Tanking in AFL, coaches speak out.

[TLPG]

They have said no such thing. They have expressed concerns about the possibility and nothing more. No one has accused anyone of tanking. Not now, not before, and not in the future (unless someone is extremely stupid).

[pookus]

Everything you have said here is bullshit.But youll never be able to explain it to someone who thinks they know what they dont.You dont know Brock and if you did you would know how stupid those statements are.Ask one of your buddies what his opinion of Brock McClean is.Paul Roos himself,your mate said Brock was a man of the highest character.Make some phone calls if you are that in the know and find out for yourself.As far as local admin being better than the big fish please.What a load of ****.Im sure the AFL would be happy to hear that there admin is no better than the local leagues.Seems that most of these guys do the job for pittance they should do some raiding and save themselves some money.Your stubborness to prove a point has made you look really silly.

You are the stubborn one because you continue to ignore reality, just like KE. The AFL is already looking into McClean's claims as we all know, so I don't see the need to ring anyone. It will reveal what we already know to be proven - that Melbourne did not tank. They were experimenting. And there never has been a law against that and there never will be. Roosy only defended McClean on the point of what he believed. It doesn't mean he believed McClean was absolutely right.

Anyway, just like the clubs, leagues also have a single difference at the grass roots level compared to the AFL. Turnover. Handling large amounts of money is the ONLY difference. Everything else is the same, with the obvious exception of number of clubs (varying from 3 in Ravensthorpe and King Island to 72 in the Victorian Amateurs).

I explain this all to you - and you play the same childish game as KE does. Putting your fingers in your ears and singing "lalalalala I can't hear you".

No use getting into some argument that I know the answer to.I know Brock I know hes not a liar.You dont know him and you say he is for what reason I dont know.Either you believe him or you dont.You choose not to from a position of ignorance. If you met him youd change your mind.As far as admin goes I have no doubt there are very competent people in the lower leagues.Ive known a few myself but I dont know one who thinks they could run an AFL football club.Because of the level of money they have a complete different skill set.A guy who runs a Milk Bar ,though may be very competent would not be expected to run Coca Cola. A club like the pies with the amount of staff and money involved needs a world class admin.I dont think guys of that calibre are running the Hampton League.If they are then they are totally wasted and I might have a job for them.

[pookus]

But Brock never claimed tanking did he? Hasnt he been questioned by the AFL? As far as I know if he has actually given evidence that Melbourne tanked then the club are in big strife.

I considered his comments a complaint that Melbourne were playing youth instead of established players of which he was one.

He claimed they werent trying to win.Demitriou said without a smoking gun it would be hard to prove. Doesnt mean it didnt happen they just did it well.

theres a huge difference between not trying to win and deliberately trying to lose.

How is not trying to win within the spirit of the game.It is as shameful as meaning to lose.

[TLPG]

No use getting into some argument that I know the answer to.I know Brock I know hes not a liar.You dont know him and you say he is for what reason I dont know.Either you believe him or you dont.You choose not to from a position of ignorance. If you met him youd change your mind.

If I met him, he'd find out quick smart how wrong he is - unless he's as stubborn and ignorant as you are. You made the point that Roosy said he wasn't like that (in effect) so I think when I'm done with him he'll realise how wrong he is. Because unlike you, he'd understand what I'm talking about.

As far as admin goes I have no doubt there are very competent people in the lower leagues.Ive known a few myself but I dont know one who thinks they could run an AFL football club.Because of the level of money they have a complete different skill set.A guy who runs a Milk Bar ,though may be very competent would not be expected to run Coca Cola. A club like the pies with the amount of staff and money involved needs a world class admin.I dont think guys of that calibre are running the Hampton League.If they are then they are totally wasted and I might have a job for them.

LOL! You are mixing up the single difference I admitted to! Money handling! I never said what you're claiming from a money stand point! I was referring to everything else! Anyway - I know someone who has made that jump! I can't remember his name but he was the admin for the Geelong FL (and a bloody good one) and now he holds a position in the AFL! And then there's Mark Patterson. He ran the Bulldogs awhile back. Came from the VCFL as their general manager. Now runs North Ballarat IIRC (should check in with him one of these days!).

[Xman]

He claimed they werent trying to win.Demitriou said without a smoking gun it would be hard to prove. Doesnt mean it didnt happen they just did it well.

theres a huge difference between not trying to win and deliberately trying to lose.

How is not trying to win within the spirit of the game.It is as shameful as meaning to lose.

i dont agree. Teams that have little incentive to win will use games for other purposes like developing the team, trying new players, trying new tactics or game plans, preparing injured players for the next season etc etc.

The 22 players taking the field will still try to win the game. The coaching staff will still try to win the game. But a win is a minor priority compared to other aims because it provides less benefit.

This behaviour happens in any sports. Ive mentioned cricket. What about Davis cup tennis? A team will often play their third or fourth best player for dead rubber games. Does it mean they arent trying to win? of course not. It means the benefit of winning is smaller than the benefits of giving valuable experience to a developing player.

[King-Eliagh]

If I met him, he'd find out quick smart how wrong he is

Ohhhh TLPG. If you met Einstein he'd find out quick smart how wrong he is too.

[King-Eliagh]

But a win is a minor priority compared to other aims because it provides less benefit.

Xman wasn't it you who was spouting off about the importance of developing a winning culture earlier?

Can't have it both ways mate.

And please your cricket and other sports examples are completely different in this context. I've told you this a zillion times. When will you learn we are talking about tanking because of the benefit of obtaining the draft picks.

Blind Freddy!

[Xman]

But a win is a minor priority compared to other aims because it provides less benefit.

Xman wasn't it you who was spouting off about the importance of developing a winning culture earlier?

Can't have it both ways mate.

And please your cricket and other sports examples are completely different in this context. I've told you this a zillion times. When will you learn we are talking about tanking because of the benefit of obtaining the draft picks.

Blind Freddy!

Sure I was. A win is always beneficial. But if winning will not result in a benefit as far as finals or progression through the compettition then it will be one of a number of benefits, including team development etc.

Its about prioritising with a plan for the future.

Again though you just make assumptions about draft picks and intentionally losing games without any proof. Your assumption is based on the fact that earlier draft picks provide better players despite evidence that this is not the case within the top 10 anyway. There is no connection. The only clear and established connection is playing youth to accelerate team development when the finals are no longer a possibility.

[pookus]

No use getting into some argument that I know the answer to.I know Brock I know hes not a liar.You dont know him and you say he is for what reason I dont know.Either you believe him or you dont.You choose not to from a position of ignorance. If you met him youd change your mind.

If I met him, he'd find out quick smart how wrong he is - unless he's as stubborn and ignorant as you are. You made the point that Roosy said he wasn't like that (in effect) so I think when I'm done with him he'll realise how wrong he is. Because unlike you, he'd understand what I'm talking about.

As far as admin goes I have no doubt there are very competent people in the lower leagues.Ive known a few myself but I dont know one who thinks they could run an AFL football club.Because of the level of money they have a complete different skill set.A guy who runs a Milk Bar ,though may be very competent would not be expected to run Coca Cola. A club like the pies with the amount of staff and money involved needs a world class admin.I dont think guys of that calibre are running the Hampton League.If they are then they are totally wasted and I might have a job for them.

LOL! You are mixing up the single difference I admitted to! Money handling! I never said what you're claiming from a money stand point! I was referring to everything else! Anyway - I know someone who has made that jump! I can't remember his name but he was the admin for the Geelong FL (and a bloody good one) and now he holds a position in the AFL! And then there's Mark Patterson. He ran the Bulldogs awhile back. Came from the VCFL as their general manager. Now runs North Ballarat IIRC (should check in with him one of these days!).

What an arrogant ***** you are If you come across Brock and challenged his view Im sure youd end up on your arse. Im sure he understands the difference between experimentation and not trying to win.Two vastly different things.And business is all about money.The more money the higher expertise needed.You can not seperate the 2 Simple.Im sure those guys who have stepped up are learning to deal with big business while on the job.

[pookus]

But a win is a minor priority compared to other aims because it provides less benefit.

Xman wasn't it you who was spouting off about the importance of developing a winning culture earlier?

Can't have it both ways mate.

And please your cricket and other sports examples are completely different in this context. I've told you this a zillion times. When will you learn we are talking about tanking because of the benefit of obtaining the draft picks.

Blind Freddy!

Sure I was. A win is always beneficial. But if winning will not result in a benefit as far as finals or progression through the compettition then it will be one of a number of benefits, including team development etc.

Its about prioritising with a plan for the future.

Again though you just make assumptions about draft picks and intentionally losing games without any proof. Your assumption is based on the fact that earlier draft picks provide better players despite evidence that this is not the case within the top 10 anyway. There is no connection. The only clear and established connection is playing youth to accelerate team development when the finals are no longer a possibility.

The connection is you have a guy on the inside who had no doubt it was going on.Believe him or dont .Im sure your opinion wouldnt matter much to him.

[TLPG]

If I met him, he'd find out quick smart how wrong he is

Ohhhh TLPG. If you met Einstein he'd find out quick smart how wrong he is too.

You're an idiot. I know the difference between a man to respect (Einstein) and a person to show contempt for (any liar or coward).

What an arrogant ***** you are If you come across Brock and challenged his view Im sure youd end up on your arse.

And he'd end up on a assault charge. Arrogance is fine if you know in your heart you're right and some idiot who knows nothing contradicts you without solid evidence. So you want to call me arrogant? Coming from you under the circumstances I have just two words; Thank You.

Im sure he understands the difference between experimentation and not trying to win.Two vastly different things.

He doesn't. That's plain as the nose on your face.

And business is all about money.The more money the higher expertise needed.You can not seperate the 2 Simple.Im sure those guys who have stepped up are learning to deal with big business while on the job.

Football is community, not business! That's why money handling and other factors are SEPERATE! Besides - there's an old saying. If you pay peanuts you get monkeys. But if you pay bigger peanuts you get bigger monkeys! If you're saying football is a business and only a business you're a bigger idiot than I thought.

[King-Eliagh]

But a win is a minor priority compared to other aims because it provides less benefit.

Xman wasn't it you who was spouting off about the importance of developing a winning culture earlier?

Can't have it both ways mate.

And please your cricket and other sports examples are completely different in this context. I've told you this a zillion times. When will you learn we are talking about tanking because of the benefit of obtaining the draft picks.

Blind Freddy!

Sure I was. A win is always beneficial. But if winning will not result in a benefit as far as finals or progression through the compettition then it will be one of a number of benefits, including team development etc.

Its about prioritising with a plan for the future.

Again though you just make assumptions about draft picks and intentionally losing games without any proof. Your assumption is based on the fact that earlier draft picks provide better players despite evidence that this is not the case within the top 10 anyway. There is no connection. The only clear and established connection is playing youth to accelerate team development when the finals are no longer a possibility.

You goose. I'm not making an "assumption". I'm going off the frank and clear admissions of foul play by coaches and players

Havent heard this in the other sports you mention

[TLPG]

Admissions that don't exist despite numerous attempts to garner that info from you. All you have is assumptions by the media.

[Xman]

Xman wasn't it you who was spouting off about the importance of developing a winning culture earlier?

Can't have it both ways mate.

And please your cricket and other sports examples are completely different in this context. I've told you this a zillion times. When will you learn we are talking about tanking because of the benefit of obtaining the draft picks.

Blind Freddy!

Sure I was. A win is always beneficial. But if winning will not result in a benefit as far as finals or progression through the compettition then it will be one of a number of benefits, including team development etc.

Its about prioritising with a plan for the future.

Again though you just make assumptions about draft picks and intentionally losing games without any proof. Your assumption is based on the fact that earlier draft picks provide better players despite evidence that this is not the case within the top 10 anyway. There is no connection. The only clear and established connection is playing youth to accelerate team development when the finals are no longer a possibility.

You goose. I'm not making an "assumption". I'm going off the frank and clear admissions of foul play by coaches and players

Havent heard this in the other sports you mention

admissions that are interperated by you in a way that contradicts the custodians of the game.

Fact is no coach or player has ever said they deliberately lost games.

[pookus]

If I met him, he'd find out quick smart how wrong he is

Ohhhh TLPG. If you met Einstein he'd find out quick smart how wrong he is too.

You're an idiot. I know the difference between a man to respect (Einstein) and a person to show contempt for (any liar or coward).

What an arrogant ***** you are If you come across Brock and challenged his view Im sure youd end up on your arse.

And he'd end up on a assault charge. Arrogance is fine if you know in your heart you're right and some idiot who knows nothing contradicts you without solid evidence. So you want to call me arrogant? Coming from you under the circumstances I have just two words; Thank You.

Im sure he understands the difference between experimentation and not trying to win.Two vastly different things.

He doesn't. That's plain as the nose on your face.

The

And business is all about money.The more money the higher expertise needed.You can not seperate the 2 Simple.Im sure those guys who have stepped up are learning to deal with big business while on the job.

Football is community, not business! That's why money handling and other factors are SEPERATE! Besides - there's an old saying. If you pay peanuts you get monkeys. But if you pay bigger peanuts you get bigger monkeys! If you're saying football is a business and only a business you're a bigger idiot than I thought.

The fact that you believe that your opinion is more informed than a current day league player who was at the club in question says a lot about you as a man.You wont hear from me about this again because obviously you have the answers lol.Your an AFL apologist and you embarass me as an AFL devotee. Local football is community AFL is business.