Beaussie
Site Admin
Joined: 19 Nov 2004
Posts: 3583
Location: Sydney
9805 Credits
Team: Sydney Swans
|
 Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2008 6:59 am Post subject: Inconsistencies in the AFL's treatment of Carlton and Sydney |
 |
|
Roos and the Swans were summonsed to Melbourne to face an investigation into claims that the Swans deliberately lost against the Hawks in the NAB Cup. Fast forward to the comments of Libba on the Footy Show last week and isn't it interesting to see the reaction from the AFL and Demetriou. Double standards or what?
| Quote: |
AFL soft-pedals on Carlton claims
Richard Hinds | March 18, 2008
http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/now-whos-the-tanker-afl-softpedals-on-carlton-claims/2008/03/17/1205602294149.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1
Having been forced to face a full-scale investigation into alleged match fixing, Swans coach Paul Roos yesterday chose diplomatic silence when asked whether the AFL was obliged to launch a similar inquest into claims that Carlton had deliberately lost games last season to gain a priority draft pick.
"We've got nothing to gain from that," Roos said. "We went through the process and successfully defended ourselves. End of story."
However, after the AFL's legal officer yesterday met former Carlton assistant coach Tony Liberatore, the man whose accusations have created a major controversy on the eve of the season, the Swans have watched with a growing bemusement as the league this time does everything possible to avoid bringing in the legal eagles.
The AFL wasted no time initiating an investigation into Roos's alleged instruction to Jarrad McVeigh on the boundary line in a pre-season match in Launceston to "go forward but don't kick a goal". Yet, in recent days, AFL chief executive Andrew Demetriou has gone to extraordinary lengths to downplay Liberatore's suggestion on The Footy Show last Thursday that Carlton had tanked regular-season games and, by extension, compromised the integrity of the competition.
Rather than actively pursuing information after the Liberatore interview, as they had when word of Roos's remark reached the ears of the AFL's football operations manager Adrian Anderson, Demetriou instead said it was up to the former Blues assistant to come forward with evidence Carlton had not performed at their best.
Demetriou ventured that "list management" - the practice whereby clubs out of contention for the finals book players in for surgery rather than have them play on with strapping or painkillers - was acceptable and should not be confused with "tanking".
Then, at the weekend, Demetriou told Channel Seven he was offended by the tanking talk surrounding Carlton. "I actually find it really abhorrent that people are accusing a club, and various people who I've got very high regard for, of actually losing games and having people call them cheats," he said.
That comment might justifiably anger the Swans, coming so soon after Roos - and, by association, his fellow coaches and officials - were subjected to a potentially humiliating accusation. It certainly does nothing to disavow the notion that Roos is not held in high regard by Demetriou.
Another Demetriou comment might also raise eyebrows among Swans officials: "If someone wants to get up and call a club cheats, or anyone at a club a cheat, they should substantiate that."
The Roos inquiry was launched on the hearsay of four AFL officials, whose statements were later found to be inconsistent. As evidence goes, surely that is far flimsier than the assertions of an assistant coach who had intimate knowledge of the Blues' football department - even if Liberatore has appeared to back away from his comments after being subjected to a media character assassination.
It remains to be seen if the AFL will investigate Liberatore's claims as vigorously as it did those against Roos, which former Victorian Appeals Court judge John Winneke concluded were unfounded.
But, with such glaring inconsistencies in the AFL's approach, the unavoidable conclusion is that Roos was put through the wringer in order to protect the "integrity" of a pre-season competition that has none. And that Carlton - and other clubs accused of tanking - are being spared to protect a flawed draft system that tempts teams to lose. |
|
|
