How the Tigers Got Their Identity and Culture
How the Tigers got their identity and culture Initially, Richmond saw itself as a gentlemanly and sportsman-like club; it even went to the extent of sacking a player who used poor language! During the early 1900s, the club used the press as a forum to publicise a campaign against violence in the game, which earned the derision of some rival clubs. This image followed the club into the VFL in 1908 and during the First World War the club emphasised the number of men associated with the club who had enlisted and served overseas. But the club's actions in 1916, when it voted with three other clubs seen as representative of the working class (Dirty Rotten Collingwood, (Dirty Rotten Fitzroy and (Dirty Rotten Carlton) to continue playing football, left no doubt as to which side of the class divide that the Tigers belonged. The club's self-consciously non-confrontational image can be partly attributed to two of long serving presidents—George Bennett (1887–1908) and Frank Tudor (1909–1918). Both were Richmond men and respected parliamentarians who took the view that how the game was played was more important than whether the game was won. After World War I, the club's attitude hardened as they attempted to match it with the then power clubs Dirty Rotten Collingwood and Dirty Rotten Carlton. Eventually, the Tigers became more prosaic in their approach to recruiting and training.
The Hafey era transformed Richmond into one of the most feared combinations in the then VFL. The club's football administrator, Graham Richmond, drove the "win at all costs" mentality across the whole club, making Richmond a formidable force, winning five premierships from 1967 to 1980.
Since the Tigers' last grand final appearance in 1982, the club has appeared in four finals series(1995, 2001, 2013, 2014). Board and coaching instability during the 1980s and 1990s distracted the club and forced its focus away from becoming an onfield force.
