Geelong sending players for surgery early and impacting GWS finals chances

[jim boy]

I agree, but there's still an integrity issue that occurs every year that nobody talks about.

The impact varies, but if you potted West Coast for not putting an extra behind the ball because of integrity, than this is no different.

It also likely gives Geelong a better chance to get an earlier draft pick.

Why is tanking only an issue for the struggling bottom place sides, but not an issue if a mid table side throws their last games?

I think you are looking for something that isn't there. Questioning the integrity is about whether a team is trying to manipulate the results, or more specifically a loss, which was the alleged behaviour of West Coast. Sure - Geelong will be playing a weakened team - but we are going for a team of fully fit players, not three-quarter fit players, who could play if really required. On game day, we will be pulling out every stop in order to win, the result is not going to materially affect our draft spot. Geelong will do the right thing by its fans and any retiring players.

There is no difference between what Geelong are doing and what Port do when they 'rest' players - should we be calling into account what Port does? After-all they are not pulling out all the stops to win a match if they rest a key player, and that may have knock-on effects for other teams.

If GWS dont make the finals, they're not going to blaming Cameron for going into surgery at an inconvenient time, they'll be lamenting their early season poor form, which put them too far back.

 

[ourgameplandoesntwork]

conveniently ignoring the fact that for the rest of the 4th quarter the umps were trying their best to drag the crows over the line up until that one decision. Adelaide weren't good enough - better luck next year.

Crows fans are really looking very small pathetic at the moment. They need to move on. Human error happens all the time. If they have played better earlier in the match, they would have been good enough to have one accounting for human error. Their whingeing and complaining is embarrassing. It’s hilarious that they’re up in arms because they may have possibly scraped into eighth. All the hallmarks of a club that have not been relevant for a quarter of a century.

 

[ourgameplandoesntwork]

If a team has legitimately injured players, and they have nothing to play for in terms of progressing their season, why would they play these injured players?

This is just a part of the sport. There’s nothing that is to be done about this. If teams at the bottom of the ladder have legitimately injured, which it is very obvious that Geelong does, in this case, then those teams could do the same. If something suspicious were going on, then it’s a different story!

This thread is a nothing burger.

 

[kickazz]

AFL just needs a policy where they review club decisions like this. If found out maybe the players involved need to miss round 1 next season as well.

What's there to review though?

Should they also be reviewing when a player is 'managed' throughout the season?

 

[kickazz]

The Hobo makes some good points regarding "When is a team not trying as hard as they could to win this specific game" and the associated integrity issues around that.

But then you could argue a player should never appear as "managed" in the team OUTs, as this implies not trying as hard as you could.


I think a good comparison is horse racing - (in Australia at least) a jockey must give his/her horse its best chance to win any race it enters in, even if the trainer is 'setting' the horse for a more important race in the near future. They get suspended if they don't try. The only exception of course is safety and the welfare of the horse.

So with footy, you can not select 100% your best team if the health of the player is the concern. But you can't deliberately tank and lose games in order to get draft picks when you could have won.

 

[BF Tiger]

What's there to review though?

Should they also be reviewing when a player is 'managed' throughout the season?

Yeah, they probably should. Although “managed” throughout the season when finals are still on the line is different to “sending for surgery because we blew our finals opportunity and if we now lose we might get a better draft pick anyway”.

 

[Elmer_Judd]

Its been happening for years.

Dogs are shot and ECO btw, Geelong will still beat them at the Cattery anyway I reckon.

No harm, No Foul in what the Cats are doing.

It's common sense actually

 

[matey]

As long as they aren’t having the surgery overseas in somewhere like China or Russia and come back stronger, quicker, jump higher and play well into their 50’s!

 

[kickazz]

Yeah, they probably should. Although “managed” throughout the season when finals are still on the line is different to “sending for surgery because we blew our finals opportunity and if we now lose we might get a better draft pick anyway”.

Yeah this makes sense. Then there is the other way of looking at it - perhaps Cameron needed to be rested/have surgery even earlier, and the cats put TOO much emphasis on winning games and trying to make the finals as opposed to considering player welfare and the longer term.

At the end of the day, clubs should probably be allowed to select sides any way they see fit (including playing youngsters to develop them, etc). The onus is on the competition to make losing unattractive. The way the draft works doesn't help this, but there are other reasons you don't want to lose, such as getting 4:40 Sunday games and developing a losing culture. I don't see teams losing on purpose, and it could only be a factor IMO come the last round or two when there is a clear #1 or clear #1 and #2 pick (or similar) on the line. It is for such possibilities that I'm open to the idea of having a bit more of a lottery approach to early picks.

 

[The Hobo]

At the end of the day, clubs should probably be allowed to select sides any way they see fit (including playing youngsters to develop them, etc).

When the Hawks did this earlier this season, everyone said they were tanking.

 

[kickazz]

When the Hawks did this earlier this season, everyone said they were tanking.

Yeah - and they may have proven us wrong by developing some good youth and winning their fair share of games.

But they lost more than they won, and so the AFL will give them shit timeslots which affects them financially.

I think it's hard to micro-manage selection integrity - we just need to make sure that losing, overall, remains an unattractive prospect.


Another thing that makes this hard is the lack of a good reserves comp. In the old days that's where you could really develop your youth.

 

[iameviljez]

AFL just needs a policy where they review club decisions like this. If found out maybe the players involved need to miss round 1 next season as well.

How would that go?!?

The player needs surgery. Geelong decided to send the player in for surgery so they can do a full preseason in 2024. This is hardly being obtuse.

There isn’t any kind of review required.

Geelong doesn’t owe GWS, or the Dogs, a thing.

 

[iameviljez]

When the Hawks did this earlier this season, everyone said they were tanking.

That’s because it’s fun

 

[Elmer_Judd]

Bulldogs fans probably more irrate than Giants fans tbh. No way are the Bulldogs sacking Bevo if they play finals again.

When was the last time a coach was sacked after guiding their team into the finals ?

Was it Cornflakes (Grant Thomas) at St Kilda ?

 

[Spearman]

Yeah this makes sense. Then there is the other way of looking at it - perhaps Cameron needed to be rested/have surgery even earlier, and the cats put TOO much emphasis on winning games and trying to make the finals as opposed to considering player welfare and the longer term.

At the end of the day, clubs should probably be allowed to select sides any way they see fit (including playing youngsters to develop them, etc). The onus is on the competition to make losing unattractive. The way the draft works doesn't help this, but there are other reasons you don't want to lose, such as getting 4:40 Sunday games and developing a losing culture. I don't see teams losing on purpose, and it could only be a factor IMO come the last round or two when there is a clear #1 or clear #1 and #2 pick (or similar) on the line. It is for such possibilities that I'm open to the idea of having a bit more of a lottery approach to early picks.

This
No, let's force the player who's been playing in pain, risking permanent damage back out there for a meaningless game because it would be unfair for some other club in the comp.
Funny thing though, one of those replacements might just be panting at the opportunity to show his stuff out there and play a whale of a game.

 

[jj1978]

Adelaide wins… Carlton locked in for home final… GWS may have had an easier time. Even with Carlton GWS game being last both teams will know the lay of the land do possibly expect a raft of changes or bruise free action.

Pies “apparently” have been taking it easy for a few weeks having stitched up top 2… feel for Piotr and Dees probably missing out on top 2.

Cats and Dogs both playing terribly… coin toss who wins this regardless. But dogs have themselves to blame for some of their performances as Does Carlton for their poor run costing them a too 4 chance.

 

[PhatBoy]

Cameron and Danger would absolutely have played this week if season was on the line. Likely also Rohan, Blicavs Guthrie etc.

And despite being off, they're all still far better than the alternative, which is why they've kept playing.

Yes of course they WOULD have, that is different to ‘should’ have.

Cameron is probably enough of a freak that he can still contribute at below full fitness, Dangerfield though he willed himself through a couple of influential performances has been carrying a busted rib since the first port Adelaide game and has looked like it.

Every result impacts the competition beyond the two teams who produce it. Those individual results - and therefore their impacts - are influenced by selections, suspensions, injury assessment, surgeries, concussion protocols.

This is only an issue right now because it is a ‘final’ impact that has no more rounds of footy left to alter that impact.

You can’t do anything about it

 

[PhatBoy]

And more than anything, what excuse is there for the guys who come in not to aim up and still win?

 

[STPer18]

When the Hawks did this earlier this season, everyone said they were tanking.

When it comes to Hawthorn it's best to just assume that they're being nefarious until proven otherwise.

 

[bzparkes]

Should Geelong compromise their pre-season to keep the finals chances of other clubs alive?

Or is the 'concern' with the betting markets?

Geelong sending players early to have them cherry-ripe for pre-season is smart management. I don't think their players will be playing to lose anyway.

 

[kickazz]

Should Geelong compromise their pre-season to keep the finals chances of other clubs alive?

Or is the 'concern' with the betting markets?

Geelong sending players early to have them cherry-ripe for pre-season is smart management. I don't think their players will be playing to lose anyway.

Betting on the final round of H&A season is always a bit of a lottery anyway.

 

[flamethrower]

Geelong have sent some of their best players in for surgery now for 2 reasons...

1. They cannot make the finals
2. They are playing their bunnies - you could lay 18 Geelong jumpers on the ground and it would be enough to beat the Bulldogs. They would certainly match the Bulldog's midfield for lack of leg speed.

And THAT is the real reason why the Bulldogs are losing to teams like West Coast and Hawthorn - they have quicker players in the midfield and run plodders like Bont, Macrae, Smith and Libba off their feet.

 

[ferrisb]

I think you are looking for something that isn't there. Questioning the integrity is about whether a team is trying to manipulate the results, or more specifically a loss, which was the alleged behaviour of West Coast. Sure - Geelong will be playing a weakened team - but we are going for a team of fully fit players, not three-quarter fit players, who could play if really required. On game day, we will be pulling out every stop in order to win, the result is not going to materially affect our draft spot. Geelong will do the right thing by its fans and any retiring players.

There is no difference between what Geelong are doing and what Port do when they 'rest' players - should we be calling into account what Port does? After-all they are not pulling out all the stops to win a match if they rest a key player, and that may have knock-on effects for other teams.

If GWS dont make the finals, they're not going to blaming Cameron for going into surgery at an inconvenient time, they'll be lamenting their early season poor form, which put them too far back.

This guy gets it.

There is a difference between 'not doing every single thing in your power to win a game' and 'trying to deliberately lose'.

Clubs have to balance short- and long-term goals. And often these are in direct contrast with each other.

Resting a star (or two) when you are out of finals contention is fine. Sending in a player for an early surgery is fine. Prioritising youth for rebuilding clubs is fine. Just like playing all your vets when you are in contention is fine too.

Going out onto the field trying and hoping to lose (to tank for draft picks or to manipulate finals ladder positions) is not OK. Playing Caleb Daniel in the ruck to increase your chances of losing is not OK.

Clubs are free to balance short- and long-term considerations. Even if that means lowering your chances of winning that game. As long as the players that go out there and the coaches in the box are trying to win the game.

 

[Roby]

Sure, but Dogs win and GWS scrape a win, and % is a factor.

Cats are missing quite a few stars, it will make a massive difference. Dogs are 1.72 favorites off the back of the changes.

Maths isn't your strong suit, and would've helped you before posting this thread

When the Hawks did this earlier this season, everyone said they were tanking.

The Hawks did nothing of the sort, that was even remotely similar to Geelong this week.

 

[JackOutback]

The % factor isn't really an issue. We win and GWS lose, the Dogs will be in the finals no matter what the margins are.

The Dogs just lost to the worst team of the last decade at home. No matter who the Cats have missing, I still highly doubt they'll win at a ground they haven't won at for 20 odd years. We're cooked.

How are the Eagles the worst team of the decade if they have never got a wooden spoon? Or are we forgetting North and the fact they are on track for their third consecutive spoon?