H_T

Yes, I suggest here too.

If you want any mail on anything to do with Richmond, Caro's the person to see or hear from. Always has the inside info at Tigerland. As for KB, life is too short Hungry, get over it. I'm tipping a young CS at 28 wouldn't have pushed KB. KB holds all those present at the time to account for what happened. Walking out on a 'radio interview' 18 years later?........come on, tsk tsk - how many coaches get the sack, anyway...

Yes.

TB - I thought he had eyes only for the ball, in all fairness, it was unfortunate contact, the free was awarded. I think the right decision was made now that it's been thrown out. I was surprised he got reported really. Hodge was seen joking with Mooney afterwards in disbelief at being reported. PS. I hate Hawthorn too. But fairs fair. If that was Garland you would of been up in arms in disbelief.

Over 27K, great to see. Hopefully over 29K after the Collingwood clash.

Your post is the most decisive, informal and in your words, smartest thing to come from this thread Sleeve. Good post, your finger is certainly on the pulse. Unfortuantely we will not see Aussie roaming for the crumb in the next few weeks. That is why I think Jetta will go around again this week, unless the staff opt for Maric. Agree with your post. Re: Bate, Miller, Newton, Sylvia. The lead up roles, etc. We have to play to our players strengths and set up accordingly.

Tell me after you see it again, when 'we bombed it' long into the forward line - ie. a pack situation, how effective it turned out. From what I recall, we didn't take many contested marks and if it wasn't marked by the opposition, North cleared out the ball more often than not and rebounded. We looked more effective in good pieces of play and spotting someone on the lead on the run by kicking into space. More appropriate given our forward line. A good piece of play down the members wing which resulted in a few precision kicks which included Petterd who kicked precisely to someone in the 50m arc. Resulted in a goal. That was a goal from a kick-in from memory. Sides like Geelong and Hawthorn do that week in week out, sometimes each quarter in a game. If we can replicate that more often, we'll be a far better side.

Cheers Trident. Not a bad result from kick-ins in comparison to North's 0.1. We won by 17 points in that department. That's a win!

I thought he played well enough to remain in the side. That is for sure. But I can see the other side with S.Martin. It's good that there is competition for spots down back. Clearly it was a joke, although that they want him dropped for in some cases 'Martin', has some merit, in my 'opinion'. So whilst I lean towards Frawley at the moment, I can see both views and for the record neither party is on 'drugs'.

I'm of the opinion, 'they've gone troppo'. Either or either.

Sure. Does it mean we'll have another thread next week? ie. "14th on the ladder"

Maybe. I'd back India to make a score. I'd lean towards a draw.

Are you insinuating there are posters out there on drugs? I certainly hope not. Whilst I haven't put Frawley in my outs, everyone is entitled to there opinion, don't you think? Fwiw, Newton might not be as good at NASA than Bate is. He loves floating around in "space".

Fairdinkum! Worth starting a thread??...

I'd keep Bartram in for this week. IN: Sylvia, Newton OUT: Bate, Bennell Backs: J.Frawley, M.Warnock, C.Garland Half backs: K.Cheney, J.Rivers, B.Green Centres: S.Buckley, B.McLean, A.Davey Half forwards: C.Sylvia, B.Miller, C.Bruce Forwards: R.Petterd, M.Newton, C.Morton Followers: P.Johnson, B.Moloney, J.McDonald Interchange: C.Bartram, N.Jones, N.Jetta, J.Spencer.

What was "our" result/stat Trident?

Actually, even I forgot about him until your post. Good point. Certainly a chance this week one would think.

Indeed. Comment: If Richmond lost to Melbourne in Round 4 after a 0-3 start - which is quite feasible, I would have thought that would be the straw that broke the camel's back in sacking Wallace. Not after the Richmond v Bulldogs game in Round 3. Each to their own.

Good call.

Quite possibly.

I agree with most of your assessment regarding the structure. I had some concern with the selections leading into the game, with North going in with plenty of height. Personally, I would have tried Newton at Full Forward for Round 1, I wouldn't have played Bate up forward out numbered with the North defence dropping back. At least he would have been a better option up forward when Melbourne went long. What concerned me was the instructions to the midfielders. Were they told to bomb it long? Surely not, with our forward set up. Too often, the likes of Morton, Bruce, and others bombed it in when we were either out numbered or lacked the nous and/or height to get our hands on the pill. North got the ball back out too easily for mine.

Buckley was disappointing I thought, but he must keep playing, he can be damaging and the more he plays the better, esp. his defensive side to his game. He wasn't the only one who should be a little disappointed, McLean I thought was another, he didn't look 100%. Was he ill during the week? I don't think he would of taken an injury into the opening game.

Not really. We were undersized. Bate was outnumbered many-a-time and doesn't have the capabilities to take a mark or spoil an opposition ruckman dropping back into the forward line either. Our height deficiency and "nous" in the forward 50m was severely lacking I thought. Petterd showed " a bit".

Did it ever occur to you, that they're positioning themselves to move into space for 'the next phase" of the transition after the initial kick in. I noticed Garland taking quite a few kick-ins, spotting up a teammate 20-30 metres out, with precision. From there it was distributed by hand/foot to those - on the move - who were originally standing outside 50m from the initial kick-in.

Well summed up.