The penny drops....

[saintspremiers]

http://m.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/sec ... 28hpt.html

I hope they don't throw the book at the Dees.

Plenty of teams have tanked in the past dozen years.

It's just now that Dimsim and a monkey are acknowledging it.

[SuperDuper]

dont care if they strip them of their Scully compensation pick for starters!.
That would at least make things a little fairer!
and be a little ironic as well

[bigcarl]

Demetriou should acknowledge that the AFL rules in some cases encourage tanking and find a way to fix that.

it will keep happening as long as the rewards are there.

[plugger66]

Demetriou should acknowledge that the AFL rules in some cases encourage tanking and find a way to fix that.

it will keep happening as long as the rewards are there.

What rules in place now encourage tanking? If it is found out they tanked during games then they deserve a penalty. A player trying his guts out during a game dont deserve the coach to be trying to lose. Completely different to before a game if sending players for operations. At least the players know who is and isnt playing.

[bigcarl]

If you finish low you get a higher draft pick. This witch hunt against Melbourne reeks of hypocrisy from the league, whose rules actively encourage tanking.

[magnifisaint]

http://m.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/sec ... 28hpt.html

I hope they don't throw the book at the Dees.

Plenty of teams have tanked in the past dozen years.

It's just now that Dimsim and a monkey are acknowledging it.

They won't acknowledge it, they'll be forced to accept it. Melbourne should be excluded from the draft this year and Schwab and co should be terminated.

[Life Long Saint]

We need to start using past tense when referring to the the rules encouraging tanking.

The old format of the priority pick (from which we benefited) most certainly encouraged teams to lose games of football. The lure of having the first two picks in a draft would be impossible to resist. Even you, p66, must acknowledge that.

Belatedly, the AFL, to their credit, have scrapped that system and put the allocation of 1st round priority picks in the hands of the commission.
That, of course, has its own drawbacks as there is now no transparency with the system and the AFL can be accused of having an agenda when the first team is awarded a 1st round priority pick.

[Legendary]

I agree with Life Long Saint.

It was the entire priority pick system that encouraged tanking. We benefited more than any other club, but the entire concept was a joke.

Very hypocritical of the AFL to come down too hard on a team that sought to take advantage of the system they had put in place.


That being said, some of Melbourne's performances that year were breathtakingly bizzare. I don't think you could every say that we didn't try and win games of footy under GT in '01 and '02, despite how bad we were ...

[bozza1980]

If you finish low you get a higher draft pick. This witch hunt against Melbourne reeks of hypocrisy from the league, whose rules actively encourage tanking.

That's like saying you shouldn't punish drug cheats because the rewards for winning are too tempting, spare me.

At the end of the day they are going to be punished for rampant stupidity.

They were a bunch of spuds and were doing a pretty good job of losing when they were trying to win, why they felt compelled to have meetings to discuss trying to lose is beyond me.

Then after having their coach tank games, they sack him for not winning enough. That's not a ticking time bomb waiting to happen is it??

They deserve everything coming to them.

[SinCitySainter]

The problem as I see it is drawing the distinction between trying to lose and not making winning your priority.
One is tanking and needs to be outlawed the other is a standard aspect of any league based sport.
If you cannot make the finals then winning games is not your number one priority.
It is perfectly legitimate to move players around to see how they do in other positions or to get games into younger players or to send players off for surgery early.
None of these actions indicate trying to deliberately lose games just not focussing on winning.
I cannot see how they penalise Melbourne unless they can find the smoking gun that proves deliberate collusion by the football department to lose games.

[Animal Enclosure]

I agree with Life Long Saint.

It was the entire priority pick system that encouraged tanking. We benefited more than any other club, but the entire concept was a joke.

Very hypocritical of the AFL to come down too hard on a team that sought to take advantage of the system they had put in place.


That being said, some of Melbourne's performances that year were breathtakingly bizzare. I don't think you could every say that we didn't try and win games of footy under GT in '01 and '02, despite how bad we were ...

St Kilda only benefitted from it for 2 years- 2000 & 2001.

In 2000 we received Kosi (we still had the 1st pick & would have taken Roo)

In 2001 we received X.Clarke (we still had the #2 pick & would have taken Ball)

So we may have got 2 additional picks but probably didn't make the most of them!

If Melbourne do cop draft penalties at least their trade for Jesse Hogan will stand.... & locking a kid who most likely would go top 3 next year will minimise their pain. Losing Viney would hurt them terribly though.

[bigcarl]

Admit it Plugga. Your hero fat boy is in diabolical trouble over this one.

The only way to save face is not to blame Melbourne, but to take responsibility for the rules that encouraged this sort of behavior. They are not the only ones, by any means.

Perhaps a raffle of the bottom 10 to decide who gets first pick?

[bigcarl]

At the end of the day they are going to be punished for rampant stupidity.

You think they are the only club to have done this Boz?

Spare me the hypocrisy.

Clubs have been doing this for years and it will continue as long as the rewards are there.

[asiu]

stretching / bending the (existing) rules of engagement is accepted and expected , isn't it ?
... expanded perception on opportunity is continually sought and sold as 'on the ballness'


example ... the filth and their new jumpers

good onya melb.

[St Ick]

If Dees tanked, so did Carlton, Richmond, Saints, Port etc etc. You could argue Carlton did vs us in the last round! Dees are the only ones to admit it though, I guess taking their pick 4 from them could work, just means we could then have the 22/23 best pick...

[ace]

We all know that Collingwood tanked resulting in Thomas the Tank pick.
We all know that Carlton tanked to lose the Kreuzer cup match, the loser got to pick Kreuzer.

But there is someone who has encouraged tanking by his previous refusal to recognise it takes place.
Instead of being convicted he will now judge Melbourne's actions and retain his 2 million plus salary.

[dragit]

Removing their pick 4 would be totally understandable, afterall it is only ONE of their scully compensation picks anyway…

[ace]

I agree with Life Long Saint.

It was the entire priority pick system that encouraged tanking. We benefited more than any other club, but the entire concept was a joke.

Very hypocritical of the AFL to come down too hard on a team that sought to take advantage of the system they had put in place.


That being said, some of Melbourne's performances that year were breathtakingly bizzare. I don't think you could every say that we didn't try and win games of footy under GT in '01 and '02, despite how bad we were ...

St Kilda only benefitted from it for 2 years- 2000 & 2001.

In 2000 we received Kosi (we still had the 1st pick & would have taken Roo)

In 2001 we received X.Clarke (we still had the #2 pick & would have taken Ball)

So we may have got 2 additional picks but probably didn't make the most of them!

If Melbourne do cop draft penalties at least their trade for Jesse Hogan will stand.... & locking a kid who most likely would go top 3 next year will minimise their pain. Losing Viney would hurt them terribly though.

Kosi and Xavier Clarke.
I thought the reason for the priority picks was to help the club, not to clog the list with near permanently injured players.

[suss]

If Dees tanked, so did Carlton, Richmond, Saints, Port etc etc. You could argue Carlton did vs us in the last round! Dees are the only ones to admit it though, I guess taking their pick 4 from them could work, just means we could then have the 22/23 best pick...

We didn't tank to get priority picks - we were just s***. There's an enormous difference.

[Dr Spaceman]

If Dees tanked, so did Carlton, Richmond, Saints, Port etc etc. You could argue Carlton did vs us in the last round! Dees are the only ones to admit it though, I guess taking their pick 4 from them could work, just means we could then have the 22/23 best pick...

We didn't tank to get priority picks - we were just s***. There's an enormous difference.

Unfortunately, or fortunately, this is correct.

[vacuous space]

Anybody involved in deliberately losing should be permanently expelled from the league. I don't care if it's Melbourne, us or any other club.

Losing to improve your draft position is foolish anyway. It might improve your odds, but that's all. The best player we've picked in the last few years was picked in the 70s. If we'd had better picks, we might not have got him. Melbourne and Richmnond haven't got better from losing. Geelong and Sydney haven't got worse from winning. Culture trumps draft picks.

[Dave McNamara]

If Dees tanked, so did Carlton, Richmond, Saints, Port etc etc. You could argue Carlton did vs us in the last round! Dees are the only ones to admit it though, I guess taking their pick 4 from them could work, just means we could then have the 22/23 best pick...

We didn't tank to get priority picks - we were just s***. There's an enormous difference.

Unfortunately, or fortunately, this is correct.

Agreed. Didn't BBBB's famous last kick in our colours cost us a prority pick?

And add the wooden spoon E-girls of a couple of seasons ago to that list. Intersting rumour (yes, I know, 'rumour') that was reported on the radio this morning, about the AFL having a 'quiet word' to them about playing so many blokes 'out of position'..., and straight after that the E-girls suddenly won a game or two...

[sunsaint]

We all know that Collingwood tanked resulting in Thomas the Tank pick.
We all know that Carlton tanked to lose the Kreuzer cup match, the loser got to pick Kreuzer.

But there is someone who has encouraged tanking by his previous refusal to recognise it takes place.
Instead of being convicted he will now judge Melbourne's actions and retain his 2 million plus salary.

having a little panty tant doesnt change alter reality
players that dont have a read hot dip for 22 games a season in a bottom placed side getting belted each week, is no proof of tanking
a coach that doesnt pick what others think is the best team in a bottom placed side with an eye to next year, is no proof of tanking.

if you think the incentive to come last is too great, then what is the incentive to win the GF?
PS you now have given me proof that Lyon tanked against collingwood in the GF due to his team selection

[St Ick]

If Dees tanked, so did Carlton, Richmond, Saints, Port etc etc. You could argue Carlton did vs us in the last round! Dees are the only ones to admit it though, I guess taking their pick 4 from them could work, just means we could then have the 22/23 best pick...

We didn't tank to get priority picks - we were just s***. There's an enormous difference.

Unfortunately, or fortunately, this is correct.

This is actually always my arguement when 'discussing' the matter with my Demons supporting mate. Obviously I wasnt thinking this morning when I wrote that!

[plugger66]

I agree with Life Long Saint.

It was the entire priority pick system that encouraged tanking. We benefited more than any other club, but the entire concept was a joke.

Very hypocritical of the AFL to come down too hard on a team that sought to take advantage of the system they had put in place.


That being said, some of Melbourne's performances that year were breathtakingly bizzare. I don't think you could every say that we didn't try and win games of footy under GT in '01 and '02, despite how bad we were ...

It may encourage putting a young side on the park but there is no excuse once the players are out there that the coaches then try and lose whilst the players are trying their guts out. The priorty pick was a real issue but that has no gone so hopefully clubs wont tank during a game.