News Tanking lid about to blow - Melbourne in the gun

[Deep North]

Woooh! Look like Melbourne are heading to the matresses over tanking and the AFL have got 'em in the gun.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...e-lid-on-melbournes-vault-20121030-28h3c.html

If this blows a lid there could be a few teams looking over their shoulders, Carlton (again), StKilda, Collingwood... What do we think folks? The AFL have repeatedly denied it existed despite everyone knowing it does. I imagine making Andy look stupid would bring down a rain of s**t on a club the likes of which we've never seen.

 

[winty]

At least we know for sure we'll never be part of tanking investigations. No bottom four finishes for quarter of a century!

 

[witsend]

At least we know for sure we'll never be part of tanking investigations. No bottom four finishes for quarter of a century!

Didn't we tank this season for Pick 16?

 

[SJ]

Can someone direct me to the rule that outlaws tanking?

 

[thejester]

Not sure how this is something to celebrate. A club that has fought back from the brink of extinction is about to get hammered having already lost the player it tanked for. Doubt there'll be any ramifications for powerful clubs - it's taken half a dozen witnesses admitting there was a meeting where it was outright stated 'we need to tank' to bring the investigation to this point. Doubt Collingwood or Carlton were that stupid.

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

Can someone direct me to the rule that outlaws tanking?

It's called integrity of the game.

 

[thejester]

Can someone direct me to the rule that outlaws tanking?

Could be talking laws as opposed to rules here. That said, I agree it's a fuzzy area. Does the recent practice of resting players en masse count?

 

[manboob]

Could get interesting. Should really be stripped of both picks the got for potato er I mean Scully.

 

[SJ]

Could be talking laws as opposed to rules here. That said, I agree it's a fuzzy area. Does the recent practice of resting players en masse count?

Where is the law?

I've never seen anything written that says a team must 'try' 100% to win every game.

Geelong doesn't try 100% to win every game.

Runners don't try 100% to win every race (heat) and that's fine. Badminton teams didn't try to win every match (heat) at the Olympics and were banned.

Surely the aim is the premiership and teams are able to do what they like within the rules to get there.

 

[catempire]

Can someone direct me to the rule that outlaws tanking?

The old catch-all, "bringing the game into disrepute".

 

[SJ]

The old catch-all, "bringing the game into disrepute".

I don't see why Geelong resting a stack of players in Round 15 2009 or Fremantle in Round 21 2010 is much different.

 

[PomCat]

One is trying to lose the game and the other is not. BIG difference.

 

[Jazz71286]

I think if anything 'tanking' would fall under the category of match fixing.

 

[manboob]

Of course it's cheating when the draft is there to equalise everything and you have a team deliberately trying to manipulate that. Just like Spudett and the Crows now. Arguments about GWS and GCFC are in a different category.

 

[manboob]

I think if anything 'tanking' would fall under the category of match fixing.

Exactly. It's a pretty ******* slippery slope and what's not to say that Melbourne people weren't betting on the outcome? Why else would you lose the game. It's one argument eh.

 

[AM]

The old catch-all, "bringing the game into disrepute".

Tick!

AFL Player Rules:

A Person must not engage in conduct which is unbecoming or likely to prejudice the interests or reputation of the AFL or to bring the
game of football into disrepute.

 

[SJ]

One is trying to lose the game and the other is not. BIG difference.

Where is the rule that says you are not allowed to try to lose?

 

[footscore]

a shame they will get to draft top players before the investigation finds them guilty

 

[FredLeDeux]

Where is the rule that says you are not allowed to try to lose?

It is "conduct .... likely to prejudice the interests .... of the AFL"; just ask their "corporate partner" TAB.com.au.

 

[SJ]

It is "conduct .... likely to prejudice the interests .... of the AFL"; just ask their "corporate partner" TAB.com.au.

I would say rewarding teams for losing, and then charging them for trying to do so, is ridiculous.

 

[SleazySimon]

Where is the rule that says you are not allowed to try to lose?

Match fixing is a federal offence.
The AFL have to abide by laws like everyone else.
The sports minister has the power to overrule what the AFL or Melbourne does if it breaks the law.
I hope they get punished the same way Carlton has in the past and the same way Adelaide will.
Just because they are a shocking side atm and the AFL want a more equal exciting comp shouldn't excuse anyone from breaking the law. The AFL needs to make a stand and set a precedent here, the government likewise.

 

[footscore]

hope Maxwell and Shaw get looked into again for their match fixing last year

 

[FredLeDeux]

I would say rewarding teams for losing, and then charging them for trying to do so, is ridiculous.

Of course it's bloody ridiculous.
But you were asking whether tanking was against the rules, and it is.
You will probably also find that it's actually illegal under some provision of the legislation regulating gambling.

 

[manboob]

OK- I'm sure it will be in here somewhere.
http://www.aflpa.com.au/images/uploads/AFL_Player_Rules_-_March_2011.pdf

 

[rocker_oz33]

Does tanking really work?Look at carlton heaps of high picks still no premiership.And the dees wasted alot of there high picks.Now with FA alot of the bottom team just might be just bottom teams with players leaving to play in a granny.