Roast The Chronicles of Alan Richardson - Part II - Richo Resigns (16/07)

[mightymalaka]

Ok

Is it?

 

[saintspremiers]

Geogie Porgie says we are on track for 8 more wins this year!

Is he for real?

If we lose as expected to Collingfilth that’s 4 losses in a row - yes all to good sides I get that, but still 4 on the trot.

That’s got to sap a lot of confidence out of the group!

Telling will be the Carlton game - lose that and it could spiral.

Let’s wait for the next two games before talking about a 12 win season.

 

[CaptainRisky]

I think it's fine to be critical of the club when it's warranted. Blaming the current administration for the fact we haven't played finals in 9 years is wrong. Majority of them took over in 2014 and most of it was spent on rebuilding the brand and getting the business side of the club back up to scratch - and we've seen what they've done - we were able to leverage $12m into a $50m world class facility at Moorabbin. We have broken our membership record three straight years. We are better positioned to service our debt. All things that would've gone nowhere under previous administration. If it weren't for Finnis and the rest of them we would still be training out of Seaford - a place that all the players disliked. Would we have got Carlisle if we stayed in Seaford? Would we have got Steele? Carlisle lives in the north western suburbs, as if he would've wanted to travel to far south east every day. These are all things people need to take into consideration when they have a go at the club.

Now that we've realised that the business off-field is running smoothly, we put our attention towards improving on field. I will say this probably should've been done the other way around, but it is what it is. After six months since our focus on football narrative became public, we strengthened our coaching group, hired experienced legends like Billy Slater & Dermott Brereton, and brought in Graeme Allan who is a massive get for a club like ours and will have a big say in future trades with other clubs for talented players.

I just find it silly to keep criticisng the club, especially this year since we sit 4-4 and everyone who has watched us play knows we have improved greatly, and the fact that the new people that have been brought in by the club haven't even had a chance to prove to us that they are a good appointment - yet we want to criticise them anyway. Lets see what happens in the trade and draft period, where most of these appointments will be graded (Allan & Gallagher). As for on the field, the only thing I can fault is entry and scoring - something Brett Ratten was brought in for. If we can get this fixed we are a top four side. It's not as bad as people like to think it is.

Great post apart from the last bit George , we are no where near a top 4 side this year or next , may scrape into the 8 next year IMO

 

[George]

Great post apart from the last bit George , we are no where near a top 4 side this year or next , may scrape into the 8 next year IMO

Fair enough. If we fix our entry I think we would've won the last two games. From what I've seen we are good enough. Anyway just a difference in opinion, all good.

 

[Mowman]

Geogie Porgie says we are on track for 8 more wins this year!

Is he for real?

If we lose as expected to Collingfilth that’s 4 losses in a row - yes all to good sides I get that, but still 4 on the trot.

That’s got to sap a lot of confidence out of the group!

Telling will be the Carlton game - lose that and it could spiral.

Let’s wait for the next two games before talking about a 12 win season.

I agree i dont see 8 more wins more like 4 - 6 which is still a very good year compared to last year.
But last year was as bad as anything I have seen for a long time

 

[Premium]

I agree i dont see 8 more wins more like 4 - 6 which is still a very good year compared to last year.
But last year was as bad as anything I have seen for a long time

This next 2 games are big games , get flogged by the Pies and beaten by the Blues and the wheels fall off.

We get past the Blues game at 5 and 5 and we will still be alive for finals with Hannebery , Carlisle and Steven a chance to come back.

 

[Present Not Past]

My gut feeling says the same VDS66.

I feel Jack will give the game away....he'll never leave us and go to another club.

He loves the Saints too much and would want to be a one team player.

Is Jack the player who has had to play the most games at our Club under the coaching of Richardson?
Broken by the Cho?

 

[BrutThough]

Is Jack the player who has had to play the most games at our Club under the coaching of Richardson?
Broken by the Cho?

Are you seriously trying to suggest Jack's serious mental health issues are a product of Richo or is it just a very ill informed joke?

 

[Present Not Past]

Are you seriously trying to suggest Jack's serious mental health issues are a product of Richo or is it just a very ill informed joke?

Obviously I don't have the inside knowledge about Jack's issues that you do so I am only conjecturing, however, there's plenty of evidence to suggest that constant failure in your area of employment does have an impact on one's mental health. I wonder how many other players have retired early due to the prospect of seeing no obvious success in their future?

 

[George]

Obviously I don't have the inside knowledge about Jack's issues that you do so I am only conjecturing, however, there's plenty of evidence to suggest that constant failure in your area of employment does have an impact on one's mental health. I wonder how many other players have retired early due to the prospect of seeing no obvious success in their future?

Quit while you're behind lol.

 

[VDS66]

Is Jack the player who has had to play the most games at our Club under the coaching of Richardson?
Broken by the Cho?

Do you think before you post?

 

[kernelT]

This next 2 games are big games , get flogged by the Pies and beaten by the Blues and the wheels fall off.

We get past the Blues game at 5 and 5 and we will still be alive for finals with Hannebery , Carlisle and Steven a chance to come back.

Carlton game is huge isn't it?

A whole lot riding on that one for Richo IMO, and they have been playing pretty well lately without getting wins, but have scored 605 points to our 604, but have conceded a few more goals.

12 or more wins and it's my shout at the bar... just a pot though and no fancy craft shit.

 

[Persevering Saint]

Hope the playing list and the club in general do not share this view!
" I don't get worked up over games that we were expected to lose"

Frankly, I disagree. As I've been saying the last few weeks, given injuries and the quality of the opposition, the likelihood of us winning them was extremely low. There are significant strategic advantages that come from the club being realistic about those games:

1. It stops players risking injury in a futile attempt to win, whether by trying excessively in games to the point of injury, or even playing at all (some players have benefitted over the last few weeks from being managed).
2. It avoids them being shamed and guilted for failing to achieve the impossible, ie, "we suck because we couldn't win". That is a pointless sucking of morale.
3. It gets them focussing on winning the war, that is, getting into finals. Nobody cares WHICH 13 wins you win to get into finals - they just care that you win 13 games.
4. It gives them other achievable goals in those games, which the team can build on to improve in the second half of the season, which is full of more winnable games. I've written about this at length in several post-game thread posts recently. That builds morale, and confidence going into those more winnable games.

The whole "go out there to win every game" is noble, but strategically flawed, in my opinion.

 

[Persevering Saint]

Let's go through the rest of the season's games, and give a conservative estimate of wins, based on location and ladder position:

1. Collingwood at MCG = Loss.
2. Carlton at Marvel = Win.
3. Port in China = Loss.
4. Suns in Townsville = Either way.
5. Lions at Marvel = Either way.
6. Richmond at Marvel = Loss.
7. North in Tassie = Win.
8. Geelong in Geelong = Loss.
9. Bulldogs at Marvel = Win.
10. Melbourne at Marvel = Either way.
11. Carlton at MCG = Win.
12. Sydney at SCG = Win.

That's four more probable wins, taking us to 8. We win the either way games, that's 11. If we can sneak one or two more surprise win somewhere along the way (I have my eye on that Sydney one, though I think playing at the SCG will kill us), and that's 12-13. All of these assumptions are made without factoring in the significant difference that the likely addition of Stuv, Lonie, Carlisle, Hannerbury, Geary will make to our quality of play in the coming month. That could be those extra 2 wins, right there.

 

[Persevering Saint]

And I think that one of the BIG wins against the Eagles on the weekend was the shift to attempts to lower the eyes. That was most illuminating. It revealed the reason why the coaches have been loath to do it - namely, that the disposal skills of the mids delivering the ball into the 50, and separation skills of the forwards have been identified by the coaches as not being good enough. What was significant about the Eagles game was that, rather than just conceding that and choosing the low-skill option of bombing it instead, the coaches finally decided to do the harder, more long-term process of starting to practice it in games.


That is a key reason we lost - and I don't care. If we're going to get forty-something attempts to kick into into the fifty, I'd rather every single one of them was a practice at precision delivery and we stuffed up thirty-five of them, than that we bomb it in and score off twenty of them. Over time, the players will get more in sync, and learn their way to proper disposal. This is a quintessential example of my "sacrificing a pawn" idea: I'm willing to put a game we're already likely to lose, and make it completely unwinnable, if in the process we improve our forward-50 entries. In the short term that's frustrating, but in the long term it will allow us to win far more games.

 

[MrFoster]

yeap and who oversaw the list management in that time. our list managers were ameet -> trout -> Gallagher under Finnis. Trout the most experienced by a fair margin. the other two came in with no experience.

do you think the lack of experience has something to do with having no real plan and the outcomes we get?

In truth, we mismanaged the contracts/list in the Ross Lyon years, hired Pelchen to fix the problem.. we had to get rid of some of our senior players in Dal Santo/Goddard who was on big money or wanted more money.. Pelcen’s strategy was not wrong, by rebuilding the list through trading and drafting. trading was ok, but coaching and drafting was really poor, Richardson did not recognise midfield is our big problem, instead of drafting/trading for gun mids, we focused on system/flooding/pressure, drafting utilities rather

fair call, you are correct, there is every chance Hunter, Gresham, Coffield and Bytel will all get there with Billings. but all we can go on now is the knowns. the actual output

Future potential is good and encouraging, but we need help now.. imagine a small Gresham or skinny Clark going against Bont, Neal, Wines, Mitchell, Oliver, Crouch brothers, Kennedy, Shuey, Dangerfield (can’t be bothered to list everyone), Ross and Steele are good, but they ar not your big ball winning mids that almost every club has.. the engine room of every side. That’s why we need to get someone from the mid-season draft, then try to add more through trading/FA, we have enough kids, adding more is not going to help until 2-3 years down the line. By the way, Steven is not an inside mid, he was forced to play there because we don’t have anyone after Lenny, and Armo’s one season wonder..

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Let's go through the rest of the season's games, and give a conservative estimate of wins, based on location and ladder position:

1. Collingwood at MCG = Loss.
2. Carlton at Marvel = Win.
3. Port in China = Loss.
4. Suns in Townsville = Either way.
5. Lions at Marvel = Either way.
6. Richmond at Marvel = Loss.
7. North in Tassie = Win.
8. Geelong in Geelong = Loss.
9. Bulldogs at Marvel = Win.
10. Melbourne at Marvel = Either way.
11. Carlton at MCG = Win.
12. Sydney at SCG = Win.

That's four more probable wins, taking us to 8. We win the either way games, that's 11. If we can sneak one or two more surprise win somewhere along the way (I have my eye on that Sydney one, though I think playing at the SCG will kill us), and that's 12-13. All of these assumptions are made without factoring in the significant difference that the likely addition of Stuv, Lonie, Carlisle, Hannerbury, Geary will make to our quality of play in the coming month. That could be those extra 2 wins, right there.

How many probable wins did you have at the start of the year? When you found out we had no Roberton, Hannebery, Carlilse , McCartin?

 

[MrFoster]

And I think that one of the BIG wins against the Eagles on the weekend was the shift to attempts to lower the eyes. That was most illuminating. It revealed the reason why the coaches have been loath to do it - namely, that the disposal skills of the mids delivering the ball into the 50, and separation skills of the forwards have been identified by the coaches as not being good enough. What was significant about the Eagles game was that, rather than just conceding that and choosing the low-skill option of bombing it instead, the coaches finally decided to do the harder, more long-term process of starting to practice it in games.


That is a key reason we lost - and I don't care. If we're going to get forty-something attempts to kick into into the fifty, I'd rather every single one of them was a practice at precision delivery and we stuffed up thirty-five of them, than that we bomb it in and score off twenty of them. Over time, the players will get more in sync, and learn their way to proper disposal. This is a quintessential example of my "sacrificing a pawn" idea: I'm willing to put a game we're already likely to lose, and make it completely unwinnable, if in the process we improve our forward-50 entries. In the short term that's frustrating, but in the long term it will allow us to win far more games.

Part of the bombing long strategy is also it’s a system every player regardless of position, skill set can execute.. a precise kick to a leading forward, or taking the game on/taking on the tackler, not many in our side can do.. it’s basically a defensive tactic because our general skill is poor.. so we accommodate for the less skilled players.. rather than getting better skilled players into the side like White, Rice.

 

[Saint Shags]

Obviously I don't have the inside knowledge about Jack's issues that you do so I am only conjecturing, however, there's plenty of evidence to suggest that constant failure in your area of employment does have an impact on one's mental health. I wonder how many other players have retired early due to the prospect of seeing no obvious success in their future?

What an absolute joke.
Ha friggen ha.

Perhaps instead of trying to spread some ****ed up rumour or blame a guy for someones mental health issues, you take a second to reflect and realise what you are saying is so degrading and ****ed up, and not post that shit.

Have a crack at tactics records and player development. But stay the hell away from trash comments like blaming someone for the health issues of another when you have no goddamn idea of what is going on.

 

[George]

Frankly, I disagree. As I've been saying the last few weeks, given injuries and the quality of the opposition, the likelihood of us winning them was extremely low. There are significant strategic advantages that come from the club being realistic about those games:

1. It stops players risking injury in a futile attempt to win, whether by trying excessively in games to the point of injury, or even playing at all (some players have benefitted over the last few weeks from being managed).
2. It avoids them being shamed and guilted for failing to achieve the impossible, ie, "we suck because we couldn't win". That is a pointless sucking of morale.
3. It gets them focussing on winning the war, that is, getting into finals. Nobody cares WHICH 13 wins you win to get into finals - they just care that you win 13 games.
4. It gives them other achievable goals in those games, which the team can build on to improve in the second half of the season, which is full of more winnable games. I've written about this at length in several post-game thread posts recently. That builds morale, and confidence going into those more winnable games.

The whole "go out there to win every game" is noble, but strategically flawed, in my opinion.

Let's go through the rest of the season's games, and give a conservative estimate of wins, based on location and ladder position:

1. Collingwood at MCG = Loss.
2. Carlton at Marvel = Win.
3. Port in China = Loss.
4. Suns in Townsville = Either way.
5. Lions at Marvel = Either way.
6. Richmond at Marvel = Loss.
7. North in Tassie = Win.
8. Geelong in Geelong = Loss.
9. Bulldogs at Marvel = Win.
10. Melbourne at Marvel = Either way.
11. Carlton at MCG = Win.
12. Sydney at SCG = Win.

That's four more probable wins, taking us to 8. We win the either way games, that's 11. If we can sneak one or two more surprise win somewhere along the way (I have my eye on that Sydney one, though I think playing at the SCG will kill us), and that's 12-13. All of these assumptions are made without factoring in the significant difference that the likely addition of Stuv, Lonie, Carlisle, Hannerbury, Geary will make to our quality of play in the coming month. That could be those extra 2 wins, right there.

And I think that one of the BIG wins against the Eagles on the weekend was the shift to attempts to lower the eyes. That was most illuminating. It revealed the reason why the coaches have been loath to do it - namely, that the disposal skills of the mids delivering the ball into the 50, and separation skills of the forwards have been identified by the coaches as not being good enough. What was significant about the Eagles game was that, rather than just conceding that and choosing the low-skill option of bombing it instead, the coaches finally decided to do the harder, more long-term process of starting to practice it in games.


That is a key reason we lost - and I don't care. If we're going to get forty-something attempts to kick into into the fifty, I'd rather every single one of them was a practice at precision delivery and we stuffed up thirty-five of them, than that we bomb it in and score off twenty of them. Over time, the players will get more in sync, and learn their way to proper disposal. This is a quintessential example of my "sacrificing a pawn" idea: I'm willing to put a game we're already likely to lose, and make it completely unwinnable, if in the process we improve our forward-50 entries. In the short term that's frustrating, but in the long term it will allow us to win far more games.

Couldn't agree more - a well thought out analysis of where we are at. We need more of this.

You pencilled us in for five wins on that list too, not four, so we'd actually reach 12 including your either way games. I've been saying that our second half of the year really opens up and we can make quite a strong push for finals in the final month of the season. Imagine we are in a position to make the eight by the end of Round 19 (after Geelong game). Could potentially win all those last four games and head into a finals series in good form.

What has happened over this last month (Adelaide, GWS, West Coast, Collingwood) won't determine our season. It'll be the half a dozen games we should win in the back half that will.

 

[kernelT]

Let's go through the rest of the season's games, and give a conservative estimate of wins, based on location and ladder position:

1. Collingwood at MCG = Loss.
2. Carlton at Marvel = Win.
3. Port in China = Loss.
4. Suns in Townsville = Either way.
5. Lions at Marvel = Either way.
6. Richmond at Marvel = Loss.
7. North in Tassie = Win.
8. Geelong in Geelong = Loss.
9. Bulldogs at Marvel = Win.
10. Melbourne at Marvel = Either way.
11. Carlton at MCG = Win.
12. Sydney at SCG = Win.

That's four more probable wins, taking us to 8. We win the either way games, that's 11. If we can sneak one or two more surprise win somewhere along the way (I have my eye on that Sydney one, though I think playing at the SCG will kill us), and that's 12-13. All of these assumptions are made without factoring in the significant difference that the likely addition of Stuv, Lonie, Carlisle, Hannerbury, Geary will make to our quality of play in the coming month. That could be those extra 2 wins, right there.

Really not sure if our current form gives us clear wins over North, Dogs or Sydney… these ones will hinge on who we can get back from injury IMO.

Carlton just kicked 13 goals against Collingwood and were two goals up late in the game, it will be interesting to see if we are that close.

Heaps of either way games for mine.

 

[MrFoster]

Fair enough. If we fix our entry I think we would've won the last two games. From what I've seen we are good enough. Anyway just a difference in opinion, all good.

The operative word is “if we fix the forward entry”, believe our forward entries have been poor since Dal Santo and Goddard left, then Hays and Joey retired.. Let’s be honest, Steven was always a 50/50 kick.. So without the elite ball users, where is the good forward entry going to come from? that 20-40 metres spot up kick..

Looking at the options now..
Gresham - from evidence is a 50/50 kick
Clark - too young, has endurance issues
Dunstan - not a good kick
Sinclair - good kick, but inconsistent
Newnes - ok kick, but inconsistent
Ross - ok kick, but can’t do it under pressure
Steele - not shown that he is a reliable kick
Acres - not a good kick, more suited to long kicks

Struggle to find where the improvement is going to come from.. we either have to dominate the game so there is less pressure on our mids, or force turn overs..

Hope I’m wrong on this, but can anyone else see where we can get the forward entry fixed? At times, we have problems getting the ball out of the backline without bombing down the line, let alone threading the needle spotting up a forward on the lead. For what is worth, I think our forwards are fine and quite potent.. just need the mids to be firing and hit targets.

 

[George]

The operative word is “if we fix the forward entry”, believe our forward entries have been poor since Dal Santo and Goddard left, then Hays and Joey retired.. Let’s be honest, Steven was always a 50/50 kick.. So without the elite ball users, where is the good forward entry going to come from?

Looking at the options now..
Gresham - from evidence is a 50/50 kick
Clark - too young, has endurance issues
Dunstan - not a good kick
Sinclair - good kick, but inconsistent
Newnes - ok kick, but inconsistent
Ross - ok kick, but can’t do it under pressure
Steele - that he is a reliable kick
Acres - not a good kick, more suited to long kicks

Struggle to find where the improvement is going to come from.. we either have to dominate the game so there is less pressure on our mids, or force turn overs..

Hope I’m wrong on this, but can anyone else see where we can get the forward entry fixed? At times, we have problems getting the ball out of the backline without bombing down the line, let alone threading the needle spotting up a forward on the lead. For what is worth, I think our forwards are fine and quite potent.. just need the mids to be firing and hit targets.

It's not even so much the kicking accuracy as opposed to the gameplan for entry. Even if they are average kicks they should all still be looking to hit up a leading target inside the 50 instead of kicking to a pack. It's a gameplan thing for mine. Even if they are average field kicks I'd much prefer them give it a go than keep doing what hasn't been working.

 

[kernelT]

It's a gameplan thing for mine.

Agreed.

6 years he's had to sort it out.

Sack Richo.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

In truth, we mismanaged the contracts/list in the Ross Lyon years, hired Pelchen to fix the problem.. we had to get rid of some of our senior players in Dal Santo/Goddard who was on big money or wanted more money.. Pelcen’s strategy was not wrong, by rebuilding the list through trading and drafting. trading was ok, but coaching and drafting was really poor, Richardson did not recognise midfield is our big problem, instead of drafting/trading for gun mids, we focused on system/flooding/pressure, drafting utilities rather

Future potential is good and encouraging, but we need help now.. imagine a small Gresham or skinny Clark going against Bont, Neal, Wines, Mitchell, Oliver, Crouch brothers, Kennedy, Huey, Dangerfield (can’t be bothered to list everyone), Ross and Steele are good, but they ar not your big ball winning mids that almost every club has.. the engine room of every side. That’s why we need to get someone from the mid-season draft, then try to add more through trading/FA, we have enough kids, adding more is not going to help until 2-3 years down the line. By the way, Steven is not an inside mid, he was forced to play there because we don’t have anyone after Lenny, and Armo’s one season wonder..

Armo was actually pretty good over several seasons, but since his back went on him, its all been left to Steven.
I believe Joey was actually moved out of the midfield to try to get more time into the likes of Ross and Dunstan.

Trading.
2013. Richo had just arrived. We had SFA defenders, a cobbled together backline of Blake, Dempster , Fisher, Gwilt and Dempster, most of them injured for significant parts of the year. Blake , Kosi and Milne retired. ( Milne had kicked nearly as many Goals as Lee and Saad combined ).
Most disposals went to Montagna, Steven , DalSanto, Armitage, Ray, Jones. ( all averaging more than 20 ).
We traded in Delaney, not exciting but practical. Bruce ( Backman but turned out to be a forward ) and Longer which was part of the ultimately unsuccessful McEvoy deal. I don't see any regrets in hindsight about missing the other trades that year.
We got Billings, Dunstan, Acres. Three mids who should have been firing a couple of years later. In an ideal world we should have had a decent spine to build on.

If i did it again in retrospect......we forget about the Longer trade.
We draft Bontempelli, Crouch , Nankurvis and Ben Brown. Then we'd be saying how inspired the Pelican was.

2014 we pissed away Stanley for a stupid draft pick.

2015 we traded for a Mid. Freeman. and Carlisle .
2016 we traded for Mids. Steele and Stevens
2017 we got Logan Austin for a swap of late future picks.

The drafting ...i'd say was an attempt at best available. Battle for example, would you rather we had taken Mutch?
( Don't start me on Long vs Fisher though ).