Mega Thread Admitted Coaching for Picks - AFL Investigation? Everything to do with Dees Tanking goes in here

[baja]

Re: Admitted Coaching for Picks - AFL Investigation?

Seeing that the gambling powers have so much control over our game fining and suspending players for giving family members position tips etc, what will they do about this? In horse racing there are severe repercussions.. will they refund my 20 that I put on the Dees to win the flag that year?

 

[stickman11]

Re: Admitted Coaching for Picks - AFL Investigation?

I think it would be naive to try to pin this all on Bailey. From the same article:

Gee that is real proof. How could I have doubted your analytical mind.

 

[Sprout]

Re: Admitted Coaching for Picks - AFL Investigation?

I love how it's consisently West Coast and Richmond fans creating these threads. One has miraculously jumped from wooden spoon to top four. Wow..what a recovery. The other had a coach who admitted to stopping coaching his team during a final quarter in order to get a PP.

 

[Forward Press]

Re: Admitted Coaching for Picks - AFL Investigation?

I'm not sure how you can be opposed to tanking, and then justify saying that its more acceptable in some cases than others.

It should be all or nothing

Nothing's ever black and white.

Carlton were penalised draft picks for their salary cap violations. Thus they had a side bereft of talent and Pagan topped up with a lot of hacks. It is my opinion that the personnel Pagan and then Ratten had to work with was of a poorer quality than what Melbourne had at the beginning of 2008.

Don't get me wrong though - in a system where you get better picks for finishing lower, sides out of finals contention obviously have this incentive for packing players off to end of season surgery earlier than required and for trying other young players and perhaps even new tactics. I guess you could call that tanking too.

 

[Brazen]

Re: Admitted Coaching for Picks - AFL Investigation?

I'm not sure how you can be opposed to tanking, and then justify saying that its more acceptable in some cases than others.

It should be all or nothing

I agree... until now it was all banter and conjecture about whether different teams used any deliberate strategy to manipulate their ladder position - and how could you prove otherwise.

Which is why coming out with such a direct admission like that is just astounding. It puts the evidence on a platter for people.

Other clubs might still sit under a bit of conjecture and doubt, but Melbourne is now confirmed as deliberate strategic two-year tankers, by the coach's own admission that he did it with the club's blessing.

 

[krisholio14]

Re: Admitted Coaching for Picks - AFL Investigation?

Really?

Well my memory differs - Carlton were quite crap and it was just a continuation in that Essendon game.

In Melbourne's defence, the personnel they had during 2008 and 2009 were also very inadequate.

Your memory is no good then.

Carlton were 5 or 6 goals up and doing it easy, then they moved a bunch of players around, took Fev off and the game was very quickly lost.

Also, are people forgetting Terry Wallace all but admitted going for the picks and not the wins at one point there?

 

[Morris Major]

Re: Admitted Coaching for Picks - AFL Investigation?

"I had no hesitation at all in the first two years of ensuring this club was well placed for draft picks," Bailey said.

Could argue:
- Traded established players for high picks
- Played the kids drafted with said picks
- Team performance suffered as a result of blooding young, inexperienced players

Even OJ's lawyer can't get away with arguing that statement is a concrete admission of tanking.

 

[whatboutbob]

Re: Admitted Coaching for Picks - AFL Investigation?

Gee that is real proof. How could I have doubted your analytical mind.

Ok, continue to focus your rage on the guy that's been booted. There are no systemic issues at Melbourne. It was all the coach's fault.

Close your eyes all you want, but the higher-ups at Melbourne (the Board, CEO etc) were either a party to the tanking and thus culpable, or they were ignorant and thus negligent. I'm not sure which I'd prefer if I were a Melbourne supporter.

 

[Gazza_11]

Re: Admitted Coaching for Picks - AFL Investigation?

Eugh we didn't tank, we were just dreadful.

 

[Forward Press]

Re: Admitted Coaching for Picks - AFL Investigation?

Your memory is no good then.

Carlton were 5 or 6 goals up and doing it easy, then they moved a bunch of players around, took Fev off and the game was very quickly lost.

Also, are people forgetting Terry Wallace all but admitted going for the picks and not the wins at one point there?

Wasn't Fev dragged for some undisciplined act?

But your memory is better than mine re: that match, so I'll concede on that one.

And yes, I haven't forgotten that Terry Wallace game in the Cotchin Cup where he admitted to not doing anything in the last few minutes of a close game.

 

[Brazen]

Re: Admitted Coaching for Picks - AFL Investigation?

Your memory is no good then.

Carlton were 5 or 6 goals up and doing it easy, then they moved a bunch of players around, took Fev off and the game was very quickly lost.

Also, are people forgetting Terry Wallace all but admitted going for the picks and not the wins at one point there?

I agree that any form of tanking is bad. If my coach came out and said 'once we realised we were montys for the spoon, we tweaked things to get the extra draft pick', Id be livid - which is why Im surprised Melbourne fans arent!

I guess what makes this admission so distastful is that even if West Coast, or Richmond or Carlton were in future to be proven, in a specific game or few games late in the season to tinker to get an extra pick - yeah its bad - but its amazing to hear an admission that it was a planned, premeditated strategy for the "first two years" of his coaching, and that it was done with the club asking him to 'do whats best for the club'... thats long term strategic tampering with results. All examples are bad, but I just find this one right at the top of the tree for irksomeness.

 

[whatboutbob]

Re: Admitted Coaching for Picks - AFL Investigation?

...but its amazing to hear an admission that it was a planned, premeditated strategy for the "first two years" of his coaching, and that it was done with the club asking him to 'do whats best for the club'... thats long term strategic tampering with results. Al examples are bad, but I just find this one right at the top of the tree for irksomeness.

I know what you mean. Assuming that it is the case by their actions is one thing, but hearing the admission takes it to another level.

It seems so...brazen.

 

[mrpez]

Re: Admitted Coaching for Picks - AFL Investigation?

Nothing's ever black and white.

Carlton were penalised draft picks for their salary cap violations. Thus they had a side bereft of talent and Pagan topped up with a lot of hacks. It is my opinion that the personnel Pagan and then Ratten had to work with was of a poorer quality than what Melbourne had at the beginning of 2008.

Don't get me wrong though - in a system where you get better picks for finishing lower, sides out of finals contention obviously have this incentive for packing players off to end of season surgery earlier than required and for trying other young players and perhaps even new tactics. I guess you could call that tanking too.

Fair enough that you may have sympathy for the Carlton position - but i can assure you as someone that attends all games in Melbourne, we were honestly a terrible side in both 2007 and 2008.

I don't think anyone would doubt that Carlton tanked in 2007 - in a run which included to losses to Melbourne, the first in which Fev was rested, the second was the infamous Kruezer Cup game. If we hadn't won either of those games, we would have received a priority pick at the end of 08, and picked up Watts and Natanui and saved BF from one of its most heated discussion points.

 

[Herne Hill Hammer]

Re: Admitted Coaching for Picks - AFL Investigation?

How? There is a reward for coming last so ... WHY WOULDNT YOU COACH TO LOSE? Make no mistake EVERY coach does it. Worsfold did it last year.

NOT their fault!!! I commend tankers why? Tanking = winning. The AFL cant say anythjing because they are respoonsible for it. THERE IS A PRIZE FOR GETTING 16th/17th posi so why wouldnt teams try to get that 16th/17th position??

Wooden spoons mean jack s**t. There is no relegation and no reward AT ALL infact you are punished for finishing 9th!! so What next? investigate why a team tried to win the flag??

Pfft good on him for admitting it! There's plenty that have done it.
Ratten, tank you very much. Woosha 2010. Malthouse 04/05 etc....

he is the coach, if he placed player development over not making finals, big deal.

How are you developing players you don't even have yet? Seems to me it just teaches the players that are already there that it's ok not to do you best all the time.

I lol'ed at the other posters that I've got quoted. Outside of Melbourne supporters on this thread they seem to be the only others that reckon there's nothing wrong with it. Ironically both are St Kilda supporters and both reckon there's nothing wrong with it. If this is the typical mindset of their supporters and maybe their club it's no wonder they have such a wretched history.

 

[Big Wilbur]

Re: Admitted Coaching for Picks - AFL Investigation?

of cause he wouldn't, he is the coach, his professional standing as a coach counted on him doing that. Lots of people in all business take short cuts to further their career.

I've been pissing myself laughing at this thread. Read your posts and see how your position has changed with each one. Fricken hilarious.

 

[krisholio14]

Re: Admitted Coaching for Picks - AFL Investigation?

Wasn't Fev dragged for some undisciplined act?

But your memory is better than mine re: that match, so I'll concede on that one.

And yes, I haven't forgotten that Terry Wallace game in the Cotchin Cup where he admitted to not doing anything in the last few minutes of a close game.

Fev wasn't playing especially well, but they basically left him on the pine for an extended period in the second half, and several other questionable moves were made at that point in the game.

 

[AndyLucimitis]

Re: Admitted Coaching for Picks - AFL Investigation?

I agree that any form of tanking is bad. If my coach came out and said 'once we realised we were montys for the spoon, we tweaked things to get the extra draft pick', Id be livid - which is why Im surprised Melbourne fans arent!

.

With all due respect, it's pretty easy to say that when you have won a flag as recently as 2006. Similarly, the Geelong supporters laying into Melbourne, Carlton and St.Kilda when they have won 2 flags in the last 3 years or so.


I'd like to see how 'livid' you'd be if West Coast hadn't won a flag since 1964 and you finally had the chance to get two top shelf picks into your club and give some hope to your supporters.

Suddenly, you'd find a thousand reasons to justify dropping a couple of late season games.

 

[krisholio14]

Re: Admitted Coaching for Picks - AFL Investigation?

I agree that any form of tanking is bad. If my coach came out and said 'once we realised we were montys for the spoon, we tweaked things to get the extra draft pick', Id be livid - which is why Im surprised Melbourne fans arent!

I guess what makes this admission so distastful is that even if West Coast, or Richmond or Carlton were in future to be proven, in a specific game or few games late in the season to tinker to get an extra pick - yeah its bad - but its amazing to hear an admission that it was a planned, premeditated strategy for the "first two years" of his coaching, and that it was done with the club asking him to 'do whats best for the club'... thats long term strategic tampering with results. All examples are bad, but I just find this one right at the top of the tree for irksomeness.

I haven't got the sense at any stage that you lads have tanked.

 

[Mitchemx]

Re: Admitted Coaching for Picks - AFL Investigation?

I'm a little suprised he came out and basically admitted it. It's something we all new about it anyway.

I'm not sure how the AFL could possible sanction a club for tanking whilst retaining any shred of credibility when they are the one's that created this incentive in the first place.

What good did the tanking do? Some would say it had a negative effect. One thing is for certain is that Melbourne has a losing culture. You only have to look at their average losing margin this season to see that, when the going gets a bit tough, the pack up and go home. For a team to have to little pride in their performance on the weekend speaks volumes about where they're at.

How much of this can be contributed to tanking? It's tough to say but it could certainly be argued one way or the other.

What's going to be an even bigger blight on the playing group is if they come and and beat the blues this week. They can only seem to get motivated enough to put in a decent performance every so often. They actually have some talented players. Just not enough desperation and lacking in leadership.

 

[Kimbo]

Re: Admitted Coaching for Picks - AFL Investigation?

Ok, continue to focus your rage on the guy that's been booted. There are no systemic issues at Melbourne. It was all the coach's fault.

Close your eyes all you want, but the higher-ups at Melbourne (the Board, CEO etc) were either a party to the tanking and thus culpable, or they were ignorant and thus negligent. I'm not sure which I'd prefer if I were a Melbourne supporter.

Regardless of what any other club may or may not have done, tanking is a blight on the game and Bailey's simply confirmed what we've all known.

Stynes said sometime last year something like "we've got the on-field situation set up, now we're going to sort out the off-field". What on-field achievements, other than securing high draft picks, might he have been talking about. Glad Bailey has gone one step further and dumped them in it.

 

[MightyTiger]

Re: Admitted Coaching for Picks - AFL Investigation?

I love how it's consisently West Coast and Richmond fans creating these threads. One has miraculously jumped from wooden spoon to top four. Wow..what a recovery. The other had a coach who admitted to stopping coaching his team during a final quarter in order to get a PP.

Cotchin was a PP?

 

[Snoref]

Re: Admitted Coaching for Picks - AFL Investigation?

Of course tanking exists, you would be very naive to think otherwise. However proving it is another story.

But having said that tanking doesn't equal success. Look at Melbourne; they tanked and look at where they are now? Tanking breeds a culture where the playing group thinks its okay to lose and not be competitive.

 

[Theo X]

Re: Admitted Coaching for Picks - AFL Investigation?

All tanking does is set your club up for a massive fail. You can't just instill a winning culture overnight.

Yeah, that's why Collingwood and Hawthorn are so s**t now........oh wait

 

[Brazen]

Re: Admitted Coaching for Picks - AFL Investigation?

I haven't got the sense at any stage that you lads have tanked.

No me neither... but some here, tongue in cheek or not, claim we did. But thats all it is, suggestion and banter... but it was the same with Melbourne, until that admission.

It was just a hypothetical... while I think there's lots of good reasons for our poor form last year, and a couple of close games in last rounds decided against us by umpiring decisions shows we werent deliberately looking for that extra pick, in my opinion. So yeah it was just a hypothetical - IF Worsfold left in 2 years time and admitted that in fact he was trying his damndest to not win those games but the players nearly stuffed it for him, despite my disbelief now, Id be livid if it happenned... so I am just surprised Melbourne fans arent livid.

 

[jonbe54]

Re: Admitted Coaching for Picks - AFL Investigation?

Look tanking is a possible charge for any team languishing on or near the bottom of the ladder for a time. Pies spent their time down the bottom and have been painted as tankers for a couple of players, like any supporter worth their salt I'd prefer to believe my club wouldn't stoop to it but I have no proof one way or another. The thing is as others have said the temptation must be near impossible to resist, especially if the stay in the cellar has been extended.

What would the AFL do and how would it word its denunciation? How can you penalize a club for taking advantage of the rules the AFL itself went to great pains to draft?

This isn't a Melbourne problem, or a Carlton problem or a Pies or Weagles problem, it's an AFL problem. In its zeal to even an essentially uneven competition it has placed itself in direct opposition to its new cash cow in footy betting!

How do you think the betting corporates will take the news that game results have been manipulated?

The most important aspect of the whole affair is that the AFL is now in an invidious position - if they move on Melbourne they are smearing one of the founding members of the code and in the process making themselves look like the biggest pack of cretins on the planet (which of course is true) but if they don't they risk losing a sizable chunk of revenue from the betting sponsors.