Mega Thread Essendon vs Richmond - Matchday Discussion

[nut]

Re: Essendon vs Richmond - Team Discussion

Definately an outsider looking in here on Richmond, but for mine as an Essendon supporter, I'm fairly happy with your team changes this week for 2 reasons:

1. Surely Tuck had to come in? His papers really must be stamped, and the focus really must be genuinely on youth for this guy to not be in the side.

2. Vickery playing #1 ruck. By no means am I saying he cannot do this, but him out of the forward line I believe leaves a huge hole. With teams putting multiple numbers on Riewoldt this season, Vickery has thrived forward. With him out of the forward line, defenders can afford to come off their man to help on Riewoldt with less fear.

Anyway, good luck tomorrow night, but we owe you for more than one occasion of recent, so I sure hope we bring the same intensity as last week.

Correct on both points....

 

[Rayzorwire]

Re: Essendon vs Richmond - Team Discussion

Deledio McGuane Thursfield White Graham Riewoldt Edwards Connors King Cotchin Rance Gourdis Vickery Post Hislop Nahas & Browne. Those in bold are the ones, I'd suggest, that have genuinely improved. The rest have either stagnated, gone backwards or haven't done enough to say for certain that they will be long term options. Of those that aren't highlighted its quite possible that up to 6 of them might not be on the list at seasons end with a couple of others only remaining out of necessity rather than talent. Pretty damning when you look at it like that just how much work Hardwick still has to do to turn things around.

It really does depend how you look at it.

When I made my list, King, Rance and Vickery were on it, they were in your highly doubtful list as I recall. Neither of us had a lot of hope for Nahas, he's proven both of us wrong and is now one of our most important players if we're to ever get a half decent side together anytime soon.

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this past debate you're referring to was a case of me saying to you that we had quite a few more 'definites' and 'probably's' from the Wallace draft era than you were suggesting - IIRC, beyond about 4-5 players, you weren't prepared to back any more to kick on. Quite a few of them have, so I'm not sure what you're arguing...that I was right?

All of Nahas, Graham, Browne, Post and Gourdis have improved to some extent - I would argue dramatically so in Nahas and even Graham's case, Connors has been injured all year.

I think it's fair to question why McGuane and Thursfield were better players under Wallace and to question why they have gone backwards (which I think you're right in saying), I'm not sure we should have expected improvement, but to at least hold their past form, stand up and lead the kids a bit was reasonable. White is a bit stiff, his game relies on us controlling the ball much more than we have done, he's another - among many - whose form has suffered due to our coaching and selection policies. One could easily ask the same form questions about Foley, who seems physically back to somewhere near his best, but is now playing very average, directionless football in a horrible midfield. He's a million miles from the form he (and we) were in when he had the big bodies of Tuck and Sandbag Johnson crashing bodies and opening the game up for him.

I remember when, how and why Foley played his best football; could you say with any confidence that Hardwick or anyone from the coaching staff has watched, analysed, and learned from those games? I'd put good money on the probability that nobody down there has watched those games, and if they haven't, then they don't even begin to know how to maximise the effectiveness of our supposed no.1 onballer.

That's the kind of gap between having their act together professionally and flailing around blindly that I've been talking about for a while now, and I'd bet there's tons of other similar instances - what could you honestly expect from a coaching staff which lets players watch a win against Essendon last time as their weekly video education session this week?

Head in the sand Hardwick...insisting on using his green cavalry as infantry years before the final battle, making sure they get smashed repeatedly because it'll 'do them good,' undermining list morale with his man fetishes, yet many of you are actively worshipping him the whole way.

A good coach would have us playing the following side this year given the set of circumstances Hardwick walked into and what he's been given to work with since:

B: Conca Rance Moore/Grimes
HB: Martin Astbury/Post/Gourdis Houli
C: Deledio Foley Nahas
HF: Connors Reiwoldt Cotchin
F: King Schulz Vickery
Foll: Graham Tuck Jackson
Int: Grigg, Newman, Morton, Webberley Batchelor etc

You don't recruit Miller, you don't keep Thursfield, you add another kid and someone who is actually useful, like a Curnow or a Duigan/Puopolo type. You don't swap a reasonable key forward like Schulz for a guy like Farmer when you're looking to add footskills and pace to your smaller brigade and your key talls are very young and raw. You don't muck about with highly speculative picks like Taylor and Roberts, then expect your supporters to forgive you when you still don't have enough depth years into the program. You never play kids like Roberts, Taylor, Helbig, Browne etc. until they're genuinely ready to earn the jumper. You don't let Newman dirty the 17 with his anonymous, leadership-devoid games anymore - he gets fit and works hard off the bench through the outside mid/HFF rotations where he can finally do some real damage with his one trick occasionally, or he gets cut/traded. No more captain in hiding performances accepted.

You play a side with a midfield that can win more than its fair share of ball and get it to your forwards one-out from the centre square, you play as talented and dangerous a forwardline as you can muster, and these things allow you the luxury of fixing the defence properly with the right brand of players and the right support for them to flourish. You add your new mids each draft to the spots Conca and Martin occupy and upgrade them into any weak slots on the wings and flanks. When they're fully AFL fit men, you use them a lot more in the centre square, only the desperate or the clueless do otherwise and we're not desperate.

If you want to talk about what Hardwick inherited and what he's done with it, look at the above side, allow for injuries if you like, look at the side we're sending out tomorrow in a season where we could have easily played finals, and tell me honestly that Hardwick hasn't dropped the ball, fumbled it a few times, and ended up floundering around on top of it.

The above side doesn't compromise development, it enhances development, it'd finish top-8 and would have given us the season we desperately needed to have - and a couple of extra promising kids to go with it.

 

[Dustin Credible]

Re: Essendon vs Richmond - Team Discussion

Don't particularly wish to intrude on your an RTs personal debate but

You don't recruit Miller, you don't keep Thursfield, you add another kid and someone who is actually useful, like a Curnow or a Duigan/Puopolo type. You don't swap a reasonable key forward like Schulz for a guy like Farmer when you're looking to add footskills and pace to your smaller brigade and your key talls are very young and raw.

I believe that the trading of Schulz was done prior to Hardwick arriving (by Cameron) and that he has stated that Schulz was the one player he would have kept.

You don't muck about with highly speculative picks like Taylor and Roberts, then expect your supporters to forgive you when you still don't have enough depth years into the program.

You don't speculate with high-end draft picks, say like JON. Relton was a rookie, Taylor was IIRC a 4th round draft pick. Perfectly acceptable, IMO to look for value in those stages of the draft. As all players at those picks come with some risks. It's not acceptable to speculate with 1st round draft picks.

You never play kids like Roberts, Taylor, Helbig, Browne etc. until they're genuinely ready to earn the jumper.

You can only do that if you have senior players who are 'genuinely ready to earn the jumper'. Not sure we've got that. Plus I'm of the opinion they've got to experience the speed of play,the physicality and the atmosphere of the crowds before they can become ready.

You don't let Newman dirty the 17 with his anonymous, leadership-devoid games anymore - he gets fit and works hard off the bench through the outside mid/HFF rotations where he can finally do some real damage with his one trick occasionally, or he gets cut/traded. No more captain in hiding performances accepted.

I have to agree with this part, his inability to lead by example is painful to watch.

 

[Rayzorwire]

Re: Essendon vs Richmond - Team Discussion

Don't particularly wish to intrude on your an RTs personal debate

Anyone's always welcome to have their say Dustin.

I believe that the trading of Schulz was done prior to Hardwick arriving (by Cameron) and that he has stated that Schulz was the one player he would have kept.

Fair enough, I guess he or anyone would have a tough job making a case for some of the Polo's and Simmonds' we did keep instead though, which is my central point.

You don't speculate with high-end draft picks, say like JON. Relton was a rookie, Taylor was IIRC a 4th round draft pick. Perfectly acceptable, IMO to look for value in those stages of the draft. As all players at those picks come with some risks. It's not acceptable to speculate with 1st round draft picks.

I don't think it's ever acceptable to speculate until you have genuine depth, then you can go chasing the elusive x factors you weren't able to cover with your picks at the richer end of the talent pool. Roberts and Taylor were the sort of picks we should have reserved for Hardwick's 4th and 5th years, assuming he gets there.

You can only do that if you have senior players who are 'genuinely ready to earn the jumper'. Not sure we've got that. Plus I'm of the opinion they've got to experience the speed of play,the physicality and the atmosphere of the crowds before they can become ready.

Webberley is ready to be blooded much harder, he's the type of kid we really need to get games into, great kick, good athlete, hard worker, quick enough to get by, he could walk in and match Newman's actual (as opposed to heavily fantasised and exaggerated) output from tomorrow if he was allowed to play on the weakest small forward each week.

But here we are playing a serially AWOL 29yo in his ideal position, playing Helbig, Farmer and Hislop more often in other roles which could also suit him, and giving him no crack whatsoever at senior level.

Bad judgement, again.

I like to see a kid like Helbig take a dozen marks on the lead at Coburg in the seniors, kick 4-5 goals and really present himself as a viable AFL option with a big enough tank to play against men before he samples the higher level. You have to be at least thereabouts to really get anything out of it IMO.

 

[_RT_]

Re: Essendon vs Richmond - Team Discussion

Head in the sand Hardwick...insisting on using his green cavalry as infantry years before the final battle, making sure they get smashed repeatedly because it'll 'do them good,' undermining list morale with his man fetishes, yet many of you are actively worshipping him the whole way. [

Compare that with TWs plan of having most kids spend most of their time at Coburg before they were given an opportunity, often only 1-2 weeks, to show that they were capable of performing at this level. More often than not if the kid didn't star he was sent back to Coburg for another month or 2 before the cycle repeated again. At least under Hardwick we're finding out very quickly which kids can and can't take us forward. Again its all about fast tracking the development of the entire list as quickly as possible. You don't do that by having green kids sitting at Coburg for their first 2 years.

A good coach would have us playing the following side this year given the set of circumstances Hardwick walked into and what he's been given to work with since:

B: Conca Rance Moore/Grimes
HB: Martin Astbury/Post/Gourdis Houli
C: Deledio Foley Nahas
HF: Connors Reiwoldt Cotchin
F: King Schulz Vickery
Foll: Graham Tuck Jackson
Int: Grigg, Newman, Morton, Webberley Batchelor etc

When you remove the highlighted players and make a few positional changes, its pretty much the side we have been playing this year. Astbury/Post/Gourdis have missed out on games through a combination of form and injury. Connors/Moore/Grimes have missed through injury, Morton through off field issues, Schulz through being traded and Tuck through reasons that have been discussed ad nauseum. So I'm not sure exactly what there is to complain about except that the bloke you have a man fetish about isn't playing when fit.

You don't recruit Miller, you don't keep Thursfield, you add another kid and someone who is actually useful, like a Curnow or a Duigan/Puopolo type. You don't swap a reasonable key forward like Schulz for a guy like Farmer when you're looking to add footskills and pace to your smaller brigade and your key talls are very young and raw.

Schulz had been on our list for 7 seasons and had countless opportunities before he was finally traded, not sure how keeping him around would have improved how performances much more than what we've currently achieved with Miller effectively playing in his place. We also shopped Thursfield around at the end of last season but couldn't get the deal done, given he was still contracted we had little option but to keep him on.

You don't muck about with highly speculative picks like Taylor and Roberts, then expect your supporters to forgive you when you still don't have enough depth years into the program. You never play kids like Roberts, Taylor, Helbig, Browne etc. until they're genuinely ready to earn the jumper. You don't let Newman dirty the 17 with his anonymous, leadership-devoid games anymore - he gets fit and works hard off the bench through the outside mid/HFF rotations where he can finally do some real damage with his one trick occasionally, or he gets cut/traded. No more captain in hiding performances accepted.

We're barely 18 months into the program, surely after giving an experienced head coach like TW 4.5 years, we can allow a rookie coach in Hardwick to have at least his first contract before we start criticising him.

You play a side with a midfield that can win more than its fair share of ball and get it to your forwards one-out from the centre square, you play as talented and dangerous a forwardline as you can muster, and these things allow you the luxury of fixing the defence properly with the right brand of players and the right support for them to flourish. You add your new mids each draft to the spots Conca and Martin occupy and upgrade them into any weak slots on the wings and flanks. When they're fully AFL fit men, you use them a lot more in the centre square, only the desperate or the clueless do otherwise and we're not desperate.

If you want to talk about what Hardwick inherited and what he's done with it, look at the above side, allow for injuries if you like, look at the side we're sending out tomorrow in a season where we could have easily played finals, and tell me honestly that Hardwick hasn't dropped the ball, fumbled it a few times, and ended up floundering around on top of it.

The above side doesn't compromise development, it enhances development, it'd finish top-8 and would have given us the season we desperately needed to have - and a couple of extra promising kids to go with it.

We could have gone down the path you suggest and we could have possibly made finals but all that would have done is hide the truth of where our list stands. You see what you're overlooking is our list simply isn't good enough to play finals this year and anyone who thinks that it was/is is in reality kidding themselves. The only reason we found ourselves in contention for a spot in the 8 a few weeks ago was because the Dogs Roos & Saints started the season so poorly. Now that these teams have started to play more like the teams they were last year they have overtaken us and we find ourselves in the spot we rightfully should have been from the start.

The ones who have dropped the ball in this instance are our supporters who got caught up in the emotion of possibly playing finals and started thinking that we were a real chance. Now that reality has hit them in the face we get posts and threads complaining about how poorly Hardwick and co are travelling when in fact they are right where they should be 18 months into the plan.

 

[smasha]

Re: Essendon vs Richmond - Team Discussion

Bombers will probably beat us but I will go hoping for a win and see all the Bummerfans beating their chests over beating us.

We've already done that 6 weeks ago lol.

They might win the battle lads,but we are going to win the WAR!

 

[Bazzar]

Re: Essendon vs Richmond - Team Discussion

Looking forward to this. First time in recent memory we have gone in without a lumbering recognised ruck (or injured Simo) but two mobile big blokes in Vick and Griff and a handy backup in Post. Griff looked very comfortable in his few rucks last week and will be interesting to see how he goes in the middle. It will be almost like an extra defaco mid as Browne was next to useless around the ground apart from throwing his body in. Maybe a sign of things to come in deciding the type of ruck we might look at drafting.

 

[PHX]

Re: Essendon vs Richmond - Team Discussion

Looking forward to this. First time in recent memory we have gone in without a lumbering recognised ruck (or injured Simo) but two mobile big blokes in Vick and Griff and a handy backup in Post. Griff looked very comfortable in his few rucks last week and will be interesting to see how he goes in the middle. It will be almost like an extra defaco mid as Browne was next to useless around the ground apart from throwing his body in. Maybe a sign of things to come in deciding the type of ruck we might look at drafting.

The reason I am shitting bricks though Bazz, is that the Griff hurt his ribs last week and had to be subbed out and now we're going to throw him in the ruck and let Hille stick the knee into him? And make no mistake he will.

I just hope that the Griff has the ruck nous to know how to protect himself if we are to have him having a stint in there.

 

[Bazzar]

Re: Essendon vs Richmond - Team Discussion

The reason I am shitting bricks though Bazz, is that the Griff hurt his ribs last week and had to be subbed out and now we're going to throw him in the ruck and let Hille stick the knee into him? And make no mistake he will.

I just hope that the Griff has the ruck nous to know how to protect himself if we are to have him having a stint in there.

My thoughts as well, but we cant cotton wool him for ever, and with Vick being named in the middle he should take Brownes role with Griff going forward. Vick has never had extended ruck time so i cant wait to see how he handles it.

 

[juss]

Re: Essendon vs Richmond - Team Discussion

I know this might not be a popular view, but I reckon it's essential Graham plays tonight - purely for structural purposes.

Not having Graham will mean Vickery rucks most of the time. I reckon there's a few reasons why we need him in tonight.

1. Vickery is hugely important to our forward line, when Riewoldt cops attention, Vickery is the only proven tall who looms as a threat. Griffiths in only his second game back, I can't see him stepping up and kicking 3-5 like Vickery can.

2. Vickery is not a proven ruck. He is yet to show he can compete for a full game in the ruck. Against Essendon with a strong ruck division, this could be really dangerous. Last week we were smashed in the middle, Essendon's rucks could do the same to us. Lose the clearance battle lose the game.

3. Having Vickery as number 1 would leave Griffiths and Post as the back ups. Seriously? An injury prone tall in his second game of the year, after copping bruised ribs the week before could be forced to ruck for a long period if injuries occured. The other back up is a KPP (out of form) who usually will be giving away 5cm and 5kg on any ruck he comes against. Very risky. Neither of these guys are in form, fully match fit, or even ruckmen.

4. Having Graham might not be great, but at the very least it allows us to keep our forward structure. I'd bring him in for Thursfield as a late change. Essendon don't have key forwards that worry me. Rance played one of his best games against the bombers last time, I reckon he and McGuane should be enough in terms of KPBs, not to mention there is also Post.

5. Vickery will get his chance to ruck, but geez he's had an okay year in the forward line, his first year where he has really shown good signs. Why not persist with that? Let him improve further in a position he is making his own. He's 20 years old, 200cm and 95 kilos. Let him have a go in the ruck next year when he's closer to that 100kg mark and has had another preseason and a better engine to run out a game on the ball. He was trained as a forward over the summer, leave him there for the year.



Apart from all that, I can see us winning this. I just think this is set up for us. Bombers beat the top team and we get done by 100 points. Ofcourse it looks like we're no chance to the media, but I think we are both mid table sides, and fairly even. Given our recent record against them, we clearly know how to beat them even when out of form. I reckon the boys will be burning to get out in this game and show something, where as the bombers might be pretty thrashed after a huge effort to beat the cats. It takes some serious resolve to come out and beat Geelong, that takes its toll both mentally and physically. I think we are a better chance with Vickery up forward, if Graham comes in, I'm tipping a cracker of a game that goes down to the last quarter.

Tigers by 10.
102 - 92.

 

[Vitalogy]

Re: Essendon vs Richmond - Team Discussion

If we get belted tonight we are back to square one. Dimma is going to get crucified if he plays Vickery as our main ruckman tonight and it doesn't work out. What does Tuck have to do to get a game.

 

[tiggywigs]

Re: Essendon vs Richmond - Team Discussion

Truly curious as to the logic of team selection this week. Personally thought Helbig was stand-out awful last week (and I am a fan of his long term potential) and Farmer not so (can be quite cool in a crisis). Dimma and crew clearly have no love for Graham or Tuck, and not sure why Webs or Nason can't crack a game where pace will be required.

Be interesting to see how Houli stands up against his old side when the chips are down and whether Grigg can start to show some grunt.

BTW, can't understand the criticism of Post last week. Seemed to have a genuine crack at it, was the best I have seen for him below his knees, and was a stand out for his attack on the ball early when so few others were for the Tiges. I can still see him making it.

 

[Bazzar]

Re: Essendon vs Richmond - Team Discussion

I know this might not be a popular view, but I reckon it's essential Graham plays tonight - purely for structural purposes.

Not having Graham will mean Vickery rucks most of the time. I reckon there's a few reasons why we need him in tonight.

1. Vickery is hugely important to our forward line, when Riewoldt cops attention, Vickery is the only proven tall who looms as a threat. Griffiths in only his second game back, I can't see him stepping up and kicking 3-5 like Vickery can.

I think the timing has been planned to perfection with the complaint to Geesh and the fact it was made public. With some luck it will be Jack who is looked after and that leaves Griff more loose as a possible danger.

And as its a perfect night for footy, i wouldnt be surprised a late change Post for Gus, but i hope not.

 

[tunksy]

Re: Essendon vs Richmond - Team Discussion

I think the timing has been planned to perfection with the complaint to Geesh and the fact it was made public. With some luck it will be Jack who is looked after and that leaves Griff more loose as a possible danger.

And as its a perfect night for footy, i wouldnt be surprised a late change Post for Gus, but i hope not.

well youd hope he gets some love from the umps, maybe. or it could just piss the Geesh off.


Post has to stay in. was very good early on last game, kept the big K man quiet for most of the game. if anyone goes out for GUS it should be one of Mcguane or Thurstfield. come on. Rance, Post, Thurstfield, Mcguane. we need 4 talls in the back line now? are we releasing newman and dids to play a more permanent midfield role??

 

[TimeFor11]

Re: Essendon vs Richmond - Team Discussion

I for one am not concerned about the Ruck situation we have tonight, play Vick and Post in the bounces and then Griff can also rotate around the ground is my understanding of what will happen. Then the 2 that aren't rucking can rotate forward and bench.

 

[captain blood 17]

Re: Essendon vs Richmond - Team Discussion

Don't you love kids. My oldest asks who's playing tonight. I say Tigers mate, you wanna watch with dad? We're struggling a bit. He says "dad i want to watch us beat the bombers". He knew all about last week, but he's in.
Carn Tigers. For those going tonight, enjoy it, and sing that song!!

 

[TheProwler]

Any late changes, surely Gus has to come in for thursty or Mcguane?

 

[PHX]

Nope.

Essendon v Richmond at the MCG, 7.10pm
NO CHANGES

FINAL INTERCHANGES
Essendon: Brent Stanton, Angus Monfries, Kyle Reimers
Substitute: Ricky Dyson

Richmond: Dustin Martin, Shaun Grigg, Jake Batchelor
Substitute: Tom Hislop

 

[Rubber Hips]

after last weeks capitulation, id hope that we come out and tackle tackle tackle

don't expect to win but I do expect the tigers to get within 20 points at the final siren

defining games for thursty, slops and grigg

 

[TheProwler]

Nope.

Essendon v Richmond at the MCG, 7.10pm
NO CHANGES

FINAL INTERCHANGES
Essendon: Brent Stanton, Angus Monfries, Kyle Reimers
Substitute: Ricky Dyson

Richmond: Dustin Martin, Shaun Grigg, Jake Batchelor
Substitute: Tom Hislop

Bummer guess I will have to see what Dimma and co have planned then

Maybe Batch and Post may spend some time in the forward half tonight?

 

[thetwooth]

can anyone explain why foxsports 518 has the gc vs sydney on when its information says they are to be playing the richmond essendon match

 

[Tigerland]

WTF

I'm in NSW

Channel 10 - Swans v GC
Fox Sports 1 - Swans v GC
Fox Sports Extra - Swans v GC

Someone has f**&^d up bigtime.

I'm not paying $70 a month for this garbage!

 

[thetwooth]

same here tigerland, im on hold trying to get some answers from them. not impressed at all!!!!!

 

[thetwooth]

phew , its on!!!!

 

[Bazzar]

Very, very happy, no change, im hanging to see us more mobile. Big tick for Dimma and match committee