Melbourne vs Adelaide sanctions

[Cleric]

Its been reported that Melbourne will be found guilty of tanking but will not face any draft sanctions.
After how hard the Crows were hit if this is true then all merry hell must be let loose. I have no doubt my spinless club after been spanked by Vlad will say nor do nothing.
I am just dumbfounded if this is true.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/mor...rne-tanking-saga/story-e6frf9jf-1226580702476

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Following on from the Tippett saga, we will be even more contrite than usual.

 

[Cap]

I can only imagine Chapman will make a statement thanking the league for penalising us for our bad behaviour.

Heck, he might even ask if we can pay the Demons fine.

 

[The_Answer3]

AFL's not going to torpedo the Demons. They're a strong breeze away from collapse.

 

[Mattrox]

Why would there be sanctions? That would mean that Vlad would have to admit he was wrong and tanking did occur. A minor penalty and they can say that "they didn't deliberately throw the game, they just didn't make winning the priority. "

 

[SydCrow]

and one of our coaches has to serve his full penalty

 

[Skippy231]

This is an absolute joke, for Melbourne to get away with this in comparison to what the crows were hit with shows that if your a team that isn't vulnerable to collapse you will get harsher penalties than a struggling team. Basically it cost them a $500 000 fine to secure pick 2 in the draft.

 

[chigwidden]

AFL's not going to torpedo the Demons. They're a strong breeze away from collapse.

I know this is true, but if it's going to be a reason why the sanctions are reduced, then I think that should be explicit. As in "we fined the Demons X% of operating revenue for X time period they tanked" or similar. If fines are going to be tied to a clubs viability and position, then it should be the case for all, not just for those who are close to going broke. At which point you'd get a massive outcry from Collingwood and it would be rightly scrapped as a rationale.

Them going broke was, afterall, likely a factor in tanking in the first place. If you're in that position the cost-benefit analysis around losing a game or four versus picking up a top young player is a complete no-brainer.

 

[Geoffa32]

We are the club who will suffer the most out of this.

Melbourne cop a fine, I am sure a group of their supporters will pay this. The old Melbourne "club" will dust off their cheque books in a fundraiser to be held sometime this year.

We will lose one of our assistant coaches for almost half a season. This will affect us far more than any monetary fine Melbourne will cop. Also will Bailey be paid? If so we are hit again.

 

[crowman_23]

Pretty disappointing that we'll take the hit of Bailey, and the Dee's won'y cop near what we did, for something the league spoke very heavily against.

Could see it coming a mile away though. When is the AFL ever consistent or fair really?

 

[Mismatched]

A lot of inconsistency with how all of these affairs played out. Trigg and Harper get suspended, forfeiting all pay and are not allowed to set foot in the club. Tippett gets suspended for the same time as Trigg, but he can train, play in intra-club trials etc.

Then our club gets fined $300k and 4 draft picks, plus lose Tippett for nothing, for effectively failing to declare a part of Tippett's contract and outlining his trade value. Melbourne deliberately lose games so that they could obtain the #1 and 2 draft picks and get off with only a fine.

Unfortunately our club, as always, approached this the wrong way, we meekly rolled over and tried to convince the AFL it "wasn't that bad". What we should have done is denied and blamed everyone else. If you want something from the AFL you must be strong.

We should be on the blower to AZfL house demanding a "please explain" regarding these sanctions. Just because Melbourne are a basket case, doesn't mean they should get lesser sentences for cheating.

 

[Crow-eater]

The AFL: Consistently inconsistent

So basically one giant oxymoron

 

[Mattrox]

Arbitrary punishments from the MRP through to Tanking/Salary Cap/Draft Tampering/etc are hallmarks of the AFL. They make up punishments as they see fit and have no consistency. If you want a team in the AFL that is what you have to put up with and get over it.

On the other hand AFC can be more vocal and procative. Protect its staff (eg Rendell) and stand up to the AFL. Grow some balls and get tough. And be smart about commercial arrangements.

 

[Mike Smyth]

It really does make you wonder sometimes why we waste our money, passion and time supporting this game. This is just total BS. I have no faith in the credibility, competence and fairness of the people running both my club and this competition. I thought the atrociously biased umpiring we witnessed in the prelim final was the low point of the last 12 months, seems there was more, alot more, to come for us loyal supporters.

Proves yet again there are rules for Vic/Sydney clubs and then rules for the rest of us.

Maybe time we find another hobby.

 

[Mike Smyth]

I can only imagine Chapman will make a statement thanking the league for penalising us for our bad behaviour.

Heck, he might even ask if we can pay the Demons fine.

Don't give him ideas.

 

[Jars458]

Just breathtaking. The AFL administration are a disgrace. If Chapman doesn't complain, then he is a disgrace. Bailey gets hit and we suffer even though he was just doing what he was told. How Melbourne don't lose draft picks is beyond me. They deliberatley lost games!! Is there an ICAC in Victoria that can investigate the AFL given the amount of government funding they get?

 

[SydCrow]

we should take a leaf out of the Collingwood playbook - "It's Us Against Them"

only difference is that in our case it's true

 

[Team DJ]

Its been reported that Melbourne will be found guilty of tanking but will not face any draft sanctions.
After how hard the Crows were hit if this is true then all merry hell must be let loose. I have no doubt my spinless club after been spanked by Vlad will say nor do nothing.
I am just dumbfounded if this is true.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/mor...rne-tanking-saga/story-e6frf9jf-1226580702476

How can they whack Melbourne but not the Blues Tigers Saints or any other team that have been questioned about it.

Its a non issue, move on. Theyve changed the rules now anyway.

 

[Damp Squarie]

If they dont get penalised it will be because they are a Prictorian Club - say no more.
AFL...PFFT!

 

[CrowMania1990]

Surely if there is sufficient evidence Melbourne tanked, their punishments will be on par with ours at least. If what if being speculated it true, unfortunately the AFL must have little evidence against Melbourne, which raises the question of why punish them. They either did it or they didn't, the punishment rumoured seems like a slap on the wrist in all honesty, we are getting potentially punished greater.

 

[ftmch]

Surely if there is sufficient evidence Melbourne tanked, their punishments will be on par with ours at least. If what if being speculated it true, unfortunately the AFL must have little evidence against Melbourne, which raises the question of why punish them. They either did it or they didn't, the punishment rumoured seems like a slap on the wrist in all honesty, we are getting potentially punished greater.

What I'm struggling with is if Dean Bailey is being effectively banned from footy for several months (which is what's being reported), then surely that's an admission that the MFC tanked.

For the organisation that employed him - and with strong suggestions that he was heavily coerced by that organisation - to only get a monetary fine, but the individual (now at another club) to get a several month suspension, is just astonishing.

 

[BigLefty]

The only logical, and appropriate sanction for the Dees if found guilty of tanking is to strip them of draft picks. That was the reward for their actions, so at the minimum (as you clearly cant take their players away) they must be stripped of future picks.

To make it a significant enough deterrent it needs to be more than they gained, so i'd be suggesting at least the first 2 rounds of the next 2 drafts. Anything less is still not really a punishment, just a payment plan for getting the number 1 and 2 picks.

A fine is pointless for any club really as the AFL effectively just pay it anyway when they put their hand out for their annual collection.

 

[Mike Smyth]

I wonder if the Jim Stynes factor had any impact on the pathetic fine the AFL handed Melbourne. If they lose a minimal of 3 years draft picks and incur a massive fine for crimes committed while Jim Stynes was at the helm would that have destroyed the Jim Stines name and standing as one of the greats of the AFL.

The Jim Stynes name, courage and character is about the only positive to come out of the Melbourne FC over the last decade.

 

[Geoffa32]

Next club to tank will just get a Patsy in to "coach" the side for the period they want to tank over a couple of seasons (to try and get a PP). Then when they want to start winning games sack him and cop the monetary sanction. Patsy is not at the club and getting a couple of number 1 picks over the two years is well worth the $500k "fine".


Yeah great deterant

 

[Deaneus!]

Same shit, different day.

We'd have been better off trading Tippett early and tanking instead for 2009-2010.