In 2010, Richmond was an early season laughing stock and the so-called “worst team since Fitzroy”. They ended up finishing 15th in Damien Hardwick’s first season in charge.
Collingwood won the flag that year, and five years later, the Magpies may be rising again after having bottomed out to 11th in 2014.
Bottomed out at 11th! Richmond has only finished higher than that four times in the last 13 years, and even then no higher than seventh.
And now the Tigers are faced with the grim reality of having peaked with a couple of elimination final humiliations over the last two seasons, and being back on the slide again.
Richmond supporters are entitled to think that it’s simply not fair. Why is the Richmond Football Club pathologically incapable of any form of sustained competitiveness, let alone success? Just what is wrong at Tigerland?
The despair of supporters after Friday night’s loss to Melbourne is very real, but the crying shame is the lack of surprise that accompanies it. Another week/month/season/decade of numbness is about to set in.
Let’s have a look at Richmond’s list management, recruiting and development, and game-plan and coaching to see if we can identify any weaknesses.
List management
During the Tigers’ woeful form in the first half of 2014, there were many critics of the ‘top up’ players that Richmond had attracted from other clubs, almost all of whom weren’t getting a regular game for their previous side, often in poor performing teams.
During the nadir of 2010, Richmond had realised they needed mature talent of a certain age injected into the club to increase their chances of competitiveness, which led to the likes of Bachar Houli, Shaun Grigg and Ivan Maric coming across in 2011-12, along with the mature Steven Morris from the SANFL.
This was followed by Troy Chaplin, Chris Knights and the more questionable Aaron Edwards, Ricky Petterd and Sam Lonergan for the 2013 season, utilising a combination of free agency, national draft and rookie listing.
It’s important to note that the Tigers didn’t give up a single pick inside the top 35 of any draft for these players, and seven of them were in the best 22 of 2013 that carried Richmond to fifth on the ladder at the end of the home-and-away rounds.
In the four years prior to 2013, Richmond had finished 12th, 12th, 15th, and 15th, and thus no-one’s idea of being in flag contention.
Yet you’ll hear many media and Joe Public talk about how the Tigers thought their premiership window was open by attracting these ‘Moneyball’ players to the club. It’s patently untrue.
In fact, this phase of Richmond’s list management can only be described as a spectacular success, helping lift the club from a winless last in 2010 to fifth in 2013, all within 79 matches.
The off-season heading into 2014 was where it started to go off the rails.
With niggling doubts over the soundness of Ivan Maric’s body, Shaun Hampson was brought across from Carlton as a back-up ruck in 2014, traded for pick 32. This was overs for a non-best 22 player.
Ex-Swan Nathan Gordon was taken late in the draft, supplemented by more rookies with AFL experience, Todd Banfield, Matt Thomas and Anthony Miles. The latter had an immediate impact upon finding his way into the senior team, and became a top-ten player for the club.
The problem wasn’t that the likes of Thomas, Petterd and Gordon were rookie listed. In theory, this type of player was fine to have as a break-glass-in-case-of-emergency. If injuries struck, they could come in for a few games in the middle of winter, and play a role with a hardened body.
The problem was that these players were elevated to best 22 status by Hardwick and co, and too many players in the side shared similar limitations.
They were brought in as experienced depth players, to cover for injuries and help get wins against lesser sides. Richmond though, several times in 2014, and already twice in 2015, keep losing precisely that type of game.
Hardwick often opens post-loss press conferences not wanting to use injuries as an excuse, before proceeding to do so. The Richmond strategy of rookie-listing experienced players makes it look like false advertising. He’s on the hustle either way.
Despite all of this, there are 18 players still on the list from that famous elimination final loss to Carlton, few of which it could be confidently said have their best football behind them. Add to this a host of first and second-round picks currently at the club that weren’t playing that day.
Based on those factors, there are reasons to be optimistic. Something else has been holding the side back.
Recruiting and development
During Hardwick’s reign, the Tigers have continued to mine the draft, never relinquishing their first-round pick, and in fact drafting 13 players inside the top 35 in his time, all of which are still at Tigerland.
The most celebrated of these is Dustin Martin, with the most maligned being Reece Conca.
Seven of these 13 draft picks have already represented Richmond across the first four rounds this season, and there is every chance that number could reach 10 or 11 when the teams come out this Thursday night, with Conca, Ben Lennon, Corey Ellis and Todd Elton all in the frame to replace under-performing or injured players.
The Richmond recruiting staff has been seemingly obsessed with footballing solid citizens. There has been nothing dynamic about these draftees, no sense of x-factor.
Run your eyes across a list of Richmond players, both young and old.
Of the younger brigade, think of Conca, Miles, Nick Vlastuin, Brandon Ellis, Matt Dea, Matt McDonough, Sam Lloyd, Matthew Arnot.
There are little points of difference among them of course, and some with the potential to be very good footballers, but there is a sameness across the board, most notably a lack of flair and speed.
Add this to the likes of Chris Newman, Nathan Foley, ex-Cat Taylor Hunt, Petterd, Grigg, Gordon, Knights and Morris.
All of a sudden, there is a plainness about the list that is all too evident when the team is struggling. No wonder Brett Deledio is so badly missed when out of the side, with his line-breaking run, overall class and goal-kicking prowess.
It’s also easy to see why someone like Shane Edwards has been a standout over the last year and a bit, the master of the deft touch to control the ball, capable of making something out of nothing, more than a hint of magic about him.
Edwards also provides the added bonus of doing the simple things well, something that has been in short supply among his teammates.
Looking particularly at the first round picks of the last six years, is Dustin Martin a vastly superior talent in game 112 than he was in his first year? I’m an avowed Dusty fan, yet I say he is not.
Reece Conca averaged 23 disposals in a six game patch early in his first season. His last six has seen him average just shy of 16.
Nick Vlastuin makes good decisions with a clear mind, and is blessed with composure and skill, but is much the same player 40-odd games into his career as he was on debut.
The Tigers have already rolled a dozen players through the half-forward line in four matches this year, yet Ben Lennon, a classy flanker, pick 12 in 2013, is trundling in the VFL.
Brandon Ellis is one who made a quantum leap in improvement over the course of 2014, his relentless outside run a key factor in Richmond’s fairytale run to the finals. His numbers are solid this season so far, but his impact reduced.
Tyrone Vickery, a top-ten pick acquired before Hardwick’s time, is yet to be seen at AFL level in his seventh year on the list. His third season still stands as his best. It’s a football lifetime ago.
There have certainly been no diamonds found in the rough of any late draft day either.
Of all the young players taken in the draft since Hardwick was appointed, Champion Data, using their famous ratings system, can’t find one player on the Richmond list taken later than pick 15 to rate even as average heading into 2015, let alone above average or elite.
Everything was looking rosy enough when the Tiges were climbing the ladder, as winning always papers over the cracks, but losing brings with it a magnifying glass and a fine-tooth comb.
It’s all too easy to conclude that Richmond’s recruiting and development doesn’t stand up under the scrutiny. In fact, some might say that the development has been all but non-existent.
This has certainly been the case in grooming on-field leaders. Can you think of a Richmond footballer that you’d call ruthless? What about relentless? Tough? Even rugged?
Alex Rance, definitely. Ivan Maric, probably. The cupboard is bare beyond them.
There have been some development wins here and there, yes (talls Ben Griffiths and David Astbury come to mind). And no disastrous draft losses either. Just a whole lot of nothing more than OK.
But there has to be more to it. After all, we keep harking back to the fifth-placed finish in 2013, and that barnstorming nine wins in a row to end the 2014 home-and-away season is fresh in our minds.
Game-plan
The Richmond of 2013 played a fast and flowing brand of football, similar in many ways to Port Adelaide, who were also resurgent that year. In fact, the Tigers actually beat the Power by 41 points at Football Park that season. They also claimed the scalps of eventual grand finalists, Hawthorn and Fremantle, by 41 and 27 points respectively.
It was all predicated on running in waves from half-back, ballistic ball movement, taking the game on at most opportunities, and overlap run and carry. This created all kinds of uncertainty in the opposition, who were never sure which way to look or who to cover as the ball was swept down the ground.
Richmond was also defensively sound, conceding the third least points against, while rating a respectable fifth in attack. The balance was right, and the future looked bright.
Of course, what came next was giving up a 32-point third quarter lead against Carlton in that elimination final, crumbling to the weakest of 20-point defeats, in a performance that spooked the Tigers to such an extent that they are yet to fully recover.
It was a damning public display of tactical coaching ineptitude and alarming lack of on-field leadership, allowing Chris Judd to orchestrate clearance after clearance, and anonymous defender Nick Duigan to kick four goals.
Based on one half of football, albeit a significant one, Hardwick felt the need to fix what wasn’t broken. He wanted to take the pace out of the Richmond game in order to shore up a supposedly leaky defence.
From the very first bounce of the next season, fast movement became slow. Wave running became stagnancy. While previously players looked to attack first and go conservative second when in possession of the ball, it’s amazing to observe now how often the instinct is to look for a safe option, even when in control of the play with momentum their way.
Players will stall with the ball in hand, looking for a bad safe option than a good risky one. This allows opposition teams with ample time to flood back, as we’ve seen in the losses to the Western Bulldogs and Melbourne this season. They just have to bide their time, knowing a Tiger mistake will be forthcoming, either through a missed short kick, or a long bomb to an outnumbered contest.
Hardwick is often heard bemoaning that his side has dominated the inside 50 stats, yet walks away with a loss. In Richmond’s 14 losses since and including that elimination final, seven times they have won the inside 50 count, drawing it on one other occasion too.
Rather than always being about poor entries, this actually tells a story that their defensive mechanisms are fundamentally flawed.
It’s all well and good to press up and lock the ball in the forward-line, which does generate repeat inside 50s to a crowded forward-line, falsely inflating the figures.
But Hardwick’s defenders continually push up too far, to be 60 or 70 metres from their own goal as the last line of defence. When the turnover occurs and the opposition breaks in waves, they are running free and clear toward goal, invariably with a loose man or two among them, with hapless Tiger defenders trailing desperately in their wake.
So where to now for Richmond?
The best sides combine a defensive mindset without the ball with an attacking flair when in possession. It’s not impossible to have both.
Unfortunately, too often the Tigers have a defensive mindset with the ball, and can’t stop attacking flair when without it.
In regards to disappointing performances, all related to mindset, the same broken record continues to play. The same kind of losses keep occurring. Even worse, the same excuses keep getting rolled out.
Richmond may well come out firing against Geelong this week. We can be confident it will last the opening term. We can hope it will last a half. They might even give their all for a full four quarters.
But what about the week after? How about the week after that? Can they produce next time they’re seen on the big stage? The next time the weight of expectation is on their shoulders?
We all know now that it’s not going to happen. 35 years of failure is not so easily overcome.
Ian
Guest
We need to do something lets get some exciting players to help lids cotch and dusty before they decide to jump ship instead of staying on a sinking one. If the port game shows us anything its that teams move coast to coast with ease. Prob need more handballs too ?
Jeremy Ansell
Roar Rookie
We'll have to agree to disagree about Neale, I don't feel he's had 30 "very good" games prior to the end of last and this season. Misread your comments and linked the wrong Hill with your Fremantle ties. I still rate Ellis ahead of Hill, both had their best seasons last year but felt Ellis had a greater output. I also highly doubt Richmond's ability to develop a player like Hill, which I suppose is a different story.
Don Freo
Guest
Neale has had 10 or so "really good" games and 30 more "very good" games. He is extremely consistent. Last week was very rare but you might wonder where Jack and McVeigh got to. He was still working, bullocking, scrapping and stripped Sydney of possession. I'm talking about Brad Hill...I thought you were too.
Jeremy Ansell
Roar Rookie
There is a certainly a sameness to those three driven by the scars of first round draft picks past. Looking at the talent on offer in the top 5-6 picks in the last few drafts, I can't help but wonder what a trade into a higher pick might have accomplished? Agree that Heppell in hindsight in a no-brainer but he was drafted under a big injury cloud that Essendon had inside word on, which scared off a number of clubs off. @Don - Hill was well ahead and in an earlier draft, but Neale still has had only 10 really good (some amazing) games. That being said it does break the mould of the traditional Richmond first round draft pick of this decade. My point was that though Richmond drafted solid types, there wasn't a lot more available to them. But as mentioned above,whether they could have thought outside the square to change that and could have provided the next couple of years with top 4 aspirations rather than having a solid platform but sitting somewhere near the middle.
Cameron Rose
Expert
I take your points Jeremy, and the GC/GWS concessions is a good point, also made by a few others. It never pays to play "what if" with drafts, but in terms of Vlastuin's year (and I like him too), someone like a Menzel or Broomhead look to have something about them, particularly when we need class forward of centre. Vlas was compared to Hodge in terms of attitude and leadership, but I don't see it. Heppell over Conca was a no-brainer to many at the time, and also in retrospect. And I like Conca too, I don't think he's had a year yet when not dealing with injuries. Our players are all fine individually, but as a collective it begins to look a bit samey.
Cameron Rose
Expert
Good commentary Tiger. I particularly like the point about Morris and the sliding rule. Getting in hard and low at ankles was sort of his specialty. I've got time for Grigg, but understand there are others that don't. As an outside runner, Houli is always going to rely on others, but for instance, in the Port final I thought he was one that could actually hold his head up. At least he tried to get the ball moving our way.
Don Freo
Guest
Ellis is good but Hill and Neale have both put together 2 decent seasons...not just a few games. Hill is a stunner. I think you misrepresent Cripps. I do like Conca...but...Heppell. Your analysis of your players could well be a mini snapshot what goes on in the Tigers recruiting department. There is a lot you are missing but you can justify your selections...spuriously.
Jeremy Ansell
Roar Rookie
Great article Cam but to be fair to Richmond's draft picks in 2010-13 aside from Conca, I wouldn't be taking a different player drafted within 20 picks or so of where Richmond drafted when looking for a midfield type. 2013 - Cripps (taken just after Lennon) may end up being a brilliant inside midfielder but I'd rather pass on another midfielder who can only kick it 40 metres up and down with limited pace. 2012 - Vlastuin is probably the best player from what I've seen out of any player below him, maybe Thurlow. 2011 - Other than Ellis, you're looking at B. Hill or Neale as competition yet I'd take Ellis over those two still. That may change if Neale puts together a decent season, not just a few games. 2010 - Heppell or Prestia over Conca, but I'm a huge fan of his if he can get injury free. The GC and GWS years ruined these drafts, even Wells from Geelong couldn't get much out of them. I'm not sure Richmond could get anything more than dependable top 5-15 players unless they went for talls which is against what the club needed and hopefully picked a Tom Lynch, Darling or Cam McCarthy.
Milo
Roar Rookie
Good comment. 1. Cant and wont sack Hardwick. Still too much stigma attached to RFC coaching positions. Maybe at years end earliest but you gotta get someone better. Who? 2. Add Chaplin to your list of downhill skiers. At best cruises around the backline shouting orders and collecting soft uncontesteds. At worst doesnt even get near it esp when the heat's on. Grigg and Houli must go. 3. Arnott. Totally agree. Get him to do some damage. He can play but the way Hardwick has him in and out he probably doesnt know what day it is. Same goes for McDonough and Lennon. Tell them theyre playing win lose or draw for the next ten games.
Nihilistic Tiger
Guest
There's a million things I could rant about regarding Richmond's issues but I'll keep it relatively brief with some immediate concerns: Martin needs to be in the guts and play the same role he did 2010 (with stints up forward). You haven't seen Fremantle stuff around with Fyfe moving him off the ball. Arnot's a wrecking ball who should be also given a run of games in the guts and hurting blokes not prancing around at half-forward for two games then dropped because he doesn't play like Rioli or whoever.. Morris should be dropped and delisted at year's end....useless since the sliding rule was introduced.. It's also time Grigg was dropped - the most unaccountable footballer I've ever seen , which says something considering I've seen all of Richmond's last 33 seasons...he and Houli are two of the biggest downhill skiers in the comp. Anthony Miles needs to learn some defensive accountabilty before people laud him any more. I like Taylor Hunt's work ethic & the fact he has a bit of pace but ultimately he is a tagger not a footballer, as Geelong already knew. Finally - no point sacking Hardwick if Francis Jackson, Blair Hartley & Daniel Richardson all remain. Same goes for the fitness & medical staff.
Jack
Guest
The scary thing is realistically compared to other teams richmond are missing very few starting players . If they lose delideo cotchin at same time we are lookingn at a bottom 3 side. Now that's lacking deprh
Jason Cave
Guest
So, if the Tigers decides to have Damien Hardwick moved on, who would be his replacement at Punt Road? -- Comment from The Roar's iPhone app.
Simoc
Guest
I don't agree with any of this. The Bulldogs have been a revelation this season with their skills under pressure and their willingness to back themselves. The complete opposite of the Gold Coast side who are lost in transition to a has been structure coach. I reckon its about the coach, the mindset, and getting the players as a team. Richmond have the players but none of the rest on a regular basis. They are capable but unwilling. But there is no point in changing coach mid season. There are elite coaches but of course confidence is such a major factor, which can't be counted on, and the coach is helpless there.
Doc Disnick
Roar Guru
jax, I think when someone insults one of the best coaches of the last 10 years, then one is justified in replying in an appropriate manner. At no stage have I bagged out Perth, simple mentioned that many other cities here in Australia are considered better. Now you have gone to great length to discredit this link, for what ever reasons you may have. My comments were purely based on reasons why Ross might want to return to Melbourne and nothing else. As our other fellow Roarer mentioned, he would be borderline mad to return to Melbourne - after all the city is terrible isn't it, along with Carlton and Richmond when compared to the west coast. What about this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercer_Quality_of_Living_Survey That is a very reputable company, so I doubt you would question it. It matters little, because the very people here that hate people even questioning the likes of Perth and Freo for this matter have also openly admitted to Freo struggling to attract players from the east. It is a known fact that teams like Freo and WC rely heavily on the WAFL and find it very difficult to during the trading periods. Why? Because Perth is on the other side of the planet, just like I said. I am going to do an article later this year on the affects of travel, because an interesting report came out last year on the WC regarding their average games played. Ever wondered why no WC player has made it to 300 games? Ever wonder why their games average is one of the lowest in the competition. Ever wonder if travel affects this? Ever wonder if people living over their feel isolated and alone? Ever wonder if this might affect Ross Lyon???????????????????????????????????????????? You might want to think about all these things before challenging someone on their thoughts jax. I'm sure Perth is a great city to live jax. After all it rate very highly on all those lists. It still doesn't change my argument one little bit!
Macca
Guest
I doubt it - apparently his religion is the major factor in his decision - (I think he is a Jehovah Witness).
Dalgety Carrington
Roar Guru
If they got rid of Hardwick I'd wonder if that would give Rance something to put in the reason to leave column, or in the reason to stay column?
Macca
Guest
Sorry Slane - I didn't realise that I was supposed to rank the importance of each of your arguments. As for you arguments that Port and Freo were both mid tier in 2010-11 Freo are the exception having gone particularly hard in the draft in I think it was 2008 and then getting somewhat (and I do say somewhat) lucky that in 2009 the picked up the best player in the comp after every team (including themselves) had passed him by they had set themselves up prior to the draft concessions. While Port were mid tier in 2010, but second last in 2011 which is hardly mid tier. And as for there being no basis for the claim the basis is in the very nature of the draft - it is an equalisation process teams like Hawthorn, Geelong or Sydney should not be able to stay at the top of the table for the best part of a decade in the draft era - at least one of those mid tier teams I listed should be pushing up by now as not all 8 could balls up the draft repeatedly. "Neither is your assertion that better draft picks in a reality without GWS/GCS would translate to on-field success" I didn't assert it would automatically transalte - I admitted teams like Carlton & Richmond had made other mistakes but I do assert that it is a factor in the lack of success of all those mid tier sides. Also previously you said "Teams that have started a ‘rebuild’ any time in the last decade are missing a necessary tier of players." Which is exactly my point - all those teams would have loved to fill those missing spots with an O'meara or Cameron or Lynch or Shiell. And while all teams need to draft wisely it is easier to draft wisely the more talent there is in the pool and the higher your draft picks - finishing 8th and getting your first pick at what was essentially somewhere in the 30's (as happened to carlton) isn't going to reap the best results.
slane
Guest
Good on you Macca, you've taken the least important part of my argument and corrected me. Carlton were in fact mid-tier in 2010-11. Even better: Freo and Port were both mid-tier in 2010-11. Somehow they've managed to contend despite the twin bogey-man of Free-Agency and Draft Concession. It doesn't change the fact that there is no basis for you saying: 'Those teams should now be on the slide and being challenged by some of the mid tier from around 2010-11 It just isn't supported by evidence. Neither is your assertion that better draft picks in a reality without GWS/GCS would translate to on-field success. Draft picks are relative to each other. So Richmond gets better draft picks, but so does everybody else.
Macca
Guest
"This statement has no basis in reality and grossly over-values both Richmond and Carlton. Neither were mid-tier in 2010" Hmm in 2010 Carlton finished 8th out of 16 - not sure you can get much more mid tier than that. Given I actually said 2010-11 if we look at 2011 the Blues finished 5th with Richmond 12th (up from 15th) with both teams firmly in the mid-tier (ie not top 4 or bottom 4). But this is about more than just Carlton & Richmond - North, Essendon, the Eagles, the Bulldogs even Adelaide & Brisbane were all around that mid tier (the last 2 less so) in 2010 & 2011 and none of them are close to getting back into the top 4 - with arguably the closest 2 (Essendon & North ) having the second & third oldest list in the comp having taken massive risks in trading in older players to make the push up but ultimately looking like falling short and having a big list restructure looming.
jax
Guest
I doubt that Ross is going anywhere and the list is in very good shape for today and the future, take a look at it. Why do you have lower yourself by bagging Perth Rick? What relevance does it have other than to help you feel better about where you choose to live and to help you take pot shots at other Roarer's and cities, is that the best you can do? Location is a personal choice and I don't care what some researcher thinks is the better place to live because I am pretty sure that they have never lived in either location. They create a criteria that they want to measure (their opinion on what makes a great city, a Point of View if you will), then they weight each data point in order of what they deem important and then they pull data sets from many sources and run it through 'their algorithm' which then spits out a report that they can sell for a lot of money which is then picked up by the ABC so people like you can feel good (or not so good) about where they live. Only narrow-minded people give any significant weight to reports like these. Sure it's a guide but until one has actually lived in any said city it's really hard to draw conclusions on where one would want to live. Having travelled to over countries I can tell you that the reports do not match the reality in a lot of cases. Having lived in both cities I can't see why Lyon would want to leave WA. He's coaching the best he ever has been, he has a top class list, lot's of money and resources at his disposal, young kids settled into school, great beaches and a climate to die for. The report you listed was compiled by a Media conglomerate and I don't know about you but I have very little faith, time or patience for media companies and the Economist is one of the worst going around but that's another topic. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economist_Group "The Economist Newspaper Limited, trading as The Economist Group, is a multinational media company headquartered in London, United Kingdom which specializes in international business and world affairs information. Its principal activities are magazines, newspapers, conferences and market intelligence. The Economist Group is 50% owned by Pearson PLC via The Financial Times Limited. The bulk of the remaining shares are held by individual shareholders including the Cadbury, Rothschild, Schroder, Agnelli and other family interests as well as a number of staff and former staff shareholders. The Economist Group operates as a separate and independent business."