If Richmond Isn’t Really Run by First-Timers, Why Does It Feel That Way?
Updated: Aug 30
RTSSG’s full member feature, “The Entire Club Is Run by First-Timers.” Has Richmond Lost Too Much Experience at Once?, starts with a supporter question worth testing rather than simply repeating.
One of the sharper reactions to Richmond’s 2026 season was not simply about Adem Yze. It was the claim that too much experience had disappeared from around him — and that the club was now being run by people doing major jobs for the first time.
That concern is easy to understand after the departures of figures such as Peggy O’Neal, Brendon Gale and Neil Balme. Richmond has changed enormous parts of the organisation at the same time as it has changed the football team itself.
But the literal version of the claim becomes harder to sustain once the current leadership group is examined. John O’Rourke had years on Richmond’s board before becoming president. Shane Dunne had spent about a decade inside Richmond and built Aligned Leisure before becoming CEO. Tim Livingstone and Blair Hartley have long histories inside the football program. Blake Caracella and Chris Newman bring substantial coaching experience. Even recent high-performance appointments arrived with established professional backgrounds.
So is “first-timers” actually the right description of Richmond’s problem?
If the club contains plenty of people with substantial experience, why has the supporter perception of lost experience become so strong? Is it really about years on a CV, or about where supporters expect experience to be most visible when difficult football decisions are being made?
What kind of experience should matter most during a rebuild — previous success at Richmond, experience from outside the club, senior decision-making responsibility, football-specific expertise, or the ability to challenge an existing view before it becomes policy?
And how should supporters judge whether that experience is influencing Richmond’s biggest calls rather than simply existing somewhere inside the organisation?
The high-performance story makes the question even harder. Richmond recruited experienced people, yet availability remained a major problem and the program changed again during 2026. If experience by itself cannot guarantee the right outcome, what should Richmond actually be looking for when it adds experience?
Does a rebuilding club need more senior voices, different voices, clearer authority, stronger challenge around the key decision-makers — or something else entirely?
What would Richmond have to show in 2027 before supporters could reasonably say the organisation around the young team looks more settled, more demanding and better equipped for the decisions ahead?
The full RTSSG investigation follows those questions through the people, roles and decision points around Richmond rather than accepting the original supporter claim at face value.
Not a member yet?
RTSSG.com: Richmond News By Richmond People For Richmond People!
Comments