Herald sun investigation into dees tanking saga

(Log in to remove this ad.)

iameviljez

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Oct 20, 2004
Posts
11,058
Likes
10,550
Location
Dili, Timor-Leste
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Pompey
Is that not match fixing?

With the amount of betting money in the game, this seems even bigger.
When I think of match fixing, I think of a situation where there's an incentive going on that we do not know about - i.e. referees being bribed or blackmailed, bets being laid.

In this case, the incentive was not only clear, it was created and made explicit by the AFL. In fact, the AFL made it clear that it was completely within Melbourne's best interests as a sporting club not to win another game on the run home in 2009. After all, the aim of the game isn't to finish as high as you can every year. It's to win premierships. Nailing an old-fashioned 1-2 Priority Pick Combo (Thomas and Pendles, Roughy and Franklin, Riewoldt and Kosi) can absolutely set a club up for the next decade.

So yes, in literal terms, it is match fixing in that it is conspiring to lose. But honestly, I don't blame Melbourne. This was almost completely the AFL's baby.
 
Last edited:

Johnny Karate

Team Captain
Joined
Apr 13, 2015
Posts
516
Likes
1,241
AFL Club
Melbourne
I think we tanked. I think other clubs did as well but weren’t as inept and obvious about it. The scrutiny was applied because of this and the fact we were so dysfunctional that people started talking.

We weren’t the first nor will we be the last club to attempt to bend rules in order to obtain a competitive advantage. That doesn’t excuse nor abrogate responsibility for what was done though.

The wider issue is how corrupt the AFL as an administration is and particularly was under Andy D. Everything they do is based on saving their own arse rather than accepting responsibility or conducting proper inquiries. Is it any wonder clubs behave in morally slippery ways when the leadership of the code does it as a matter of course?

A short list:
Brisbane’s salary cap concessions were eliminated after they won 3 flags on a whim. Sydney got to keep theirs for more than a decade.

Sydney eventually lost theirs not because an extensive review revealed unfair advantage but because they cut the AFL’s lunch in the pursuit of Buddy Franklin to GWS.

The AFL drug policy claims to protect player privacy and treat potential addiction (principles that I agree with). However, the lack of transparency with the clubs themselves is very convenient in protecting the AFL’s image.

Melbourne play an obviously dodgy game in 2009 against Richmond. However, scrutiny only comes in 2012 after a former player speaks out on a tv program about what they felt may have happened. Never mind that there had been talk of tanking for priority picks years before this.

Essendon oversee an illegal supplements program which the AFL most likely had prior knowledge of but only act when ASADA and the media get wind of it. Essendon also face club wide sanctions and no AFL investigation is launched into clubs where the individuals responsible were previously involved.
 

Bunk Moreland

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 22, 2011
Posts
29,695
Likes
56,796
Location
Your girlfriend's dreams
AFL Club
Essendon
There is proof that Melbourne conspired to tank, that's why they were fined for it.

Send me a link to show the evidence that they did actually tank.

Again, tanking means intentionally losing or trying to lose, show me where this happened.
The concern is match fixing.

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.

Evidence uncovered points toward the manipulation of outcomes or the deliberate fixing of results by support staff at Melbourne.

The senior coach said, on the record, his job was threatened if he didn’t interfere with results.

That’s strong evidence.

https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentar...teractiveonlinegamblingadvertising/report/c13
 

Jibroni

All Australian
Joined
Jun 14, 2017
Posts
818
Likes
749
Location
Adelaide
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Liverpool, AC Milan, North Adelaide
Kind of ironic that Slobbo decides to bring this up the week we play Essendon.

He simply should just simply retire and stop being a flog.
 

markm106

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Mar 29, 2006
Posts
6,929
Likes
4,998
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Melbourne
Not sure why people think this will put pressure on Melbourne going into tonight’s game. Surely the recent HS articles placing Woosha under the microscope would be placing more pressure on them.
 

Blackhawk42

Club Legend
Joined
Feb 5, 2018
Posts
2,458
Likes
3,933
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Chicago Blackhawks Melb Renegades
Haven't gone through the thread, but am I the only one who couldn't give a crap about this?
It was 10 years ago.
Most of the players and coaches from then have moved on.
Dean Bailey is dead.
Take out the first two rounds and Melbourne are finally back to being a proper, competitive football club. Their dire past decade and this issue are both long dead and buried.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

iameviljez

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Oct 20, 2004
Posts
11,058
Likes
10,550
Location
Dili, Timor-Leste
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Pompey
Brisbane’s salary cap concessions were eliminated after they won 3 flags on a whim. Sydney got to keep theirs for more than a decade.

Sydney eventually lost theirs not because an extensive review revealed unfair advantage but because they cut the AFL’s lunch in the pursuit of Buddy Franklin to GWS.
Both of these were completely symptomatic of an administrative body with its head firmly wedged up its unmentionable. The treatment of Sydney after poaching Buddy was just incredible - effectively, a trading embargo just for upsetting the golden child of the AFL. So wrong.
 

Big Blood

All Australian
Joined
Jun 27, 2010
Posts
878
Likes
1,348
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Sturt
I think we tanked. I think other clubs did as well but weren’t as inept and obvious about it. The scrutiny was applied because of this and the fact we were so dysfunctional that people started talking.

We weren’t the first nor will we be the last club to attempt to bend rules in order to obtain a competitive advantage. That doesn’t excuse nor abrogate responsibility for what was done though.

The wider issue is how corrupt the AFL as an administration is and particularly was under Andy D. Everything they do is based on saving their own arse rather than accepting responsibility or conducting proper inquiries. Is it any wonder clubs behave in morally slippery ways when the leadership of the code does it as a matter of course?

A short list:
Brisbane’s salary cap concessions were eliminated after they won 3 flags on a whim. Sydney got to keep theirs for more than a decade.

Sydney eventually lost theirs not because an extensive review revealed unfair advantage but because they cut the AFL’s lunch in the pursuit of Buddy Franklin to GWS.

The AFL drug policy claims to protect player privacy and treat potential addiction (principles that I agree with). However, the lack of transparency with the clubs themselves is very convenient in protecting the AFL’s image.

Melbourne play an obviously dodgy game in 2009 against Richmond. However, scrutiny only comes in 2012 after a former player speaks out on a tv program about what they felt may have happened. Never mind that there had been talk of tanking for priority picks years before this.

Essendon oversee an illegal supplements program which the AFL most likely had prior knowledge of but only act when ASADA and the media get wind of it. Essendon also face club wide sanctions and no AFL investigation is launched into clubs where the individuals responsible were previously involved.
Fair argument. The AFL is an organisation with multiple conflicts of interest but with few or none of the methodologies applied by other organisations, like
- recusal
- transparency
- revolving door rules
- separation of powers and responsibilities

It needs an independent empowered integrity unit to deal with serious allegations, eg, tanking, supplements abuse etc. Not the club of mates.

It's impossible not to see the continued recycling of poorly-performed administrators as a sign of a culture of secrecy and mutual self-protection.
 

Clint Bizkit

All Australian
Joined
Jan 29, 2007
Posts
836
Likes
1,032
AFL Club
Melbourne
The concern is match fixing.

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.

Evidence uncovered points toward the manipulation of outcomes or the deliberate fixing of results by support staff at Melbourne.

The senior coach said, on the record, his job was threatened if he didn’t interfere with results.

That’s strong evidence.

https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentar...teractiveonlinegamblingadvertising/report/c13
What evidence?

Bailey said he felt pressure but there is no evidence (that I know of) that shows anything actually was put in place.
 

Johnny Karate

Team Captain
Joined
Apr 13, 2015
Posts
516
Likes
1,241
AFL Club
Melbourne
Fair argument. The AFL is an organisation with multiple conflicts of interest but with few or none of the methodologies applied by other organisations, like
- recusal
- transparency
- revolving door rules
- separation of powers and responsibilities

It needs an independent empowered integrity unit to deal with serious allegations, eg, tanking, supplements abuse etc. Not the club of mates.

It's impossible not to see the continued recycling of poorly-performed administrators as a sign of a culture of secrecy and mutual self-protection.
I don’t think the AFL are own their own. To paraphrase Titus O’Reily the AFL are the worst sporting administration apart from all the others.

For starters, they could behave with integrity like they are running a community based organisation that does not pay tax instead of greedy corporate shills who are only motivated by their next bonus. Show some semblance of leadership.

When scandals inevitably arise they should investigate parties responsible, punish if necessary, check if the problem is widespread and also review and reflect if their own policies and behaviour need adjustment.

The problem with administrations like Andy D’s is they operate somewhere between Fonzie and Sargeant Schulz. They’re never wrong or they know nothing.
 

beema limapep

Premiership Player
Joined
Oct 29, 2017
Posts
3,571
Likes
5,103
AFL Club
Richmond
The concern is match fixing.

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.

Evidence uncovered points toward the manipulation of outcomes or the deliberate fixing of results by support staff at Melbourne.

The senior coach said, on the record, his job was threatened if he didn’t interfere with results.

That’s strong evidence.

https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentar...teractiveonlinegamblingadvertising/report/c13
Yep.

Send in the cops.
 

Kwality

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 14, 2011
Posts
16,363
Likes
5,201
Location
Tootgarook
AFL Club
West Coast
When I think of match fixing, I think of a situation where there's an incentive going on that we do not know about - i.e. referees being bribed or blackmailed, bets being laid.

In this case, the incentive was not only clear, it was created and made explicit by the AFL. In fact, the AFL made it clear that it was completely within Melbourne's best interests as a sporting club not to win another game on the run home in 2009. After all, the aim of the game isn't to finish as high as you can every year. It's to win premierships. Nailing an old-fashioned 1-2 Priority Pick Combo (Thomas and Pendles, Roughy and Franklin, Riewoldt and Kosi) can absolutely set a club up for the next decade.

So yes, in literal terms, it is match fixing in that it is conspiring to lose. But honestly, I don't blame Melbourne. This was almost completely the AFL's baby.


Both parties have an interest in seeing this put to sleep .... RIP Dean Bailey
 
Top Bottom