Geelong rorting the system

[STPer18]

I know it's all very very raw at the moment and trust me when I say this isn't gloating, but you fell for the Caro bait. It hurts like hell right now but just give it time. Sure, be angry at her for toying with your emotions and giving you the faintest bit of hope, but she was just doing what any good muckraker would do.

Hey, there's always next time. Maybe the Reid deal? Butters? Plenty of potential whinging to come, so stick with us.

 

[PhatBoy]

All of their flags they won with gifted father-sons so whether it's 1 asterisk or 2 asterisks, it doesn't matter to me. This news comes as no surprise though.

Gifted….. under the exact same rules as every team had. Boy we really rorted that rule. Did the Lions’ flags come as any surprise to you? Should the Pies’ 2010 flag be rescinded? Or the eagles’ 92, 94, 05 flags.

If your club’s ex players could actually pull a root maybe your summary of previous generation father-sons would extend beyond Chris Johnson, Tom Kavanagh, Brad Campbell and Glenn Molloy.

 

[Munich]

Mate, if Port Adelaide played Geelong in the GF last year, I would have been riding Port home like there was no tomorrow.

Are Dogs' supporters ever going to get over Baz leaving them?

It's quite crazy to witness this lunacy.

 

[PhatBoy]

It seems like this info came from Geelong. How else would Caro or anyone know what Geelong "expects".

So why would Geelong be leaking this info? Obviously, it is because they want to control the narrative.

It is not difficult to deduce that the audit has uncovered several issues. Geelong expect "multiple" fines.

Who came up with this "5 figure fine" scenario? Is this Geelong trying to decide their own penalty? If so, smart move to try to set the narrative, but precedents have been set and a few small fines would be the equivalent of a wet lettuce.

The Crows "forgot" to hand over some paperwork in the Kurt Tippett scenario. They were fined, plus they also lost their first and second round draft picks for two years in a row, and the player involved (Tippett) was suspended for 11 matches.

Losing draft picks is the only punishment that actually hurts clubs. Financial punishment is easily overcome by on-field success. So if the AFL wants to send the message that losing paperwork is not acceptable, then the punishment for Geelong needs to be appropriate. Not just a few small fines. Most clubs would happily pay a 10K fine if they were allowed to "lose" paperwork and pay players outside the salary cap.

Geelong insists they did nothing wrong. Of course they say that. Essendon also said that. Big deal. The AFL took draft picks away from Essendon. The same penalty should now apply to Geelong. If several issues have been uncovered which are worthy of punishment, then they are guilty.

There is already a lot of suspicion about Geelong and their inflatable salary cap. If the AFL lets them off with a few small fines, then that suspicion will be confirmed beyond all doubt.

It is time for the AFL to show they are serious about the salary cap and paperwork and transparency. Suspensions for the players involved and draft sanctions for the club. That is the only way to show they are serious.

Over to you AFL.

It’s also Caroline Wilson.

If it was Geelong ‘setting the agenda’ like her or not, I think she would work that out.

 

[sleep]

It seems like this info came from Geelong. How else would Caro or anyone know what Geelong "expects".

So why would Geelong be leaking this info? Obviously, it is because they want to control the narrative.

It is not difficult to deduce that the audit has uncovered several issues. Geelong expect "multiple" fines.

Who came up with this "5 figure fine" scenario? Is this Geelong trying to decide their own penalty? If so, smart move to try to set the narrative, but precedents have been set and a few small fines would be the equivalent of a wet lettuce.

The Crows "forgot" to hand over some paperwork in the Kurt Tippett scenario. They were fined, plus they also lost their first and second round draft picks for two years in a row, and the player involved (Tippett) was suspended for 11 matches.

Losing draft picks is the only punishment that actually hurts clubs. Financial punishment is easily overcome by on-field success. So if the AFL wants to send the message that losing paperwork is not acceptable, then the punishment for Geelong needs to be appropriate. Not just a few small fines. Most clubs would happily pay a 10K fine if they were allowed to "lose" paperwork and pay players outside the salary cap.

Geelong insists they did nothing wrong. Of course they say that. Essendon also said that. Big deal. The AFL took draft picks away from Essendon. The same penalty should now apply to Geelong. If several issues have been uncovered which are worthy of punishment, then they are guilty.

There is already a lot of suspicion about Geelong and their inflatable salary cap. If the AFL lets them off with a few small fines, then that suspicion will be confirmed beyond all doubt.

It is time for the AFL to show they are serious about the salary cap and paperwork and transparency. Suspensions for the players involved and draft sanctions for the club. That is the only way to show they are serious.

Over to you AFL.

The crackpots are out in force.

Wants the AFLW player's head on a plate. Take our third-round AFLW draft pick, you cruel bastard.

 

[danster168]

Gifted….. under the exact same rules as every team had. Boy we really rorted that rule. Did the Lions’ flags come as any surprise to you? Should the Pies’ 2010 flag be rescinded? Or the eagles’ 92, 94, 05 flags.

If your club’s ex players could actually pull a root maybe your summary of previous generation father-sons would extend beyond Chris Johnson, Tom Kavanagh, Brad Campbell and Glenn Molloy.

exactly, you made my point. It's all luck, which is why it's a gift. Your success was built on good fortune, not on successfully building a team through good recruiting, list management, coaching, revolutionising the game etc. It was all Ablett and Hawkins and co.

 

[PhatBoy]

exactly, you made my point. It's all luck, which is why it's a gift. Your success was built on good fortune, not on successfully building a team through good recruiting, list management, coaching, revolutionising the game etc. It was all Ablett and Hawkins and co.

So, despite the fact that we actually had to develop Ablett and Scarlett in particular into good players, we didn’t have to develop them into good players? That was just luck?

You don’t think there’s luck involved in a system where the ethos is essentially summed up thus:

‘Hey, you guys, be shit for ages - and on purpose in some cases, and have all these rewards!!!!’

No, you’ve opened an argument you can win here…..

 

[Munich]

exactly, you made my point. It's all luck, which is why it's a gift. Your success was built on good fortune, not on successfully building a team through good recruiting, list management, coaching, revolutionising the game etc. It was all Ablett and Hawkins and co.

We didn't build a team on good recruitment or list management?

Are you for reals?

Do you know who S Wells is?

 

[Purple Suit]

Gifted….. under the exact same rules as every team had. Boy we really rorted that rule. Did the Lions’ flags come as any surprise to you? Should the Pies’ 2010 flag be rescinded? Or the eagles’ 92, 94, 05 flags.

If your club’s ex players could actually pull a root maybe your summary of previous generation father-sons would extend beyond Chris Johnson, Tom Kavanagh, Brad Campbell and Glenn Molloy.

The new teams didn’t have that access though, so it’s not the same or fair. Something the AFL still can’t get their head around.

Imagine if Geelong weren’t allowed to get chopping the arm free kicks but the other team can? It seems that with the concessions and advantages thrown around so much.

 

[Munich]

The new teams didn’t have that access though, so it’s not the same or fair. Something the AFL still can’t get their head around.

Imagine if Geelong weren’t allowed to get chopping the arm free kicks but the other team can? It seems that with the concessions and advantages thrown around so much.

Original comment was comparing to Melbourne, not the expansion sides.

Two oldest clubs in the comp.

 

[Robroy22]

It seems like this info came from Geelong. How else would Caro or anyone know what Geelong "expects".

So why would Geelong be leaking this info? Obviously, it is because they want to control the narrative.

It is not difficult to deduce that the audit has uncovered several issues. Geelong expect "multiple" fines.

Who came up with this "5 figure fine" scenario? Is this Geelong trying to decide their own penalty? If so, smart move to try to set the narrative, but precedents have been set and a few small fines would be the equivalent of a wet lettuce.

The Crows "forgot" to hand over some paperwork in the Kurt Tippett scenario. They were fined, plus they also lost their first and second round draft picks for two years in a row, and the player involved (Tippett) was suspended for 11 matches.

Losing draft picks is the only punishment that actually hurts clubs. Financial punishment is easily overcome by on-field success. So if the AFL wants to send the message that losing paperwork is not acceptable, then the punishment for Geelong needs to be appropriate. Not just a few small fines. Most clubs would happily pay a 10K fine if they were allowed to "lose" paperwork and pay players outside the salary cap.

Geelong insists they did nothing wrong. Of course they say that. Essendon also said that. Big deal. The AFL took draft picks away from Essendon. The same penalty should now apply to Geelong. If several issues have been uncovered which are worthy of punishment, then they are guilty.

There is already a lot of suspicion about Geelong and their inflatable salary cap. If the AFL lets them off with a few small fines, then that suspicion will be confirmed beyond all doubt.

It is time for the AFL to show they are serious about the salary cap and paperwork and transparency. Suspensions for the players involved and draft sanctions for the club. That is the only way to show they are serious.

Over to you AFL.

Excellent summation, been fobbed off as just a Caro fluff piece......
C'mon G-town...lets hear the reality.

 

[PhatBoy]

The new teams didn’t have that access though, so it’s not the same or fair. Something the AFL still can’t get their head around.

Imagine if Geelong weren’t allowed to get chopping the arm free kicks but the other team can? It seems that with the concessions and advantages thrown around so much.

Sorry what?


How does that work.

West Coast had a father son pick before Geelong ever did. They drafted Ashley McIntosh in 1989. Worked out alright for them.
Hell, the same year we claimed our first ever selection, the Eagles picked a guy called Ben Cousins who we COULD have picked up ourselves.

All four of the initial unmerged expansion clubs have their own SANFL/WAFL criteria for father son selections: Brett Ebert was picked for Port five years into their existence, again, a lot quicker into their history than the Cats drafted a player under the modern F/S rule. Sydney and Brisbane obviously have their own.

As far as the last two teams go, I really don’t care. The academy benefits they have, plus the fact that current father son selections have to be bid upon and matched mean it doesn’t really matter too much anyway.

 

[Yoda_]

 

[PhatBoy]

Doesn’t this mean that the guy overseeing the investigation - not doing it - therefore is the one who, if you’re going to make out like he’s doing it, has uncovered this so called ‘heinous cheating’ which in turn suggests it was conducted with integrity? It would then be up to the AFL to determine the punishment wouldn’t it, not the guy doing the investigation.

Detectives don’t determine the sentence for someone found guilty of a crime

 

[danster168]

We didn't build a team on good recruitment or list management?

Are you for reals?

Do you know who S Wells is?

he's a guy whose built a reputation on late picks but he's picked just as many flops as everyone else. Jhye Clark, Kane Tenace, Billie Smedts, Cooper Stephens, Darcy Lang, Djerkurra, etc.

 

[PhatBoy]

he's a guy whose built a reputation on late picks but he's picked just as many flops as everyone else. Jhye Clark, Kane Tenace, Billie Smedts, Cooper Stephens, Darcy Lang, Djerkurra, etc.

‘Anyone else’ hasn’t produced as many diamonds who’ve gone on to be elite.

Djerkurra was pick 25. Seems an odd one to pick out. Between Daniel Chick in 1995 and Josh Dunkley who is obviously a very good player 20 years later, McStay, Ross, Redden and Nick Stevens are the only players of any note taken at that pick. 4 players in 20 years made it to 200 games (assuming Dunkley and McStay do. Not really sure why it was just supposed to be a given that he was supposed to be a good player.

Tenace?

Lolllll. Yeah it’s amazing how some players will play 50-60 games and not be able to break fully into a side that is about to go on a streak where they win 52 out of 55 games and have a midfield made up exclusively of all Australian players.

Some of the others I’ll give you.

 

[Purple Suit]

Sorry what?


How does that work.

West Coast had a father son pick before Geelong ever did. They drafted Ashley McIntosh in 1989. Worked out alright for them.
Hell, the same year we claimed our first ever selection, the Eagles picked a guy called Ben Cousins who we COULD have picked up ourselves.

All four of the initial unmerged expansion clubs have their own SANFL/WAFL criteria for father son selections: Brett Ebert was picked for Port five years into their existence, again, a lot quicker into their history than the Cats drafted a player under the modern F/S rule. Sydney and Brisbane obviously have their own.

As far as the last two teams go, I really don’t care. The academy benefits they have, plus the fact that current father son selections have to be bid upon and matched mean it doesn’t really matter too much anyway.

I can’t be bothered going thru it but it did disadvantage WA & SA teams. Freo more than WC due to the timing, SA more than WA due to the 200 game vs 150 game requirement.

Doesn’t this mean that the guy overseeing the investigation - not doing it - therefore is the one who, if you’re going to make out like he’s doing it, has uncovered this so called ‘heinous cheating’ which in turn suggests it was conducted with integrity? It would then be up to the AFL to determine the punishment wouldn’t it, not the guy doing the investigation.

Detectives don’t determine the sentence for someone found guilty of a crime

If you are investigating a major crime you might have committed, better to give up a small accounting error to appease all parties. Detectives wouldn’t be in charge if it was a family member being investigated.

Knowing how the AFL work, it wouldn't surprise me if it is a big breech but they cover it up publicly. The tell tale will be Geelong going quite over the trade period and shedding players instead like Carlton seemed to do last year and the Pies in the past.

 

[SurreyBlue]

Been corrupting the system for years. We will get 'nothing to see here' except for some minor discrepancies.
Shoveled under the carpet......

 

[Art Vandelay_]

I wouldn't even accept a free Ford.

Shame on Geelong for treating their players with contempt.

A step up from the free Nissan's hawk players get.

Giant nothing burger Caro's findings. Some admin errors. Whoopty do and move on.

 

[Enviable Tradition]

Doesn’t this mean that the guy overseeing the investigation - not doing it - therefore is the one who, if you’re going to make out like he’s doing it, has uncovered this so called ‘heinous cheating’ which in turn suggests it was conducted with integrity? It would then be up to the AFL to determine the punishment wouldn’t it, not the guy doing the investigation.

Detectives don’t determine the sentence for someone found guilty of a crime

Yeah everything about it screams integrity...

 

[Richmond Flats]

It's rare to go a week these days without hearing Geelong have cheated.

 

[Richmond Flats]

Geelong are the Man City of the AFL. Disgusting immoral cheats.

 

[STPer18]

It's rare to go a week these days without hearing Geelong

 

[Richmond Flats]

View attachment 2326537

If you guys played within the rules I wouldn't have to see you in the news every week

 

[danster168]

‘Anyone else’ hasn’t produced as many diamonds who’ve gone on to be elite.

Djerkurra was pick 25. Seems an odd one to pick out. Between Daniel Chick in 1995 and Josh Dunkley who is obviously a very good player 20 years later, McStay, Ross, Redden and Nick Stevens are the only players of any note taken at that pick. 4 players in 20 years made it to 200 games (assuming Dunkley and McStay do. Not really sure why it was just supposed to be a given that he was supposed to be a good player.

Tenace?

Lolllll. Yeah it’s amazing how some players will play 50-60 games and not be able to break fully into a side that is about to go on a streak where they win 52 out of 55 games and have a midfield made up exclusively of all Australian players.

Some of the others I’ll give you.

I'd suggest Geelong have used more late picks too though. Probably because they've been good for so long. which can also be tied in to their father/son success.

whats Geelongs success got to do with Tenace though. Its not like he couldn't have succeeded at another club. I know he had his injuries but it was a failed pick. His skills weren't upto it.

I think Wells is standard. some great picks, some bad picks. I've never understood the hype. I think if Geelong used more early picks then they'd be using less later picks to hit on. The Stewart and Dempsey picks were great though.