All the tanking talk is absurd

[A Living God]

Melbourne - 3 weeks ago if it was said that Melbourne would win four games for the season everybody would think they had done really well. Now if they don't win more than 4 games they are tanking

Fremantle - No team that kicks 1.7 in a game played in reasonably good conditions can be said to be deliberately losing. Their just really bad

West Coast - They have yet to lose a game they should have won. There are two more games this year that they should win, against North and Richmond at Subi. If they lose both of them then talk of tanking would have merit.

 

[stefoid]

A dog has 4 legs.

My cat has 4 legs.

Therefore my cat is a dog and to say otherwise is absurd!

 

[Cynic]

A dog has 4 legs.

My cat has 4 legs.

Therefore my cat is a dog and to say otherwise is absurd!

Mine has three

 

[Quay Club]

Melbourne - 3 weeks ago if it was said that Melbourne would win four games for the season everybody would think they had done really well. Now if they don't win more than 4 games they are tanking

Fremantle - No team that kicks 1.7 in a game played in reasonably good conditions can be said to be deliberately losing. Their just really bad

West Coast - They have yet to lose a game they should have won. There are two more games this year that they should win, against North and Richmond at Subi. If they lose both of them then talk of tanking would have merit.

If we are that bad then why wouldn't you include Freo in your should wins?

 

[Zvim]

Mine has three

My cat has 5 legs, he is the neighbourhood stud.

 

[SM]

As long as Melbourne finishes with less than 4 wins and West Coast with more than 4, or vice versa, I'll be happy.

 

[DaVe86]

It is an issue.

Go on the Melbourne, West Coast and Fremantle boards and have a look at their suggested ins and outs this week.

I saw one poster suggest both Masten and Glass get dropped...to bring back Chad Fletcher. This was received with mass acceptance. And if i were an Eagles fan, I'd be in aggreance too.


It's not whether they woudl win 5 games or not....it's that they don't want to that is an issue.

 

[Cynic]

My cat has 5 legs, he is the neighbourhood stud.

Non-desexed tom cats die young

 

[A Living God]

It is an issue.

Go on the Melbourne, West Coast and Fremantle boards and have a look at their suggested ins and outs this week.

I saw one poster suggest both Masten and Glass get dropped...to bring back Chad Fletcher. This was received with mass acceptance. And if i were an Eagles fan, I'd be in aggreance too.


It's not whether they woudl win 5 games or not....it's that they don't want to that is an issue.

Go to any team board at anytime and you will see people post the most *ed things.

We lost, lets drop half our team and never let them play again.

 

[nicko99]

Melbourne - 3 weeks ago if it was said that Melbourne would win four games for the season everybody would think they had done really well. Now if they don't win more than 4 games they are tanking

Fremantle - No team that kicks 1.7 in a game played in reasonably good conditions can be said to be deliberately losing. Their just really bad

West Coast - They have yet to lose a game they should have won. There are two more games this year that they should win, against North and Richmond at Subi. If they lose both of them then talk of tanking would have merit.

If West Coast really would want to win they would have played Cox and Kerr.

This Tanking Bullshit is nonsense. Scrap the priority pick and do something about the draft picks. like a lottery or something.

When will the AFL act.

 

[mollyfud]

All the radio commentators had AD on there stations on the weekend and none of them were brave enough to name a team they thought were tanking. Some started to say Melbourne but when AD mentioned all the people that said they were tanking and were they (commentators) calling them liars, they all went quiet!

Tanking is talked about, it should happen (if teams are serious). I think the PP should go (but then again my team has already got there picks, so I understand if it doesn't). If teams actually throw games (tell players to lose), they should be brought before the Commision and perhaps police (match fixing). But lets face it, even if you take away the PP, unless you are disadvantaged by finishing lower, teams will manage their list rather then try to win. They won't try to lose, but they will anyway.

 

[DaVe86]

Go to any team board at anytime and you will see people post the most *ed things.

We lost, lets drop half our team and never let them play again.

do you want your team to win another game this year? I didn't in 2005 when we were in exactly your position.

 

[A Living God]

If West Coast really would want to win they would have played Cox and Kerr.

Cox played against against St Kilda and he didn't make it to the last quarter. How does playing a man done help with winning?

 

[mollyfud]

If West Coast really would want to win they would have played Cox and Kerr.

This Tanking Bullshit is nonsense. Scrap the priority pick and do something about the draft picks. like a lottery or something.

When will the AFL act.

Lottery doesn't work. It gives fans something interesting after the season, but doesn't work.
Also, lets say there is a draft next year. Lets also say the Hawks miss the finals. Would you be happy for the Hawks to get the number 1 pick?
I don't think many would like that!

 

[Butane]

Melbourne - 3 weeks ago if it was said that Melbourne would win four games for the season everybody would think they had done really well. Now if they don't win more than 4 games they are tanking

Fremantle - No team that kicks 1.7 in a game played in reasonably good conditions can be said to be deliberately losing. Their just really bad

West Coast - They have yet to lose a game they should have won. There are two more games this year that they should win, against North and Richmond at Subi. If they lose both of them then talk of tanking would have merit.

People get confused with teams deliberately going out to lose being called tanking and acceptable losses being called tanking. I agree it's absurd to suggest any player goes out with losing in mind(Nobody suggests this is the case though).

On the other hand coaches use this opportunity to rest injured players, debut new kids, try players in new positions and try new tactics looking forward to the next season.

If any of the above prove to be beneficial then that's a positive they wouldn't have found normally but if they fail then that also is acceptable because they have learnt that doesn't work for next year and getting the added bonus of moving up the draft order(Not just the first draft round but every draft round!).

If your out of the finals race there is nothing wrong with trying these things as long as the proposed changes are justified.

 

[DaVe86]

What is wrong is the philosophy of the draft.

At the moment, the philosophy is build up the crap teams and give the strong teams little.

The draft should be about fairness. Every team gets an even go.


To me, the draft should go 16th to 1st.....then 1st back to 16.

That means first place gets pick 16 and 17 & 48...whilst 1st gets 1 and 32 & 33.

9th would get 8 and 24, 8th would get 9 and 23.


That means last still gets the best pick available....but the higher up you come the closer together your draft picks are.



I don't see why the philosophy is to reward low ranked clubs. The draft should be fair and balanced.

 

[Valve Bounce]

It is an issue.

Go on the Melbourne, West Coast and Fremantle boards and have a look at their suggested ins and outs this week.

I saw one poster suggest both Masten and Glass get dropped...to bring back Chad Fletcher. This was received with mass acceptance. And if i were an Eagles fan, I'd be in aggreance too.


It's not whether they would win 5 games or not....it's that they don't want to that is an issue.

Did you guys hear Gary Lyon advocating tanking? I did.

 

[Butane]

I don't see why the philosophy is to reward low ranked clubs. The draft should be fair and balanced.

What you've just suggested still isn't 'fair and balanced'. 16th still gets No.1 pick. Sure it's 'fairer' then the current system but it still has the same philosophy with a little tweak. You can't say the philosophy is wrong and then suggest something with the same philosophy

 

[DaVe86]

What you've just suggested still isn't 'fair and balanced'. 16th still gets No.1 pick. Sure it's 'fairer' then the current system but it still has the same philosophy with a little tweak. You can't say the philosophy is wrong and then suggest something with the same philosophy

No, but everyone is getting a fair shot at picks.

Getting pick 16 and 17 I would call just as valuable as having 1 and 32.

You are always going to have a first pick...you can't avoid a team getting a pick first. So if they get the first pick in round 1, then they should get the last pick in round 2. That's fair.

 

[allstarsteve]

Players don't tank, but clubs certainly do, any actions such as early operations, resting players etc which would not be done if the club was in contention is a blight on the game. Put simply that club is not doing it's best to win and wants to be rewarded for losing, it is a form of legalized cheating plain and simple.

 

[Philth]

I think the term Tanking is too harsh - it implies that a team is losing on purpose, throwing games.

I prefer the term "putting the cue in the rack" for the season - ie, getting your experienced players operated on, and playing kids instead, knowing full well you may lose. I really don't think you can blame teams for doing that. Why try your hardest to win, if you won't be playing finals as a reward?

 

[Blight von Torp]

All the radio commentators had AD on there stations on the weekend and none of them were brave enough to name a team they thought were tanking. Some started to say Melbourne but when AD mentioned all the people that said they were tanking and were they (commentators) calling them liars, they all went quiet!

I listened to this as well. AD is a tanking denier, and the commentators were pathetic.

Fact is Terry Wallace has admitted to tanking - it was a couple of weeks ago when he was a studio co-host for channel 7 at half-time.

The game in question was the last round against Carlton - in 2007 I think. He said he did it by having practically no rotations, to tire out the players, plus play some out of position.

This should be thrown into AD's face. The very fact that this tanking talk exists should be enough to abolish the priority pick.

 

[Beckers]

Yeah, absurd

 

[Zvim]

Non-desexed tom cats die young

He is de-sexed, still gets plenty of pussy... err, pussy cats.

They don't removed the nuts anymore, they just tube them.

 

[allstarsteve]

I prefer the term "putting the cue in the rack" for the season - ie, getting your experienced players operated on, and playing kids instead, knowing full well you may lose. I really don't think you can blame teams for doing that. Why try your hardest to win, if you won't be playing finals as a reward?

Terminology aside it's still arranging things to get a reward for losing

My club did it, I cheered for it and we got Pendlebury and Thomas

No fan should be encouraged to barrack for their team to lose