It's looking bleak[er] for the Dees

[Mateyman]

The whole system of how teams get accused of tanking is a bit ridiculous. One games is singled out as evidence. I see with Melbourne that it was much more than that, but everyone goes on about the game against Richmond, and our game against North etc.
If a team was trying to lose, how would they nearly win in both instances? A game where the "tanking" team lost after the siren shows they really cut it pretty fine...

 

[Baltimore Jack]

The whole system of how teams get accused of tanking is a bit ridiculous. One games is singled out as evidence. I see with Melbourne that it was much more than that, but everyone goes on about the game against Richmond, and our game against North etc.
If a team was trying to lose, how would they nearly win in both instances? A game where the "tanking" team lost after the siren shows they really cut it pretty fine...

Melbourne is "singled out" because a decision was made by people in control of the club to go out and tank. What's more they threatened people with losing their jobs if they didn't go along with the decision. If you read the articles in the Richmond game the players 'revolted' at 3/4 time and decided to try and win, those that did were either benched or played totally out of position.

That didn't occur with other Clubs, even though they might have sent players for operations the team they sent out was told to win.

Big difference

 

[Mateyman]

Melbourne is "singled out" because a decision was made by people in control of the club to go out and tank. What's more they threatened people with losing their jobs if they didn't go along with the decision. If you read the articles in the Richmond game the players 'revolted' at 3/4 time and decided to try and win, those that did were either benched or played totally out of position.

That didn't occur with other Clubs, even though they might have sent players for operations the team they sent out was told to win.

Big difference

No, you've missed my point. I said that INDIVIDUAL games (like Collingwood vs Roos) aren't evidence of a tank, the season (or part where the team tanked, presumably more than one game) should be judged as a whole, as pulling out 1 game where a team lost after the siren isn't very good evidence.

 

[bodga22]

Not sure if i'm backing you up here or going against what you're saying.

Collingwood/Carlton/West Coast - I can't comment directly on the games as i can't specifically recall what happened in those matches but I think there's a clear destinction between these teams and Melbourne.

On the whole, the players of these teams were, for the most part, played in position and unemcumbered by a mentality to lose.
Yes, the clubs did try to reduce the possibility of winning by putting players in for surgery etc yet the players available could still play to win - everyone at the grounds knew that they were trying to win. - i think Caro may have been alluding to this in her article.
- The only argument might be that Carlton pulled a few strings in their final match (07?) but i think equally they could contend that Fev did have an injury (tightness - better to be cautious) etc.

It's my belief that there is a clear difference between avoiding having best team on the park and setting up a system to lose - it's a case of semantics as to what case you would attribute to "tanking".

As such, I don't think any of the 3 teams mentioned above would have any concerns over an investigation - there was no systematic plan to lose - even though they may have wanted to do so.

So Carlton didn't plan to lose but lost to a team that was tanking and ended up with kreuzer.... Hmmm

 

[Baltimore Jack]

No, you've missed my point. I said that INDIVIDUAL games (like Collingwood vs Roos) aren't evidence of a tank, the season (or part where the team tanked, presumably more than one game) should be judged as a whole, as pulling out 1 game where a team lost after the siren isn't very good evidence.

We disagree, I say it is excellent evidence.
The AFL only have to prove it happened once to substantiate the allegation.

 

[Baltimore Jack]

So Carlton didn't plan to lose but lost to a team that was tanking and ended up with kreuzer.... Hmmm

I think you might find the difference is a thing called 'evidence', generally, other than perhaps China, its needed

 

[SchuPie]

So Carlton didn't plan to lose but lost to a team that was tanking and ended up with kreuzer.... Hmmm

I'm not even arguing that you're not right

I think they - and by "they, i mean both team's heirachy - probably wanted to but I don't think it was a systemic within the playing group

A couple of key incidents / dragging of players at certain times had a crucial impact - but all moves could be justified if need be ("he was tightening up in the hamstring" / "He had a virus" etc)
- it's just that within the structure of the team at the time (players played in position) i think it would be very difficult for AFL to demonstate that is was a conscious and organised plan to lose...it's just that they may have wanted to!


Also - not sure that this was the season in question (2009) when the situation was rife at melbourne - i think the match you refer to was 2007

 

[The Royal Sampler]

I don't see putting players in for season-ending surgery as tanking. You'd be derelict in your duty as a coaching staff if you didn't look after the health of your players.

Playing players out of position? If it's one or two and it's not clear where their best position is, sure. Playing Fevola at FB, or Brock McLean FF (hypothetically) is not the same thing though. And if they're getting murdered, you should move them. The team on the park needs to be given every chance to win.

 

[Jelly Bean]

No, you've missed my point. I said that INDIVIDUAL games (like Collingwood vs Roos) aren't evidence of a tank, the season (or part where the team tanked, presumably more than one game) should be judged as a whole, as pulling out 1 game where a team lost after the siren isn't very good evidence.

But tanking happens at the game by game level. So if someone is deliberately trying to lose a game, that is tanking. It only needs to be proven for one game and it is tanking.

And people who say they weren't tanking because the players were trying to win aren't getting the point (including Demetriou). The players will always try to win. But it is tanking still if the coaches and officials put things in place to try to lose games.

Tanking won't happen at the player level, but at the coaching level (as directed by senior club officials).

 

[Mateyman]

But tanking happens at the game by game level. So if someone is deliberately trying to lose a game, that is tanking. It only needs to be proven for one game and it is tanking.

And people who say they weren't tanking because the players were trying to win aren't getting the point (including Demetriou). The players will always try to win. But it is tanking still if the coaches and officials put things in place to try to lose games.

Tanking won't happen at the player level, but at the coaching level (as directed by senior club officials).

If it can be PROVEN, in a game, yes, it's tanking. But if a team comes back and just beats another, that's not enough evidence

 

[Jelly Bean]

If it can be PROVEN, in a game, yes, it's tanking. But if a team comes back and just beats another, that's not enough evidence

Okay. Well that is a little different to what you said about not being able to judge tanking on individual games, and instead needing to judge a season as a whole.

 

[mocamagic]

There is one game where a team tanked without any question at all.

Round 24 2011 Collingwood with a 20-1 record defeated by Geelong by 96 points.

As there was no reward associated with losing no one will ever mention it.

 

[Baltimore Jack]

There is one game where a team tanked without any question at all.

Round 24 2011 Collingwood with a 20-1 record defeated by Geelong by 96 points.

As there was no reward associated with losing no one will ever mention it.

Nope, just saying that it happened isn't proof, its called speculation and as far as I know it is pretty much worthless.

 

[rose jam]

The game we played against Roos, was that the one at etihad where Bucks kicked about 5 goals? No way we were tanking that game, I remember it very well, we were busting our ass, just had a very young team and a lot of players how had missed a big chunk of the year

 

[Old Spice]

I don't see putting players in for season-ending surgery as tanking. You'd be derelict in your duty as a coaching staff if you didn't look after the health of your players.

Playing players out of position? If it's one or two and it's not clear where their best position is, sure. Playing Fevola at FB, or Brock McLean FF (hypothetically) is not the same thing though. And if they're getting murdered, you should move them. The team on the park needs to be given every chance to win.

I agree wholeheartedly. Didak had knee surgery in the off season and didn't return until ANZAC Day. Had problems all year, was suspended for two, then copped an ankle and fainted on the ground, a terrible year.

Rocca had an achilles injury which took out him out for the end of the season (4-6 weeks from reports). Rus went out for season from rd 17 with a shoulder. At one point late in the season we only had 24 players to choose from. We were particularly depleted in the forward line and big man stakes. Rocca, Rusling and C Cloke (shoulder) being ruled out for the season for the last 5 or so rounds. R Shaw went out earlyish for hip surgery.

It's very difficult to get the injury news from back then, but I seem to recall it being a pretty interrupted season. I'll add to that I just can't see a team with Buckley, Burns and Clement in it going in for any of that Malarky.

 

[Vinnie Vegas]

Rocca had an achilles injury which took out him out for the end of the season (4-6 weeks from reports).

Rocca tore his Achilles (12 month injury) in Rd 4, IIRC.

 

[Baltimore Jack]

Rocca tore his Achilles (12 month injury) in Rd 4, IIRC.

Didn't Clement also tear a calf?

 

[Vinnie Vegas]

Didn't Clement also tear a calf?

There were a ton of injuries that year - It'd be impossible to name them all.

 

[Mateyman]

Okay. Well that is a little different to what you said about not being able to judge tanking on individual games, and instead needing to judge a season as a whole.

Yeah, sorry. I just meant when people go on about 1 game as "proof", when really, it's not