gavaniacono
Cancelled
Are we also going to re-investigate the causes of WW1?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
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.Is that not match fixing?
With the amount of betting money in the game, this seems even bigger.
I wasn't excluding us from the investigation. About half the competition should be in the gun.Nice deflection.
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.
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.
I’m actually certain he’s barracking for Melbourne tonight. He’s gagging to get Hird back to Essendon.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.
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.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.
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.
It's not Robinson's story.
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.
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
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.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.
Yep.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
Send in the police. Let them sort it out.What evidence?
Bailey said he felt pressure but there is no evidence (that I know of) that shows anything actually was put in place.
It is pop corn time.
The grubby truth will now slowly emerge.
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.
Rita must not have written itwhy couldn't they have done it in semi-final week last year