The Line in the Sand (and why it took this long)

Richmond has finally moved from drift to diagnosis. After missing finals in five of seven AFLW seasons and limping to a 0-7 start this year before salvaging a couple of late wins, the club has commissioned a full-scale independent review of the entire women’s football department. In plain English: no more band-aids. This is the organisational equivalent of cutting the engine, lifting the bonnet, and letting an outsider point at everything that will fail under pressure. The December finish matters: it’s a promise that recommendations land in time to affect 2026 list and program settings — not 2029 folklore.

The headline is big; the subtext is bigger. You don’t appoint a seasoned operator like Brad Lloyd plus external high-performance specialists unless you expect sharp truths and actionable plans. This isn’t a vibes audit. It’s a forensic — on-field structures, player development, medical/high-performance, recruitment, governance, culture, leadership. All of it. That scope is exactly what a modern AFLW program requires.

Who’s Running This — and Why You Should Care

If you only remember one thing, make it this: who runs a review determines what gets asked and how the answers get used. Bringing in Brad Lloyd signals two things:

The club understands the problem isn’t a single lever (coach, list, injuries) but a system — and systems thinking is what an experienced football boss brings.
The club is willing to park egos. External eyes reduce the political fog that can smother honest self-assessment at big clubs.

Add “high-performance specialists with women’s team-sport experience,” and the remit extends beyond tactics and selection into load management, injury profiles, return-to-play, and performance science — the stuff that silently makes or breaks seasons in a 12-game format with almost zero runway for course-correction. (When you start 0-7 in AFLW, the maths, not the narrative, beats you.)

The Quiet Extension: How to Lose a Conversation You Never Started

Let’s address the decision that had supporters spitting chips: Ryan Ferguson being quietly extended through 2026, first reported by AFL.com.au — not by Richmond. The club didn’t trumpet it. It slid by in the shadows of a nightmare start. Naturally, people asked: If you believe in the coach, why not own the message? If you don’t, why extend at all? The lack of a clear, member-facing narrative left a vacuum — and vacuums get filled with frustration.

To be clear: AFL.com.au confirmed the additional year, with timing and context that made it clear Richmond was betting on stability while the boat pitched. That’s defensible if you front up and explain the strategy: what Ferguson brings, what changes are underway, how the review intersects with coaching KPIs, and exactly what “success” looks like across the next 12 months. Silence wasn’t neutral; it was corrosive. afl.com.au

Pathways, or the House With No Stairs

Every AFLW list lives or dies by its development pathway. Richmond ended its VFLW alignment with Port Melbourne for 2025, leaving a conspicuous hole between the draftee and the senior oval. That decision might prove rational (control, cost, calendar alignment, quality), but you can’t run a high-performance system without a second-tier runway. Players outside the 21 need match conditioning. Return-from-injury athletes need minutes. Young talent needs reps in role. Without that, the AFLW side becomes a high-wire act without a safety net. Richmond officially confirmed the alignment end in February. The review has to answer: what replaces it — and when?

This isn’t sweeping theory — it’s week-to-week reality. As the ABC powerfully framed it, the Tigers’ 2025 spiral wasn’t just about form; it was about a program trying to build momentum in a short season without the scaffolding to catch slump, injury, or selection pressure early. A second-tier solution is not optional; it’s oxygen. ABC+1

What Went Wrong On-Field (and why “effort” isn’t the story)

When supporters see 0-7, they hear “effort.” In truth, effort rarely vanishes; connection does. Watch the losses and you see the same four fault lines:

Front-half function: Inside-50s that don’t convert put unbearable load on the back six. Scoring stalls; the opposition resets.
Exit patterns under heat: Turnovers on the first or second handball kill territory and morale.
Midfield balance: Too many “same-type” minutes; not enough two-way mix; not enough speed off the mark to punish or protect.
Game state IQ: Poor composure in red-time — the moments when a three-point margin becomes 15 before you’ve blinked.

A proper review will tag these in gory, frame-by-frame detail and tie them to role clarity, training periodisation, selection philosophy, and list profile (age, speed, size, match minutes). That’s fixable — but only if the fixes are supported by pathway minutes and coaching bandwidth to embed new patterns under fatigue.

Governance, Culture, and Leadership: Who Owns the Gap?

Since 2017, Kate Sheahan has overseen the women’s program. The remit was to establish and build. Eight years on, the question is not whether people worked hard — they did — but whether the system kept evolving fast enough. A member-facing club acknowledges the obvious: the AFLW competition has professionalised at lightspeed. Programs that feel “good enough” in 2021 look prehistoric in 2025. Evolution isn’t a critique of effort; it’s an obligation.

That’s why an independent review matters: it strips away sentimental loyalty and asks, is the structure fit-for-purpose today? Culture isn’t posters; it’s daily standards replicated by clarity and consequence. The review’s culture lens must focus on role truth, feedback loops, selection accountability, and member transparency. When supporters can’t even get straight answers about a coach extension, trust erodes — and apathy follows.

The Apathy Alarm: When Anger Goes Quiet

Perhaps the bleakest symptom isn’t the ladder — it’s the silence under club posts, the shrinking comment threads after sirens. When people stop yelling, they’ve stopped believing their voice can move anything. That’s the danger zone for any club: you don’t just lose games; you lose community energy. Your review must treat this as a core KPI: rebuild belief with honest, regular comms, publish review milestones, and own the plan publicly. Not spin. Not posters. Proof.

Short-Term vs Long-Term: What Must Change — and in What Order

Short-term (next 6–9 months)

Publish the review spine: who’s involved, the questions being asked, timelines, and how member updates will work.
Pathway solution: announce a VFLW plan or equivalent immediately, even if it’s a one-year bridge. Every week without this costs 2026. richmondfc.com.au
Selection & role clarity reset: define two-way mids, front-half pressure roles, and late-game decision hierarchies.
High-performance audit: injury profiles, soft-tissue trends, return-to-play criteria, and in-season load management for a short season. (Women’s team-sport specialists were engaged for a reason.)
Member transparency: hold a live forum post-review; put the deck on the website; let fans see the grown-up version.

Long-term (9–36 months)

Recruit to roles, not hype: build a midfield with complementary movement (burst + endurance + two-way discipline), and a forward mix that turns entries into pressure and scores.
Leadership architecture: develop multi-layered leadership — not just a captain; think on-field line leaders empowered to change state during games.
Integrated development model: AFLW coaches aligned with second-tier coaches on language, drills, KPIs, and role expectations.
Data & video clarity: shared dashboards for players; individual “role tapes” updated weekly; review culture that rewards self-correction.
Retention through belonging: invest in the everyday — medical excellence, career support, flexible scheduling, and genuine voice. This drives retention more reliably than any slogan.

The Coach Question (and how to judge 2026 fairly)

Extending Ferguson to 2026 without loudly fronting the why was a communications failure. But the review changes the test. If the external panel confirms that structural and pathway factors suffocated the game plan, then 2026 becomes the fairest sample: new pathway in place, role clarity codified, high-performance corrections made, recruitment targeted to gaps. Judge Ferguson on that environment, not the 2025 deficit that followed an 0-7 hole and an empty second tier. If, by mid-2026, the same patterns persist, the club will have the member mandate and the evidence base to act decisively. afl.com.au+1

What Good Looks Like (the bar we should set)

A stable, two-tier program where every player knows her role and her minutes pathway.
A midfield rotation with contrasting tools (one pure burst, one defensive engine, one connector) and the ability to hold shape after turnover.
A forward 50 that values territory and repeat pressure as highly as highlights — first to ground, first to lock, first to punish.
A medical/HP unit that can demonstrate reduced soft-tissue rates and faster, safer returns.
A communications stance that treats members like adults: explain the plan; admit errors; show progress; invite scrutiny.

Risk Dashboard: If We Duck the Hard Calls

Pathway paralysis: without a second-tier solution, we repeat 2025 with fresher paint.
Talent churn: ambitious players leave systems that don’t grow them.
Identity drift: apathy hardens; engagement metrics (views, comments, attendance) slide; commercial leverage weakens.
Review theatre: nothing changes but a press release. Members will smell it in a week.

Member Lens: How the Club Rebuilds Trust

Tell the truth. Publish milestones. Tie football KPIs to public checkpoints the way we do with men’s programs. And for the love of all things Yellow & Black, don’t bury major decisions in silence. The AFL.com.au scoop on the Ferguson extension is Exhibit A in how to turn a defendable football decision into a communications own goal. If you believe in your coach, say why — loudly — and show the plan he’ll be measured against. afl.com.au

Appendix: The Hard Facts Behind the Noise

What Richmond’s Statement Actually Says

The club frames it carefully as “a review for our AFLW program, not of our AFLW program.” That wording is deliberate. It’s an attempt to reassure staff and players that this isn’t a witch hunt — it’s a systems audit.
They’ve confirmed Brad Lloyd as the lead consultant, with independent high-performance specialists from women’s team sports in support.
The review is evidence-based and will explore:
Program structure, governance, culture, leadership, coaching, player development, high-performance and medical support, recruitment, list strategy, and futurology.
CEO Shane Dunne stresses alignment with “best practice” and “sustained success.”
Translation: the club knows it’s behind the AFLW leaders and wants to modernise the environment, science, and systems.
Lloyd has already been embedded at Swinburne Centre, observing training and match preparation.
The process includes interviews and surveys of players, staff, and stakeholders — suggesting a broad data set, not just opinion.
Findings go to the board with actionable recommendations; completion due December 2025.

The club promises to update members post-review — something RTSSG should hold them to.

RTSSG Perspective

The language — “for, not of” — is spin control. It’s about protecting morale and optics while quietly acknowledging the need for overhaul. But when you line it beside the Herald Sun revelations (poor season, missed finals, coach re-signed silently, pathway void, apathy setting in), you see the dual narrative:

The media version says: crisis, accountability, embarrassment.
The club version says: collaboration, optimisation, evolution.

Both can be true — and that’s exactly what your article exposes.

Richmond’s statement proves the review is real and serious, but its soft tone also confirms how carefully the club is treading publicly. They’re trying to stabilise confidence while avoiding headlines that scream “turmoil.” Internally though, this is the biggest shake-up the AFLW arm has faced since its inception.

Final Word — and Challenge

This review should hurt. If it doesn’t, it’s theatre. Richmond has chosen the right mechanism (independent eyes, with HP expertise) and a sensible timeline (December finish). Now it must choose courage. Publish the findings in adult language. Show members the reforms with dates and owners. Replace the pathway with something stronger, not just different. Rebalance the list to roles, not names. And fix the communications stance so supporters aren’t learning club strategy from third parties again.

Because here’s the truth our people already know: anger is energy; apathy is decay. If you want Tigerland roaring for the AFLW program again, earn it — with clarity, accountability, and a plan we can see, measure, and believe in.

RTSSG.com: Richmond News By Richmond People For Richmond People!

Categories

All Posts

My Posts

All Categories

All Categories

Sort by:

Posts

Sub - Category

Recent Activity