bing181

Confirmed.

Only on Demonland.

Let me guess, you've never sat on a Board or selection panel. Even the idea that it's done by "votes". In your own words, laughable.

Yes, one could assume that. One could also make any number of other assumptions as to why he was given the flick - including the one that did the rounds at the time, which is far more credible and has nothing to do with what Goodwin did or didn't want to hear.

Except that the team is selected by a committee.

I don't have an issue with a bull-at-a-gate ball-winner like Viney having poor disposal/decision making skills. It's only an issue because none of the players around him are much better, so it's not even as if he can hand the ball off to someone who'll make sure it gets to where it needs to.

It's not being rectified because it's not easily solvable. Just as Jack Watts will never lose his sublime disposal and decision-making skills, the reverse is also true. It can be compensated for, and team play can be built around individual players' weaknesses, but there's a limit to how much compensating you can do for players who have neither the foot skills nor the vision (but who may have other attributes).

Actually not this team. Take the experience and foot skills/decision-making of Vince, Lewis and (effectively) Jones out, not just on-field but at training and around the club, and it starts to look very different. Also worth looking who has replaced those players, especially Tomlinson and Langford, both of whom bring a lot but both of whom are hit and miss decision-makers/executors. It's no accident that down back, where we do have experience, we're actually performing well (5th in the league or something?).

Unless you've actually sat on (or sat in on) the selection committee, this is just conjecture.

For people banging on about 2018, one of the main differences is we had at least a few (experienced) players who could make good decisions and then actually execute them without turning the ball over: Lewis, Vince and an in-form Jones for starters.

Speak for yourself. Though mercifully, at Board, Admin and FD level, we have people who actually know what they're doing and know something about footy.

The logical extension of this argument is that you could take Koo Wee Rup seconds and turn them into an AFL-capable side just by a) good coaching and b) adjusting the game plan around their weaknesses. If you don't have the cattle or the skills, coaching and game plans are irrelevant.

Irrelevant when regardless of what happens YOU TURN THE BALL OVER. Though even in this you're ignoring the obvious: they ARE being taught all that - but they just can't execute it. At least not for enough of a game to make a difference.

Woah. Why single out those 3? There are only about 3 who CAN kick/not turnover.

This is just delusional - though you're not Robinson Crusoe. Did you watch the match?

Execution, execution, execution. That Oliver turnover in the last minutes summed it all up. Nothing to do with Goodwin or the coaches, nothing to do with the system, everything to do with the players' failure to be able to execute even simple kicks/handballs, yet alone under pressure. Petracca one of the few exceptions.

Lots to like but ... execution, execution, execution. (And that's being kind. We should change our colours to blue and white stripes there are so many butchers in the team.)

All Richmond's goals came from turnovers and decision errors. In passages, starting to look like a team. Going take half the season to get it more consistent. Still would have preferred O'Mac, and VDB is going to need more than a couple of games to get back to his best.

Going to be a long afternoon. Oh and BTW ... it's not the coaches. Execution + turnovers are killing us.

Yet.

Easy. The players aren't executing what they're being asked to do BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT CAPABLE. (At least not for a whole match. See Carlton first quarter, Geelong last quarter.)

Of course you didn't. Because like the rest of us, you have no information on how players not in the firsts are tracking.

Find this aspect of it interesting: so many here [censored] and moan about how devoid of content the interviews with Goodwin, Mahoney etc. are - when in reality they provide a good insight into the rational and context for player choice. No surprises in the selections - if you've been paying attention.

They played him round 2 - even though he had to be nursed through it on just over 50% game time - because the players he's competing against for a place, VDB, Hannan, Spargo and Pickett were either unfit or unavailable. Now they all are he needs to step up. Made clear by Goodwin in his recent interview. Once again, not complicated.

Bennell isn't fully fit. Not complicated.