AFL commision failing the AFL public.

[piesman2011]

I think the word tanking is flawed it has to many meanings and no one can agree on the what is in essence tanking. They should instead be using the word match fixing. If true the Melbourne coaching staff were told to lose matches by the club and this is match fixing and should be delt with harshly. All of the other stuff such as putting players in for operations early and selecting players who were untried is fine and could be argued as clubs looking for new options.

[Xman]

I think the word tanking is flawed it has to many meanings and no one can agree on the what is in essence tanking. They should instead be using the word match fixing. If true the Melbourne coaching staff were told to lose matches by the club and this is match fixing and should be delt with harshly. All of the other stuff such as putting players in for operations early and selecting players who were untried is fine and could be argued as clubs looking for new options.

And this is ADs exact view (and mine), but was criticised by Patrick Smith. Every sport uses minor matches or dead rubbers to try new tactics or players, including the Davis cup. How many times have we seen the 5th rubber played between the last choice of each countries singles players? There is nothing wrong with this. The players are still trying to win. But the coaching staff realise giving valuable experience to new players is worth more than winning a dead rubber.

However, what Melbourne appear to have done is deliberately lose to gain a priority pick. They should be dealt with harshly as they have compromised the draft. However in my view it is no more serious than salary cap cheating. Look at what the likely tankers in the AFL have done since they got their priority picks: Melbourne are still crap, Carlton havent done anything either.

Where as the Salary cap cheaters in the Storm, Essendon and Carlton won premierships and denied other teams of a premiership that was rightfully theirs.

[Raiderdave]

yes.... & the ostrich impersonations continue

baaaaaaaa
baaaaaaaaaaaaa


VFL ... a low scummy corrupt game with less integrity then international Cycling

truly our nations secret shame

[Xman]

yes.... & the ostrich impersonations continue

baaaaaaaa
baaaaaaaaaaaaa


VFL ... a low scummy corrupt game with less integrity then international Cycling

truly our nations secret shame

Coming from an NRL fan, thats hilarious. Look at the storm for example. In a city where no one cares two hoots about RL the NRL established a team funded almost entirely by a media company that cheated the salary cap to win GFs and even after being penalised is still winning them.

What a farce!

Even funnier is that the entire media in Sydney and QLD hate them and even state it with bias commentary on the TV telecasts, and every RL fan in Australia hates them, including sports fans in their own state.

[Raiderdave]

yes.... & the ostrich impersonations continue

baaaaaaaa
baaaaaaaaaaaaa


VFL ... a low scummy corrupt game with less integrity then international Cycling

truly our nations secret shame

Coming from an NRL fan, thats hilarious. Look at the storm for example. In a city where no one cares two hoots about RL the NRL established a team funded almost entirely by a media company that cheated the salary cap to win GFs and even after being penalised is still winning them.

.

and the NRL dealt with it harshly , swiftly .............
integrity from one end of that joint to the other =D> =D> =D>

meanwhile ..... the VFL's reaction to an even worse situation .......... :>:: :>:: :>:: :>::
what a shambles
VFL .. truly our nations secret shame

[Xman]

yes.... & the ostrich impersonations continue

baaaaaaaa
baaaaaaaaaaaaa


VFL ... a low scummy corrupt game with less integrity then international Cycling

truly our nations secret shame

Coming from an NRL fan, thats hilarious. Look at the storm for example. In a city where no one cares two hoots about RL the NRL established a team funded almost entirely by a media company that cheated the salary cap to win GFs and even after being penalised is still winning them.

.

and the NRL dealt with it harshly , swiftly .............
integrity from one end of that joint to the other =D> =D> =D>

meanwhile ..... the VFL's reaction to an even worse situation .......... :>:: :>:: :>:: :>::
what a shambles
VFL .. truly our nations secret shame

hmmm, have they reacted? Has the investigation even finished? Tanking isnt straight forward or objective like salary cap cheating.

And lets be honest, which behaviour had a larger impact on the competition? The storm who denied two teams of a GF or the Demons who denied second bottom from an earlier pick in the draft, and are still as shite team?

The Storms penalty was harsh but didnt stop them using the same illegally formed team to continue to dominate the NRL. What a farce!

[piesman2011]

Coming from an NRL fan, thats hilarious. Look at the storm for example. In a city where no one cares two hoots about RL the NRL established a team funded almost entirely by a media company that cheated the salary cap to win GFs and even after being penalised is still winning them.

.

and the NRL dealt with it harshly , swiftly .............
integrity from one end of that joint to the other =D> =D> =D>

meanwhile ..... the VFL's reaction to an even worse situation .......... :>:: :>:: :>:: :>::
what a shambles
VFL .. truly our nations secret shame

hmmm, have they reacted? Has the investigation even finished? Tanking isnt straight forward or objective like salary cap cheating.

And lets be honest, which behaviour had a larger impact on the competition? The storm who denied two teams of a GF or the Demons who denied second bottom from an earlier pick in the draft, and are still as shite team?

The Storms penalty was harsh but didnt stop them using the same illegally formed team to continue to dominate the NRL. What a farce!

Well put Xman. I like the Storm but to deny 2 teams premierships is a lot bigger deal then to deny a team a Jack Trengrove (one player which is essentially what they did). Just ask eelofwest or KE which they would consider the worse crime.

[eelofwest]

and the NRL dealt with it harshly , swiftly .............
integrity from one end of that joint to the other =D> =D> =D>

meanwhile ..... the VFL's reaction to an even worse situation .......... :>:: :>:: :>:: :>::
what a shambles
VFL .. truly our nations secret shame

hmmm, have they reacted? Has the investigation even finished? Tanking isnt straight forward or objective like salary cap cheating.

And lets be honest, which behaviour had a larger impact on the competition? The storm who denied two teams of a GF or the Demons who denied second bottom from an earlier pick in the draft, and are still as shite team?

The Storms penalty was harsh but didnt stop them using the same illegally formed team to continue to dominate the NRL. What a farce!

Well put Xman. I like the Storm but to deny 2 teams premierships is a lot bigger deal then to deny a team a Jack Trengrove (one player which is essentially what they did). Just ask eelofwest or KE which they would consider the worse crime.

I really don't get why you guys are comparing the salary cap rorts that were dealt with swiftly and harshly to tanking which the AFL commission has taken nearly a year to start the investigation and another six months on and we have nothing, it is still on going. Fail commission Fail.

Totally chalk and cheese, and yes building a culture of loosing just to attain draft picks is cheating and is on Par with Salary cap rorts. Only difference is that we do not know were the tanking ends, there could be several clubs in the AFL who have used tanking to attain first round draft picks.

A AFL competition with no credibility and lopsided like no other sporting competition in the World.... =D>

[eelofwest]

Demetriou's state of denial scrapes the bottom of the AFL's tanking barrel

by: Patrick Smith
From: The Australian
November 03, 2012 12:00AM

Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size
Print

IF the AFL Commission is as good as it wants us to believe; if its governance is as strict as it boasts, then it must do one thing immediately.

It must demand AFL chief executive Andrew Demetriou appear before his eight fellow commissioners and explain why he so fiercely denied tanking was a critical issue in football when clearly it was.

Demetriou has shouted down, ridiculed and belittled anyone who suggested that sides were endeavouring to ensure the line-ups they placed on the field would be unable to win matches.

The commissioners and Demetriou have been in power when sides regularly set about to deliberately lose matches as club football departments sought to gain the best possible picks in the draft, including priority selections.

The Australian reported yesterday that Melbourne football manager Chris Connolly threatened staff with the sack if they did not follow a directive not to win enough matches that the club lost its competitive advantage in the 2009 draft.
Digital Pass $1 for first 28 Days

Other reports on the AFL investigation into Melbourne's match strategies that have appeared in The Age and Herald Sun through the week undeniably prove Melbourne was trying to earn the best possible draft picks even if it compromised the chance of victory.

Melbourne was not the only club and 2009 not the only year. While the AFL offered such rich prizes - high draft picks and priority selections - for consistently underperforming clubs, football departments could not resist the challenge to manipulate their positions on the ladder.

Demetriou remains adamant that clubs did not tank. He uses a very narrow definition of tanking. Demetriou's understanding allows for only direct action taken on the field of play - instructing a player to deliberately kick a point when a goal would have won the match - as tanking. According to Demetriou, putting inferior players on the field, resting elite ones, playing others in unsuitable positions, taking influential players off the ground are all examples of list management and experimentation. They do not define tanking.

When The Weekend Australian asked Demetriou whether the commission deserved an explanation, he said it did not and that, in fact, it should not be presumed that his fellow commissioners did not share his views on tanking. Well, that is simply frightening.

The AFL Commission and administration have weakened the integrity of their competition, not by merely holding such a tight definition of tanking. But when it was suggested that certain matches were suspicious for tanking tinkering, the official response was lame. Half-hearted inquiries consisted of a phone call and, sometimes, a review of game tape.

So when Carlton's Brock McLean, a former Melbourne player in 2009, said on Fox Footy in July that Blind Freddy could see that the Demons were not trying to win, the subsequent investigation by the AFL was expected to be the normal one-question inquisition. "Did you tank?" "Nope" "Fair enough".

But to the credit of Adrian Anderson and his football department investigators, it has been a dogged and expansive inquiry which has unearthed damning evidence that Melbourne had made draft picks a priority ahead of victory.

Yesterday club chairman Don McLardy addressed supporters: "The board of the MFC is concerned to ensure that the MFC is treated fairly and properly. The board will fully co-operate with an independent, lawful and transparent process," he wrote on the club's website.

"The board has sought an assurance from the AFL that natural justice will be afforded to the MFC, its players, employees and staff through the investigation."

Demetriou's refusal to expand his definition of tanking has severely hurt the AFL's credibility. The fans became bewildered, then cynical, when they could see what the AFL didn't or wouldn't. Now it is the fans that are being proved correct.

The commission must take a heavy load of blame. It has overseen a competition where supporters considered tanking commonplace yet the ruling body did not oversee any rigorous examination of team tactics. Instead, it seemed to rely on Demetriou's sweeping claim that tanking allegations were nonsense. This from a competition that boasts it prides itself on the integrity of its league yet did little to protect it.

There are signs that the commission is attempting to take greater control of the administration of the sport. Whether the recent and unexpected departure of several key administrative personnel is linked to that is unclear. However, it knocked back a recommendation from Demetriou's football department to limit the number of interchanges to 70 next season, a veto it has very rarely - if ever - used on technical match-day matters.

The commission also appears to have ignored Demetriou's loud defence of criticism about cost-of-living allowance for this year's premier Sydney. "This is a knee-jerk reaction from clubs because Kurt Tippett wants to play for Sydney, because he admires Sydney," Demetriou said at the time. "No club complaining about this has any real evidence about differentials in housing costs."

Demetriou also said the matter was not on the agenda for discussion at the last commission meeting. Yet at that meeting the commissioners agreed to review Sydney's $800,000 cost-of-living allowance that is incorporated into their salary cap. Demetriou denied to The Weekend Australian this was a personal rebuff, but just the workings of a commission meeting.

If the commissioners are putting Demetriou under greater scrutiny - his deputy, Gillon McLachlan, recently knocked back the main NRL job, so back-up is at hand - then it needs to scrutinise his stance on tanking. Having done that, it needs then to examine why its com-missioners remained so passive as their product's good name was being trashed. The AFL has lost its strut and Demetriou must be held to account.







When is Mr Demetriou going to put a end to this......terrible leadership on this issue....

Damian Drum says tanking in the AFL is a problem because it pays

Jon Ralph
Herald Sun
November 05, 2012 12:00AM

Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size
Print
Email

0
Damian Drum

Damian Drum heads back to the box after addressing his Fremantle players at Subiaco Oval. Picture: Ian Cugley. News Limited

THE first AFL coach accused of "list management" to gain priority picks says tanking will continue until the AFL removes such a huge incentive for failure. =D> =D>

Jurrah's benching scrutiny
Hasleby tips Bell to toll at Hall of Fame
Hasleby is the retiring type
Dockers' Hasleby calls it a day
Dockers veteran Hasleby calls it quits
Tanking flourishes at the top and bottom

Former Fremantle coach Damian Drum was at the centre of the infamous "Hasleby Game" in 1999, in which Geelong kicked the last 11 goals against the Dockers in Round 22, handing them a priority pick.

Dockers players remarked about their positional changes, but Drum was adamant the club did not deliberately lose the game.

He said he had been given a reminder by club president Ross McLean before the game that he must coach to win.

Perth boy Hasleby became the No.2 draft pick, but the extra pick enabled the Dockers to recruit No.4 selection Matthew Pavlich, who became one of the greats.

Now the National Party MP for Bendigo, Drum said he had a clear conscience about the game, but he said the system was broken and must be repaired.

"What we have is a flawed system that encourages teams to lose," Drum told the Herald Sun.

"The AFL have to look at it very carefully. While they continue to leave these serious inducements for losing, the system will always have conjecture.

"The AFL will be battling these allegations in two years time and four years and six years, and there will be suspicion over the performance of bottom clubs for as long as they leave these rules in place."

The league has since made it almost impossible for clubs to win a pre-draft priority pick, but struggling clubs starved of high picks in the expansion era still have huge incentives to finish on the bottom.

Drum favours a lottery system that means every club in the bottom eight has a chance at the first pick, with weightings given to the worst sides. (still rewarding failure)

In that much-scrutinised 1999 game Brodie Holland played on a half-back flank and Jess Sinclair back pocket - both for the first time - and commented on those moves post-match.

"Effectively you know what the stakes are from the result of that game," Drum said. "We were very, very clear we went out to win ... but the prize we got for not winning was Matthew Pavlich."

[Xman]

unless you get a confession its very hard to prove tanking since its based on performance. Up until mid year no one had owned up so previous investigations came up with nothing. The current investigation needs to be exhaustive since the accusation is serious but again the evidence is hard to measure.

Where as salary cap cheating can easily be proven just by looking through contracts and accounts so the investigation can be quite quick as has been the case for AFL salary cheating.

The reason the NRLs salary cap cheating was far worse than tanking is that it had a massive impact on other teams, especially the teams denied a premiership. Everyone would agree premierships are rare. Having one denied because of cheating, especially as extensive as the storm displayed was huge.

Where as Melbournes tanking impacted the competition by denying another team of pick 2 instead of 3 in the draft. Whoopie do...

The priority pick is only for teams that register few if any wins so they wouldnt have won many games anyway.

As for the AFL being uneven, thats irrelevant and only due to recent expansion. Itll even out in a few seasons

[piesman2011]

Which would you consider worse Eel? What Melbourne Storm did to your club or what Melbourne Demons (AFL) did to another cellar dweller? By taking a good player out of the draft? Whats your honest opinion? I wont grill you any more on the subject, I just would like to know.
By the way I agree that this investigation has taken a long time but until late this season there was no one comming forward to make any claims. I prefer they extensively investigate it and get the decision right even if they need to wait until next draft to penalise the demons.
As to the system being broke. The rules where changed going into the 2011 season so theres no extra draft picks for finishing with less then 6 wins any more.

[eelofwest]

Which would you consider worse Eel? What Melbourne Storm did to your club or what Melbourne Demons (AFL) did to another cellar dweller? By taking a good player out of the draft? Whats your honest opinion? I wont grill you any more on the subject, I just would like to know.
By the way I agree that this investigation has taken a long time but until late this season there was no one comming forward to make any claims. I prefer they extensively investigate it and get the decision right even if they need to wait until next draft to penalise the demons.
As to the system being broke. The rules where changed going into the 2011 season so theres no extra draft picks for finishing with less then 6 wins any more.

Honestly these 2 situations are both cheating, the Demons robed clubs that were in need of these draft picks so they are both cheaters but because the salary cap rorts effected my clubs fairytale run to the finals then i will be honest the cap rort for me was worse. But it begs the question Pies? If the Demons were tanking who else is tanking or has tanked in the AFL in years gone by? Truth is the AFL commission need to do a investigation into the last 20 years of the competition just to bring some credibility back, they have there fingers in there bums on this issue and rumblings are starting to come from the AFL public that Mr Andrew D should resign on this issue, his head has been firmly in the sand on this.

[Xman]

Which would you consider worse Eel? What Melbourne Storm did to your club or what Melbourne Demons (AFL) did to another cellar dweller? By taking a good player out of the draft? Whats your honest opinion? I wont grill you any more on the subject, I just would like to know.
By the way I agree that this investigation has taken a long time but until late this season there was no one comming forward to make any claims. I prefer they extensively investigate it and get the decision right even if they need to wait until next draft to penalise the demons.
As to the system being broke. The rules where changed going into the 2011 season so theres no extra draft picks for finishing with less then 6 wins any more.

Honestly these 2 situations are both cheating, the Demons robed clubs that were in need of these draft picks so they are both cheaters but because the salary cap rorts effected my clubs fairytale run to the finals then i will be honest the cap rort for me was worse. But it begs the question Pies? If the Demons were tanking who else is tanking or has tanked in the AFL in years gone by? Truth is the AFL commission need to do a investigation into the last 20 years of the competition just to bring some credibility back, they have there fingers in there bums on this issue and rumblings are starting to come from the AFL public that Mr Andrew D should resign on this issue, his head has been firmly in the sand on this.

the only real advantage of tanking is to gain an extra pick in the draft called a priority pick. This has only affected a few clubs before. So really, while its a serious issue and caused the AFL to change the rules, it hasn't occurred very often at all.

[Striker]

Except that Patricks definition of tanking is BS. Every team in any sport will experiment with their list and tactics once their chance of playing finals is gone. Its part of team development. The Australian cricket team play kids instead of established stars in minor matches. Is that tanking? No

So the storm won GFs after cheating the salary cap, yet the Demons have been near bottom after tanking. Hmm I wonder which tactic had the biggest effect on the comp?

Further, the Storm are still successful after being penalised. Clearly the penalty was a farce

The definition isn't BS. It's on the freaking money! Melbourne weren't experimenting! They were deliberately making it impossible for the team to play at it's best! If there were drugs involved you'd be spitting chips, and it's no different! That last remark proves how little you know about the Storm! Even without the idiots who paid a few players too much we would still have won those two flags! The Storm are succesful because we are THAT FREAKING GOOD!!

Yes, it appears Melbourne weren't just experimenting. But experimenting isnt tanking which is exactly what AD said.

The storms penalties did nothing significant to stop their future performances, they were retrospective only. SO they lost a year, they effectively got to keep the makings of a great team which they never would have developed if it werent for cheating. They are roundly hated by everyone bar Storm supporters and rightly so.

Experimenting?? They were doing no such freaking thing! They "say" they were, but we all know what they were REALLY doing!

The Storm would have developed a great team anyway. So yeah, taking the two flags away didn't really hurt us much. That's because it's not a big deal (salary cap breaches) compared to freaking tanking! Tanking is a lot worse because it's match fixing!

[Raiderdave]

so accusations of this disgraceful activity going back into the 90's !!!

what has the VFL done
NOTHING

what are they doing now
NOTHING

when will they get serious about their integrity
NEVER

why
look at the gooses posting in here .... why do they need to
their fans are **** the dumbest human beings on gods green earth

they don't need to do anything really , so they'll remain a corrupt organisation with their games & the results in them... fixed
& their brain washed fans will go on their merry way oblivious
bbaaaaaa
baaaaaaaaaaa

keep your children away from this vile sport
VFL.. truly our nations secret shame