Calls for Richmond to get priority picks before GC17

[Sir Why You Little 37,034]

The Tigers deserve a priority picks just as we did. When you say "We've had to work it out" what are you saying? That we needed to be so bad to get the high picks and rebuild. Why shouldnt Richmond get that opportunity. In any case the AFL cant give the Tiges the number one pick because Gold Coast have already committed to drafting David Swallow.

Richmond signed off on these rules with GC17 & GWS along with 15 other clubs. The rules should not be changed now.

[IvanBartul13 2,564]

Richmond signed off on these rules with GC17 & GWS along with 15 other clubs. The rules should not be changed now.

Why not? What sort of argument is that?

[Sir Why You Little 37,034]

Why not? What sort of argument is that?

It's the Facts. Simple as that. Richmonds recruiting has been crud, is that anybody else's problem but there own? (David Rohdan as one example)-they said he wasn't up to it. Played in a GF the year after.

Edited April 15, 2010 by why you little

[IvanBartul13 2,564]

It's the Facts. Simple as that. Richmonds recruiting has been crud, is that anybody else's problem but there own? (David Rohdan as one example)-they said he wasn't up to it. Played in a GF the year after.

Richmond's recruiting is irrelevant. Are you saying that Melbourne's recruiting and list management was excellent in the lead-up to three years in the bottom two rungs on the ladder. It's one-eyed drek. Your argument should deem that no team should ever have a priority pick ever and that we should hand back Trengove to the draft. No that's right Melbourne has cleverly been awful, but Richmond are just awful in and of themselves, even though in the last 15 years they have won more home and away games than us.

Edited April 15, 2010 by goodoil

[furious d 464]

Richmond's recruiting is irrelevant. Are you saying that Melbourne's recruiting and list management was excellent in the lead-up to three years in the bottom two rungs on the ladder. It's one-eyed drek. Your argument should deem that no team should ever have a priority pick ever and that we should hand back Trengove to the draft. No that's right Melbourne has cleverly been awful, but Richmond are just awful in and of themselves, even though in the last 15 years they have won more home and away games than us.

Nonsense, we got pick 1&2 for winning 4 games or less 2 years in a row, Richmond won more than 4 last year. They wouldn't be eligible any previous year so why should they get one this year?

[IvanBartul13 2,564]

Nonsense, we got pick 1&2 for winning 4 games or less 2 years in a row, Richmond won more than 4 last year. They wouldn't be eligible any previous year so why should they get one this year?

Youre right I thought Richmond won 4.5 last year, but my point is that Richmond should receive a pre-draft priority pick, like we did, if they are bad enough to warrant it. This would be at the end of 2011.

[Chook 15,012]

Richmond's recruiting is irrelevant. Are you saying that Melbourne's recruiting and list management was excellent in the lead-up to three years in the bottom two rungs on the ladder. It's one-eyed drek. Your argument should deem that no team should ever have a priority pick ever and that we should hand back Trengove to the draft. No that's right Melbourne has cleverly been awful, but Richmond are just awful in and of themselves, even though in the last 15 years they have won more home and away games than us.

Richmond were dumb for not utilising the system. Why should they be rewarded (and at the same time every other club punished) for their ineptitude? They had the same opportunity as every other club to recognise that they weren't going to win a premiership (if that is indeed their goal) with the players they had, and thus could have gone down the path we did a little earlier for a much greater reward than they will end up getting over the next few years.

Despite the fact that Richmond have won more games than us in the past 15 years, they still haven't won a Grand Final, so unless their ultimate goal is to become the winningest team, they have been equally as unsuccessful as us, but the difference is that we have recognised our players' flaws and rebuilt when we had the chance.

Edited April 15, 2010 by Chook

[Axis of Bob 11,796]

Richmond would not qualify for a priority pick this year. They have won too many games.

I don't believe that any team should get priority picks. Ever. You just have to see what a farce us picking up Trengove is, when we've just picked up Scully. Finishing last should give you a star (ie, pick 1), but just because you finish with a certain amount of wins doesn't mean that you should get 2 stars.

Richmond is not being disadvantaged by any more in this draft than any other team. In actualy fact, finishing last is 2 spots ahead of 2nd last, which is 2 spots ahead of 3rd last etc. Richmond have an advantage over all clubs except Gold Coast, who also have an advantage over the rest of the clubs. Their draft position should see them get better than each of the current clubs, which is what the draft is supposed to do.

I don't believe that Richmond deserve priority picks. We will probably be the last team to ever get a priority pick. We were very fortunate last year. Richmond are unfortunate, but not necessarily any more than any other of the current clubs.

[IvanBartul13 2,564]

Richmond were dumb for not utilising the system. Why should they be rewarded (and at the same time every other club punished) for their ineptitude? They had the same opportunity as every other club to recognise that they weren't going to win a premiership (if that is indeed their goal) with the players they had, and thus could have gone down the path we did a little earlier for a much greater reward than they will end up getting over the next few years.

Despite the fact that Richmond have won more games than us in the past 15 years, they still haven't won a Grand Final, so unless their ultimate goal is to become the winningest team, they have been equally as unsuccessful as us, but the difference is that we have recognised our players' flaws and rebuilt when we had the chance.

This is absolute rubbish, the two reasons Richmond didnt bottom out badly were Matthew and Richardson, had he not been there they would have hardly won a game and the fact that they finished 2008 in a blaze of glory, which went against the grain, has cost them dearly. Let's understand what the system is, the system is not there to be utilised, its not something clubs are meant to influence by not playing at their best or by underperforming. the draft rules are a machinery which equalise the competition and in a cyclical way are meant to give every team its chance at the top. Richmond haven't done anything, seemingly, to take advantage of the system, so why when it needs the machinery to improve should it be denied. Its ridiculous. The enemy here is not Richmond, or Melbourne, or tanking, the fact is the new Gold Coast rules are basically going to castrate Richmond in its current form. I dont give a fiddler's f u c k to be honest about the Tigers, but the game wont be well served by them being a basket case and the argument that they have made their bed sleep in it is ridiculous too, otherwise Tigers fans would have been well in their right mind going "[censored] the financially decrepid Demons off five years ago, dont give them handouts, let it stew in the misery of its financial predicament." Sometimes we've got to look beyond just Melbourne FC and to the bigger picture of the game and there is no reason why if we got a pick that the Tigers shouldnt as well when their team is half as good as what ours was last year. The last point is that the year we drafted Grimes, Morton, Maric etc was a year we were trying to do well in but failed. That we've completely rebuilt after that and used the system is fine, calculated and clever, but it was no great 5 year planning miracle, it was foist upon the club.

[IvanBartul13 2,564]

Richmond would not qualify for a priority pick this year. They have won too many games.

I don't believe that any team should get priority picks. Ever. You just have to see what a farce us picking up Trengove is, when we've just picked up Scully. Finishing last should give you a star (ie, pick 1), but just because you finish with a certain amount of wins doesn't mean that you should get 2 stars.

Richmond is not being disadvantaged by any more in this draft than any other team. In actualy fact, finishing last is 2 spots ahead of 2nd last, which is 2 spots ahead of 3rd last etc. Richmond have an advantage over all clubs except Gold Coast, who also have an advantage over the rest of the clubs. Their draft position should see them get better than each of the current clubs, which is what the draft is supposed to do.

I don't believe that Richmond deserve priority picks. We will probably be the last team to ever get a priority pick. We were very fortunate last year. Richmond are unfortunate, but not necessarily any more than any other of the current clubs.

As usual I agree, Bob, in principal, but if the Tigers satisfy the criteria at the end of 2011 surely they ought get one, if we did. We didnt deserve Sylvia, we didnt deserve Trengove, I would rather other clubs get the same opportunities, than be deemed a club that tanked a premiership.

[Sir Why You Little 37,034]

Youre right I thought Richmond won 4.5 last year, but my point is that Richmond should receive a pre-draft priority pick, like we did, if they are bad enough to warrant it. This would be at the end of 2011.

But you forget one thing. Richmond signed off on these rules, along with all other clubs. It was a unanimous vote, so why should we change things now.

I do not agree with the two new teams coming into the comp, but it's going to happen.

Richmond walk around the AFL talking as if they are one of the 4 "Power Victorian sides" so let's see it in action.

If you start changing rules and criteria, where does it stop?

Like i said in my original post-the Tigers cut back on football department spending 4-5 years ago for whatever reason, it was their choice. So they have to wear that one.

[beelzebub 23,351]

The Tigers deserve a priority picks just as we did. When you say "We've had to work it out" what are you saying? That we needed to be so bad to get the high picks and rebuild. Why shouldnt Richmond get that opportunity. In any case the AFL cant give the Tiges the number one pick because Gold Coast have already committed to drafting David Swallow.

YES, Richmond COULD have done exacty what we did... alas that are that hapless they couldnt organise a [censored] up at Fosters. Theyve had a much better bottom line for years and yet are stilll an absolute Basketcase. We took to the team with harsh reality and a scythe. Richmond didnt. Why exactly do they DESERVE anything ?? We suffered to get what we did. They had their 'plans'..now got a new admin..( with some stange ideas about reality to boot ) .. They arent th emost unsuccessful Vic club in the last 30 years for nothing !!.Its up to them..always has been.

what are you therefore arguing having acknowledged there is no reality of a pick?

[hillie 41]

melbourne is currently the only team eligible for a priority pick if it finished with 4 wins or less. That prioriy pick would normally be before the first round (pick one) as it would be our second year (actually third year) with this amount of wins. as it stands the priority pick if we were to gain one this year would be pick 4, after the first 3 GC selections.

richmond would only be eligible for a priority pick after the first round in next years draft should it win 4 games or less

so this arguement for richmond is useless. it would only be valid for the 2011 draft for West Sydney should they have 2 consecutive poor years.

[Roost It 1,434]

Wallace and Miller were the biggest disaster in Richmond's history. At a time when recruiting and nurturing juniors became the foremost weapon in football they were trawling the discard list for a way to make the 8. Maybe if they had set their aims higher we wouldn't be having this conversation. Personally I can't stand Richmond. However I would give them a prority pick ahead of GWS or GC in a heartbeat. Call me old fashioned but I'd much prefer to beat Richmond in a Final than either of the new teams.

As far as I'm concerned the tigers should be a protected species.

[beelzebub 23,351]

To concede anything to Richmond now ...as a reward for inaction, stupidity and poor decisions would fly in the face of all the work that clubs like us have put in to get our selves straight and back on our feet and in the right direction.

Were Richmond blind to the impending monster called AFL expansion ? Did they not see the writing on the wall that we were able to read and act by ? Richmond rolled the dice their way.... now they can reap from what they sow !!

[Felix 92]

To concede anything to Richmond now ...as a reward for inaction, stupidity and poor decisions would fly in the face of all the work that clubs like us have put in to get our selves straight and back on our feet and in the right direction.

Were Richmond blind to the impending monster called AFL expansion ? Did they not see the writing on the wall that we were able to read and act by ? Richmond rolled the dice their way.... now they can reap from what they sow !!

Agree, just because they failed in their drafting it does not mean they should get another crack at it. They failed, bad luck.

[Guest 45 double agent]

Some time ago Richmond looked like they were going to fold and they launched their S.O.S. (save our skins) Campaign, they had tin rattlers at all grounds and most supporters despite their allegiance contributed. They got themselves out of trouble and up and running again which was good.

Quite some time later they were in reasonable shape but there were some other clubs in trouble, ours included, and their then President Leon Daphne said the league shouldn’t support them they should be left to sink if they weren’t viable.

I have never forgotten that, so as far as I’m concerned they, as well as Port whose supporters canned us for getting handouts can disappear and I wouldn’t be in the slightest bit disturbed. If you reckon our supporters are fickle just look at theirs, Richmond have a huge support if they are winning but you could fit them in to a telephone box if they start to lose.

great post, i never forgot that comment from Nissan Daphne.

[Hobbits's 17]

If you reckon our supporters are fickle just look at theirs, Richmond have a huge support if they are winning but you could fit them in to a telephone box if they start to lose.

I disagree. richmond are well represented and have been for years. they are feral but they're the most passionate supporters who stand by their club. when have they had success in the last 25 + years ? yet they have surpassed 40,000 in membership in a year that promises not much at all.

[Guest 45 double agent]

I disagree. richmond are well represented and have been for years. they are feral but they're the most passionate supporters who stand by their club. when have they had success in the last 25 + years ? yet they have surpassed 40,000 in membership in a year that promises not much at all.

they have 32,900 members,read the sun, 32,900,there rabble and they deserve it.

[Hobbits's 17]

they have 32,900 members,read the sun, 32,900,there rabble and they deserve it.

39,905 - Richmondfc website.

keep reading errors in the sun. enjoy.

[Guest 45 double agent]

so you believe a website that that praised them for winning there first Qrt of the season last week, your a very gullible man.

[Hobbits's 17]

just stating the facts of where their membership is at. you can side-step all you want.

edit - spell

Edited April 16, 2010 by Grimes to Watts

[Guest 45 double agent]

as the Hunters and Collecters say, your just another fool in the crowd.

[Hobbits's 17]

as the Hunters and Collecters say, your just another fool in the crowd.

[Guest melbman]

Richmond have our former recruiting guy, what more do they need? ;-)