The AFL's Big Brother Antics - Give Me A Break !!!!

[JockStewart]

Oh, really?? Consider Tim Lane's analysis, and then tell me it "had nothing to do with the Swans"

To accept assurances that nothing untoward happened when Kieren Jack was recruited by Sydney you have to believe three things:​

First, his draft registration papers were lost in the mail in early October 2005. As a dubious excuse it ranks with the-dog-ate-my-homework and it is statistically a-chance-in-thousands; but it could have happened.​

​

Second, when Kieren Jack told a Sydney journalist 15 months ago that he actually hadn't registered for the 2005 national draft, either he was making it up or the journalist misunderstood him.​

And third, when Kieren's father gave precisely the same account to a Fairfax journalist a year later, either Garry Jack confected the same story or the journalist made the selfsame error as his News Limited counterpart 12 months earlier.​

​

​

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/investigated-whitewashed-20111210-1oovx.html#ixzz22G1OjgLB​

Ahh yes this wouldnt be tim lane the fanatical carlton supporter? what a coiencendence.

Post something non carlton..i dare you.

 

[Quivorir]

Typical that the only people against this are the clubs that we all know cheated.

 

[Bazzar]

Typical that the only people against this are the clubs that we all know cheated.

Exactly, and its known the Tiges did for 1 quarter, so i would welcome them to come clean and officially tell the footy world exactly how and why, and if they have to face some penalty so be it. Its better than now having that constant speculation hanging over our head and being labeled tankers.

Comparing Richmond who just didnt make any coaching moves for a quarter to Melbourne is crazy. This is what Nathan Brown said in todays paper-

"You don't realise it when you're out there playing . . . it's only when you get in to the rooms after the game and you're told of all the moves," Brown said yesterday.

"Jade Rawlings was the coach and he was pretty disappointed with the way we played.
"He said, 'You just nearly got beaten by a side that didn't want to win'.

"He basically said we were kidding ourselves."


Brown, an elusive, 182cm forward, found himself marked by lumbering 199cm ruckman Paul Johnson.

In other bizarre moves, Melbourne's most consistent ball-winner, James McDonald, was banished to defence to guard small forward Robin Nahas.

Classy forwards Russell Robertson and Colin Sylvia were playing in the VFL.

Defenders James Frawley and Matthew Warnock were also pushed forward for much of the day in an utterly baffling move.

Davies and Jurrah were on the bench for most of the last quarter.

Brock McLean, the man at at the centre of the latest tanking allegations, did not play.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/more-news/dees-didnt-want-to-win-brown/story-e6frf9jf-1226439817831

 

[Baldur]

Let's be serious for a moment, "tanking" as you have called it is not a crime !!

You are bringing the game in to disrepute, and surely it can be legally classed as match fixing.

I have little doubt that if it could be proven that a club tried to lose a game it would be looked at as a possable criminal offence. The fact that the intent is not to affect betting may be enough to protect them, but there is no doubt that trying to lose does have the chance to be a criminal offence.

People here can laugh it they wish but there is a reason the Victorian Commission for Gambling and Liquor Regulation is looking into this again.

30 seconds seach gave the following
http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/other/lawreform/NSWLRC/2011/130.html?stem=0&synonyms=0&query=match fixing


"193H Corrupting betting outcomes of event
(1) For the purposes of this Part, conduct corrupts a betting outcome of an
event if the conduct:
(a) affects or, if engaged in, would or would be likely to affect the
outcome of any type of betting on the event, and
(b) is contrary to the standards of integrity that a reasonable person
would expect of persons in a position to affect the outcome of any
type of betting on the event."
http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary...ractive_broadcasting_amendment/report/c13.htm
"13.2 Match-fixing has been defined by Australian Sports Ministers as involving:

...the manipulation of an outcome or contingency by competitors, teams, sports agents, support staff, referees and officials and venue staff. Such conduct includes:​

(a) the deliberate fixing of the result of a contest, or of an occurrence within the contest, or of a points spread;​

(b) deliberate underperformance;​

(c) withdrawal (tanking);​

(d) an official's deliberate misapplication of the rules of the contest;​

(e) interference with the play or playing surfaces by venue staff; and​

(f) abuse of insider information to support a bet placed by any of the above or placed by a gambler who has recruited such people to manipulate an outcome or contingency."​

 

[i_need_a_pencil]

I have little doubt that if it could be proven that a club tried to lose a game it would be looked at as a possable criminal offence. The fact that the intent is not to affect betting may be enough to protect them, but there is no doubt that trying to lose does have the chance to be a criminal offence.

People here can laugh it they wish but there is a reason the Victorian Commission for Gambling and Liquor Regulation is looking into this again.

30 seconds seach gave the following
http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/other/lawreform/NSWLRC/2011/130.html?stem=0&synonyms=0&query=match fixing


"193H Corrupting betting outcomes of event
(1) For the purposes of this Part, conduct corrupts a betting outcome of an
event if the conduct:
(a) affects or, if engaged in, would or would be likely to affect the
outcome of any type of betting on the event, and
(b) is contrary to the standards of integrity that a reasonable person
would expect of persons in a position to affect the outcome of any
type of betting on the event."
http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary...ractive_broadcasting_amendment/report/c13.htm
"13.2 Match-fixing has been defined by Australian Sports Ministers as involving:

...the manipulation of an outcome or contingency by competitors, teams, sports agents, support staff, referees and officials and venue staff. Such conduct includes:​

(a) the deliberate fixing of the result of a contest, or of an occurrence within the contest, or of a points spread;​

(b) deliberate underperformance;​

(c) withdrawal (tanking);​

(d) an official's deliberate misapplication of the rules of the contest;​

(e) interference with the play or playing surfaces by venue staff; and​

(f) abuse of insider information to support a bet placed by any of the above or placed by a gambler who has recruited such people to manipulate an outcome or contingency."​

Wouldn't this only be relevant if one of the Melbourne officials had bet on the game, or bet on the Demons ladder position?

 

[nomadjack71]

My point exactly !!

If dems the rules, then why are clubs going to be penalised for using them as they are written ??

Sorry, but who in the AFL has suggested that anybody is going to be penalised? The AFL has said it will investigate the claims, which as the governing body it has to. It will then do exactly as it did last time - talk to those involved and then come back and say that there is no clear evidence that clubs or players are deliberately throwing matches - which there isn't. They will find evidence that clubs out of contention focused on developing players for the next campaign. But they will say that that doesn't constitute 'tanking'. If you want to point the finger anywhere I'd suggest you point it at w***ers like Patrick Smith and Kevin Bartlett and other media flogs who find the need to sensationalise everything about this issue, yet have not to my knowledge ever actually spelt out clearly what they mean by tanking nor forced the AFL hierarchy to do the same. Nobody will be penalised.

 

[Baldur]

Wouldn't this only be relevant if one of the Melbourne officials had bet on the game, or bet on the Demons ladder position?

As I already said "The fact that the intent is not to affect betting may be enough to protect them".

In fact I strongly suspect that at present it would not be a criminal offence, but I would not want to risk my freedom on it. But there is no doubt that the various Australian governments are looking to ensure that this sort of activity is illegal.

In the UK it is illegal full stop.

 

[i_need_a_pencil]

As I already said "The fact that the intent is not to affect betting may be enough to protect them".

In fact I strongly suspect that at present it would not be a criminal offence, but I would not want to risk my freedom on it. But there is no doubt that the various Australian governments are looking to ensure that this sort of activity is illegal.

In the UK it is illegal full stop.

Cheers... didn't see that.

Having the government step in would certainly discourage tanking to say the least.

 

[Tulip]

So would you like the AFL to appoint an independent body to setup a type of royal commision into the throwing of games? It would bring up some interesting results wouldnt it.

I bet behind closed doors Kernahan would be absolutely filthy with McLean because of the possible ramifications.

McLean has ****ed both his former and current club over BIG TIME.

Brainless idiot.

 

[Necromancer Beth]

Nice to see a Carlton supporter support tanking. Makes for a refreshing change.

Just like a Richmond supporter embracing losing

 

[Bazzar]

McLean has ****** both his former and current club over BIG TIME.

Brainless idiot.

And as pointed out last night all premeditated. He knew basically what questions were going to be asked, and his response. Why? What did he have to gain, he should have just stuck to talking about their good win on the weekend and his own good form.

 

[Tulip]

And as pointed out last night all premeditated. He knew basically what questions were going to be asked and his response. Why? What did he have to gain, he should have just stuck to talking about their good win on the weekend and his own good form.

I really don't believe he knows what he says half the time. Twat of the highest order, and I've liked him since he left.

 

[sydjackson]

Ahh yes this wouldnt be tim lane the fanatical carlton supporter? what a coiencendence.

Post something non carlton..i dare you.

OK, JockStewart is a Swans supporter with very little sense of how to conduct a sensible argument, or spell for that matter.
There...that seems appropriately non-Carlton!

Now, go back and respond to my earlier post in another thread ........I dare you!

 

[Woodson]

You are bringing the game in to disrepute, and surely it can be legally classed as match fixing.

Tanking / match fixing... call it what you like..

Obviously many thought JYD was a terrible coach in 2006.... WRONG!
NORTH TANKED my friend!!! Hello pick #3.. I believe he's name is Lachlan Hansen.

North 2007... Preliminary Finalist. You do the math. moreso, JYD walked out on the club because he had a gutful of the lazy and unmotivated players not willing to put in the hard yards. Can't blame Laidley at all. Genius in a way and possibly lost his way with 'communication lines'.

 

[estibador]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/more-news/dees-didnt-want-to-win-brown/story-e6frf9jf-1226439817831

Their conduct in some of those games was disgraceful and I hope like hell the AFL strips them of draft picks. Not that it will happen but I'd indulging in a shitload of schadenfreude if it did.

Pathetic that people still defend them after the moves they pulled in those matches, have you no pride in our sport?

And trying to blame the AFL... please... I hate the priority pick system as much as everyone else but using that to excuse Melbourne's actions is weak. That's like saying it's fine to defraud Centrelink because it's the govts fault for having a system that tries to help people who need it.

 

[lock33]

Wouldn't this only be relevant if one of the Melbourne officials had bet on the game, or bet on the Demons ladder position?

Ultimately its for financial gain in business law there is a name for it.

 

[maxmustard]

Their conduct in some of those games was disgraceful and I hope like hell the AFL strips them of draft picks. Not that it will happen but I'd indulging in a shitload of schadenfreude if it did.

Pathetic that people still defend them after the moves they pulled in those matches, have you no pride in our sport?

And trying to blame the AFL... please... I hate the priority pick system as much as everyone else but using that to excuse Melbourne's actions is weak. That's like saying it's fine to defraud Centrelink because it's the govts fault for having a system that tries to help people who need it.

You must have been disgusted when you played the Hawks in round 21 2010. Threw a match for future benefit.

 

[StevenwellerHFC]

Tanking is pathetic. Should be fined a million each year a team was found to be tanking.

 

[estibador]

You must have been disgusted when you played the Hawks in round 21 2010. Threw a match for future benefit.

We would have been delighted if we'd been able to snatch a win with the team we sent over.

See the difference?

 

[maxmustard]

We would have been delighted if we'd been able to snatch a win with the team we sent over.

See the difference?

I didn't say they were the same, and I'd agree Melbourne tanking was worse. Considering your level of high horsery though I assumed you were morally against not trying to win that match.

 

[estibador]

I didn't say they were the same, and I'd agree Melbourne tanking was worse. Considering your level of high horsery though I assumed you were morally against not trying to win that match.

I'm morally against deliberately throwing matches.

I'm not morally against resting players, sending them off for surgery, playing youth, etc, so long as once the siren goes you are actually trying to win the match.

 

[hcd199]

Some general qualifications have been included in order to avoid criminalising
actions that involve the breaking of the rules of a sport, or making tactical decisions

for reasons other than affecting betting:


the relevant conduct must be contrary to the standards of integrity that a
reasonable person would expect of a person who was in a position to affect the

outcome of any type of betting on the event (cl 193H, para 2.28-2.30); and




the person must act with the intention of obtaining a financial advantage for him
or herself or for another person, or of causing a financial disadvantage to

another person, as a result of any betting on the event (para 2.58-2.65); and

the person must know or be reckless as to whether the relevant conduct
corrupts a betting outcome of the event. (para 2.51-2.57)

The above would suggest no ramifications unless betting on the match was at least reasonably likely to have reason to come into consideration.
However, I'm not sure why some are trying to defend Melbourne's actions here. This goes against everything a healthy sporting competition stands for; namely, that each team, every time it plays, intends to win the match. I'm not denying the players were trying - I'd be stunned if they themselves were playing dead, although being moved to an awkward position has got to sap your motivation somewhat - but when one side wants to win and another doesn't, then we're no longer watching the sport we showed up to watch. Much bigger damage to the game than any ridiculous rule changes, suspensions and the like.
The AFL hasn't done anything wrong: it only made the mistake of adding further aid to struggling teams.

 

[maxmustard]

I'm morally against deliberately throwing matches.

I'm not morally against resting players, sending them off for surgery, playing youth, etc, so long as once the siren goes you are actually trying to win the match.

You put out a side that could not win that match and everyone at Freo knew that. It was done for future benefit, which you took full advantage of two weeks later against a less fresh Hawks side that took things seriously in round 21. Not as bad as what we did but there are degrees to everything. Maybe we should have just 'rested' our better players instead of playing them in ridiculous positions.

 

[Rob]

You put out a side that could not win that match and everyone at Freo knew that. It was done for future benefit, which you took full advantage of two weeks later against a less fresh Hawks side that took things seriously in round 21. Not as bad as what we did but there are degrees to everything. Maybe we should have just 'rested' our better players instead of playing them in ridiculous positions.

Hawthorn did the same thing last year in the final round. Only difference being they were playing the Gold Coast, and they fell over the line anyway. Does the quality of the opponent impact whether or not it's tanking?

 

[maxmustard]

Hawthorn did the same thing last year in the final round. Only difference being they were playing the Gold Coast, and they fell over the line anyway. Does the quality of the opponent impact whether or not it's tanking?

Agree totally, they almost lost that match too. I'm not having a go at Freo, just making the point is all.