Quick question about tanking

[coryne]

Why is it that Carlton are the ONLY team in the AFL who are ever referred to as ever tanked ??? How about the WCE last year ??? They sent A LOT of senior players for early surgery, which is fair enough, but when Carlton did the same they were Tanking ......... And how about Port ??? From the GF to 13th, their coach admitted that they were "playing kids" and doing "list management" yet they didn't tank ???


Common people, if the whole footy community label Carlton as tankers then why are they the ONLY ones considering that other clubs do EXACTLY THE SAME THING ..................

 

[Butane]

Yes but 6 years of tanking is taking it a bit far. Especially that season when they lost the last 10 games straight because a win would mean losing the priority pick. (bay 13 please these never go anywhere)

 

[vonn]

Butane you will get carded because their is a new rule about the [x] board an how your meant to report it..

hehehe.

 

[Shinboner Schem]

mostly because after Ratten was caretaker coach, he would prove himself for most of the game (so he would get a contract), then throw it away so that they did not win the game and subsequently move off the bottom.

That is quite different to list management

 

[Butane]

Butane you will get carded because their is a new rule about the [x] board an how your meant to report it..

hehehe.

This isn't myspace we are talking about football. Please keep it on topic.

 

[Neville Bartos]

Okay. Carlton, West Coast, and Port are all tankers. Is that better?

 

[_Interpol_]

6 years tanking will do it

Plus they had their way with the cap for years, so they are cheats anyways

Other clubs generally got up after 1-2-3 yrs.. but 6? lol and losing that game to melbourne?

i still hold that the biggest effort in tanking in a single game was the pies v north in that game ... my god, so so dodgy. 4 goals up and blew it in T.O..

 

[Butane]

The thread title is misleading as well. What's the actual question? Carlton aren't the only team to have ever tanked is the answer you are looking for? Because nobody thinks they are the only team to have.

 

[SteeleAt11]

Why is it that Carlton are the ONLY team in the AFL who are ever referred to as ever tanked ???

Because you won 3 wooden spoons in 5 years and one particular effort against Melbourne (Kreuzer cup) was so atrocious and blatant you should have been stripped of draft picks again

 

[cmndstab]

Pretty much everyone accused Port and West Coast of tanking last year, where were you?

 

[coryne]

The thread title is misleading as well. What's the actual question? Carlton aren't the only team to have ever tanked is the answer you are looking for? Because nobody thinks they are the only team to have.

Look through the "Likes/Dislikes" thread and see how many times ANY other side, outside of Carlton, is accused of tanking ..............

As for tanking for 6 years, Carlton was CRIPPLED after the Salary Cap penelties, and were plain crap, not tanking, for a number of years. The fact that Pagan recruited recycled players instead of developing any kids didn't help either ..........

I won't deny that Carlton most probably lost the "Kreuzer Cup" game on purpose, but who wouldn't of considering what was at stake ??? But for Carlton to be pretty much singled out as the only team that tanked a season is rediculous ...........

 

[_Interpol_]

Okay. Carlton, West Coast, and Port are all tankers. Is that better?

Er, add your mob too sunshine

Dowler, Roughead, Franklin, Ellis .. They didnt grow on trees. If they did, then i retract my comment

For the record: Goddard (technically #2, lol @ Carltank) Riewoldt, Kosi, Ball all didn't grow on trees

(NB excluded x clarke and thorp, picks 5 and 7...just going with the high ones/priorities)

All tanked. Some much more than others

 

[Butane]

All tanked. Some much more than others

Pretty much sums it up.

 

[LemmingMaster]

Pretty much everyone accused Port and West Coast of tanking last year, where were you?

I just think Carltank has a nicer ring to it than WestTank or PortTank....

 

[Moo]

Mostly because Carlton's was a little more obvious.

I don't prescribe to the theory that Carlton tanked for 6 years - they were simply not very good due to the penalites imposed on them.

However the final year of that period, it appeared to me they were certainly not trying overly hard ....I mean playing the kids is one thing but pulling your champion full forward off for a rest when a game is in the balance was a big ?

Libba coming out (even though Blues fans will put up 100 reasons why he should not be believe) - simply confirmed what the rest of us were mostly thinking.

WC and Port - guilty of playing the kids and sending guys off early for surgery ...definetly, however this is hardly full on tanking IMHO.

The real victims in this were Melb who did the right thing and are still paying a high price for that.

 

[The Kipster]

I think Butane summed it up perfectly, if you are at the bottom of the ladder for 6yrs, then clearly you are by nature a tanker....I mean the majority of us have in some form bottomed out, but didn't stick around long enough to have a permanent label placed upon us....Carltank oops Carlton did

 

[IluvHarvey]

I never thought Carlton tanked. They were crap and couldn't win a game. You don't have to not win on purpose when you can't win at all.

 

[Uhumagoo]

Don't really want to label other teams as tankers. The definition of tanking was lowered so far to ensure Carlton can be labelled tankers. Now only a year later other clubs have fallen within the definition and we are being entertained by the first wave of finger pointers and their sheepish backpedalling. I prefer it this way.

 

[Mitchell Madness]

Er, add your mob too sunshine

Dowler, Roughead, Franklin, Ellis .. They didnt grow on trees. If they did, then i retract my comment

For the record: Goddard (technically #2, lol @ Carltank) Riewoldt, Kosi, Ball all didn't grow on trees

(NB excluded x clarke and thorp, picks 5 and 7...just going with the high ones/priorities)

All tanked. Some much more than others

Tanking involves losing games late in the season to gain a higher draft picks. People dont seem to grasp this concept.

Every season hawthorn has at least won 3 games late in the season and risen at least 1 spot on the ladder, eliminating the better draft pick.

The reason people have a go at carlton is because theres been no evidence in those 6 seasons of them looking like they would improve. every season they didnt look hungry enough.

I wouldnt even class the saints as tanking those yrs, they have either been in the top 4, or the bottom 4, rarely in between.

 

[IluvHarvey]

Tanking involves losing games late in the season to gain a higher draft picks. People dont seem to grasp this concept.

I didn't know there was a set definition. Where can i find it?

 

[RichoRox12]

I never thought Carlton tanked. They were crap and couldn't win a game. You don't have to not win on purpose when you can't win at all.

I agree, besides if you asked Fev to tank he'd arrive at training in his scuba gear (with a toy dildo attached)

 

[play2win]

tanking or no tanking, carlton deserved the high draft picks - they were crapola!!

 

[Lynch takes a mark]

The only game that I was genuinely disappointed with West Coast last year was the Melbourne game at the MCG, all the rest were us being genuinely crap.

 

[bodazoka]

I just think Carltank has a nicer ring to it than WestTank or PortTank....

And we all ready have a deragoatory nick name in West Coke Eagles.

 

[Thrawn]

I never thought Carlton tanked. They were crap and couldn't win a game. You don't have to not win on purpose when you can't win at all.

Yep, and it's the same with every other team that has been shit in the same time period. Tanking is a whole load of crap, and is often confused with list management.

Libba coming out (even though Blues fans will put up 100 reasons why he should not be believe) - simply confirmed what the rest of us were mostly thinking.

Oh, that's right... his vibes...