royce Hart started with number 4. It was not just Wallace....

 

[Ned_Flanders]

I have a feeling that whilst it is clubs policy to have draftees take lower numbers, its equally the policy to offer them numbers of their relatives, see Steve Morris.

Spot on, as if Richos kid wouldn't get 12

 

[Infamy]

Royce Hart started with number 4. It was not just Wallace....

Yeah because the way we did things back in the 60s & 70s really applies now.
Trying to run our club like we did back then is what caused save our skins in the 80s, not so sure its relevant today

 

[WATiger86]

Spot on, as if Richos kid wouldn't get 12

As if Richo will have kids

 

[Infamy]

As if Richo will have kids

If he does it will be daughters like the rest of them

 

[Ancient Tiger]

Yeah because the way we did things back in the 60s & 70s really applies now.
Trying to run our club like we did back then is what caused save our skins in the 80s, not so sure its relevant today

Mate, if we did things the way we did when were actually winning premierships we may actually get somewhere. You are obviously not a scholar of history. Pity that. If people really appreciated history, they would learn what worked and what didn't. They'd also learn what mistakes not repeat.

 

[Infamy]

Mate, if we did things the way we did when were actually winning premierships we may actually get somewhere. You are obviously not a scholar of history. Pity that. If people really appreciated history, they would learn what worked and what didn't. They'd also learn what mistakes not repeat.

Good to see our supporters still living in the past

 

[Tango67]

If he does it will be daughters like the rest of them

think you missed the point

 

[Infamy]

think you missed the point

I got the point, doesn't mean I can't have a joke about Richo not having kids or having daughters instead
For what its worth, my opinion would be the same for any father/son... even if its actually a father/son

I didn't really have a problem with Steve Morris given he arrived given he's only got #38

 

[Tigerforlife78]

I got the point, doesn't mean I can't have a joke about Richo not having kids or having daughters instead
For what its worth, my opinion would be the same for any father/son... even if its actually a father/son

I didn't really have a problem with Steve Morris given he arrived given he's only got #38

So hang on a minute, if Maurice Rioli had worn 37 instead of 17 and 37 was given to Dan that would be ok but because it is 20 numbers lower at 17 that isn't ok? That is some damn awful logic to argue for as long as you have on your point mate.

 

[TheProwler]

Loving him in #17. Haters gunna hate though...........

 

[Infamy]

So hang on a minute, if Maurice Rioli had worn 37 instead of 17 and 37 was given to Dan that would be ok but because it is 20 numbers lower at 17 that isn't ok? That is some damn awful logic to argue for as long as you have on your point mate.

38 only had significance to Steve. There's a fair chance he would have been allocated that number anyway. Its not traditionally an important Richmond number.

It also only happened in Dimma's 2nd year, so to be honest it never really registered as a problem back then and the standard that he brought over from Hawthorn had only just started.

 

[Tigerforlife78]

38 only had significance to Steve. There's a fair chance he would have been allocated that number anyway. Its not traditionally an important Richmond number.

It also only happened in Dimma's 2nd year, so to be honest it never really registered as a problem back then and the standard that he brought over from Hawthorn had only just started.

Well your entitled to your opinion mate and i think we have reached an impasse on this one and will not convince each other other wise or see even close to eye to eye. Im out, enjoy your night

 

[Ancient Tiger]

38 only had significance to Steve. There's a fair chance he would have been allocated that number anyway. Its not traditionally an important Richmond number.

It also only happened in Dimma's 2nd year, so to be honest it never really registered as a problem back then and the standard that he brought over from Hawthorn had only just started.

It is only the number of the ruckman that helped win us the 1969 flag, Michael Green. He is a club champion. So it is a significant number!

See the problem with some people that support our club is that they know SFA about its history. Why don't you look up significant players in the history of the RFC before you make a comment. Considering we have only won 10 flags you would think that you would know a little about at least the last 5.....

 

[Infamy]

It is only the number of the ruckman that helped win us the 1969 flag, Michael Green. He is a club champion. So it is a significant number!

See the problem with some people that support our club is that they know SFA about its history. Why don't you look up significant players in the history of the RFC before you make a comment. Considering we have only won 10 flags you would think that you would know a little about at least the last 5.....

There are significant players who have played in pretty much every single number, but #17 is still the most important

 

[THE_GUN]

There are significant players who have played in pretty much every single number, but #17 is still the most important

Not for me it really isnt, Its the number the legend jack dyer wore and M. Rioli wore

But there are other numbers that i find just as important
#3 , #4 , #12 , #29 , #30

 

[Infamy]

Not for me it really isnt, Its the number the legend jack dyer wore and M. Rioli wore

But there are other numbers that i find just as important
#3 , #4 , #12 , #29 , #30

And I wouldn't agree with handing any of those numbers out straight away to a new kid

 

[Ancient Tiger]

There are significant players who have played in pretty much every single number, but #17 is still the most important

No disputing that. However 37 IS significant. Green was fantastic for us and basically won us the flag in 1969. He also played in 2 more premiership sides (73/74), making him a triple premiership player. Hardly insignificant I would have thought.....

Edit. Just imagine right now if we had a triple premiership Ruckman, say Maric, wouldn't you think that 20 would become a significant number? Of course it would. Just because Green played in the 60's and 70's should not decrease his significance!!!!!

 

[Infamy]

No disputing that. However 37 IS significant. Green was fantastic for us and basically won us the flag in 1969. He also played in 2 more premiership sides (73/74), making him a triple premiership player. Hardly insignificant I would have thought.....

You know Steve Morris is 38 right?

 

[Ancient Tiger]

You know Steve Morris is 38 right?

So what? You stated it was ok to give a kid 37 because it had no significance. I am showing you why you are incorrect with that logic because 37 is significant. More significant than 38 because Kevin only won one premiership compared to Green's 3, although obviously 38 has significance too.

 

[THE_GUN]

And I wouldn't agree with handing any of those numbers out straight away to a new kid

I have no issue with handing the number to a kid that im confident will make it, Lids is and will always be #3 and im glad we gave it to him from day dot