VFL fines Demons 500K for ... ah .... not tanking !!

[Xman]

Find another definition? Ah what I came up with was a comprehensive and adequate definition. What you sourced was a minimal and inadequate definition from a land far far far away. Yep fantasy land Xman, that's where you're livin right now.

Its your definition! at least I found another Independant source My source was simple yes, but so is the definition of tanking.

Yesss Xman we all agree it is a well recognised tactic in many sports. But ahhh Melbourne weren't trying to "develop the teams skills and unsettle the opposition" now were they? They were quite simply, trying to lose, as you said in your prior post

It wasnt Melbourne. It was Connelly and Bailey. They were trying to increase the chances of losing. They cant make the team lose because they dont take the field.

Or in other words they TANKED to HIGH HELL. They Tankeddy tanked tanked for many moons didnt they. And, as pies, and my fellow Leaugies have enlightened us, the AFL came up with some dodgy compromise to make it all look sorta ok. Which Xman has apparently fallen hook line and sinker for

Ah no they didnt. Tanking is losing on purpose. Pretty hard to do when the players who actually represent the club are trying to win.

It's my definition? Ah sorry Xman I didnt come up with it. I sourced it off the net, like you did with yours. Difference being mine was from a source directly related to the AFL's tanking episodes. Yours? To an American Slang dictionary

It wasnt melboure it was connolly and bailey? They cant make the team lose? Ummmm I think that's terribly consistent with your normal lamo take on things. Connolly and Bailey were head honchos at Melbourne. They pulled the strings so to speak. They basically ran the Melbourne squad... yes the players were their puppets. Have you seen how many games melb won that season? I think it was 3 or four. Looks like it wasnt "pretty hard to do" for good ol Connelly and Bailey to me

Quite simply Melbourne tanked. Or as Xman would prefer they cheated, lied, deceived and corrupted the team/players, the club, their fans, and the entire code

Why should the current Melbourne team be punished for bailey and connellys behaviou?

Your tanking definition is a single persons interpretation. That's not valid, its bias.

Find a legitimate definition of tanking before claiming theyre guilty. How can they be guilty of an offence that isnt clearly defined?

The players didnt cheat. The fans didnt cheat. The board didnt cheat. The coach and Connelly cheated and they were punished were they not?

[King-Eliagh]

Why should the current Melbourne team be punished for bailey and connellys behaviou?

This is a bit off the cuff here Xman... What are you getting at? The Melbourne team received extra high draft pickies. Sure the players MAY not have been involved but the fact of the matter is the club cheated, lied, deceived and corrupted the entire code. I think that's grounds for punishing the club dont you? Sure two folk orchestrated it but the fact is the club benefited and the code lost cred. Comprehende?

Your tanking definition is a single persons interpretation. That's not valid, its bias.

Ohhhh Xman .... How many people wrote that american slang dictionary? You seriously have no idea what is valid and bias. Bias is traveling 15thousand odd k's over several oceans to find a meaning which suits your own purposes. Which, via the internet, is what you've done. Clear as day American slang dictionary indeed! Me on the other hand? I found a local objective relevant and valid definition, developed right in the heartland of tank city i.e. melbourne

The players didnt cheat. The fans didnt cheat. The board didnt cheat. The coach and Connelly cheated and they were punished were they not?

See my answer to quote one On your ridiculous notion, the melbourne storm didnt cheat neither You wanna come out and tell us the storm didnt cheat Xman? Please, if you do, make a nice shiny new thread for it because it's a new topic And I'm sure you'd cop a thrashing from fellow RL supporters on that one as well.

Seriously Xman, I think it's time you save face and get back to your attempts to take striker on. You're copping an absolute drubbing here my friend. There's nothing you can do and you're being repeatedly punished

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_6q_TfvWqvc[/video]

Someone stop the fight!

[Xman]

This is a bit off the cuff here Xman... What are you getting at? The Melbourne team received extra high draft pickies. Sure the players MAY not have been involved but the fact of the matter is the club cheated, lied, deceived and corrupted the entire code. I think that's grounds for punishing the club dont you? Sure two folk orchestrated it but the fact is the club benefited and the code lost cred. Comprehende?

No. The entire club did not participate in tanking. The only wrong doing was performed by the coach and connelly who tried to cheat.

Ohhhh Xman .... How many people wrote that american slang dictionary? You seriously have no idea what is valid and bias. Bias is traveling 15thousand odd k's over several oceans to find a meaning which suits your own purposes. Which, via the internet, is what you've done. Clear as day American slang dictionary indeed! Me on the other hand? I found a local objective relevant and valid definition, developed right in the heartland of tank city i.e. melbourne

Youre carrying on like tanking is a well defined term that agrees with your definition. This is BS! Its very much open for interpretation and as far as Im concerned is used for delivberately losing. Just like we saw with the badminton players in the olympics. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-08-02/b ... il/4172032

The deliberate "tanking" by the Chinese top seeds, two teams from South Korea, and an Indonesian pair was booed by the crowd at London's Wembley Arena and was ridiculed by the Olympics' global audience. The practice of throwing a match in order to score an easier place in the knockout stages is not isolated to badminton, but, according to today's Olympians like Denmark's Christinna Pedersen, the sport is rife with it.

there you go, tanking according to many news reports about this incident is deliberately throwing a match. This was obviously not the actions of the Melbourne Demons because the players were playing to win. Where as the badminton players were playing to lose.

See my answer to quote one On your ridiculous notion, the melbourne storm didnt cheat neither You wanna come out and tell us the storm didnt cheat Xman? Please, if you do, make a nice shiny new thread for it because it's a new topic And I'm sure you'd cop a thrashing from fellow RL supporters on that one as well.

Seriously Xman, I think it's time you save face and get back to your attempts to take striker on. You're copping an absolute drubbing here my friend. There's nothing you can do and you're being repeatedly punished

The storm were punished because as a club they won the premiership using an illegal team which was arranged due to breaking the rules. they deserved punishment. The Demons may have secured an extra draft pick but not through illegal actions because they did not deliberately lose. They had two staff who attempted to make their losses more likely and they were punished accordingly, but the rest of the club didnt cheat.

[King-Eliagh]

Oh dear Xman. The entire club is accountable as it was in line to benefit from the cheating of the big wigs. The big wigs represent a club more than the players. The players are simply their puppets. As I said Bailey and Connolly pulled the stings of the entire club. To use your words exactly

The demons were punished because as a club they lost the premiership to get extra draft pickies using an illegal team which was arranged due to breaking the rules. they deserved punishment.

You are completely bamboozling yourself here Xman. I dont even barely have to type no more to highlight what a confused buffoon you are

As for your tanking definition its the most simple simon definition I've seen and in no way accounts for the complex ways in which teams can tank. You show no understanding of sporting organisations and hierarchy and the imact those in positions of power have over an entire club. You sir, are the prototype confused buffoon :_<>

[eelofwest]

Melbourne Storm CEO was the only man aware and cheating at the Melbourne Storm yet the whole club was whacked.

NRL = credibility

AFL = Lettuce leaf/orchestrated theater company......

[Beaussie]

Melbourne Storm CEO was the only man aware and cheating at the Melbourne Storm yet the whole club was whacked.

Yeah right. So the players didn't know why they signed two different contracts and received many inducements from third parties.

NRL and credibility

[King-Eliagh]

By the same token Beaussie, you think the Melbourne Demons players didnt have a sniff of what was going on?

Xman now pick up your sox! Be consistent you silly fool and start up a post saying the storm didnt cheat, it was their ceo

[Xman]

By the same token Beaussie, you think the Melbourne Demons players didnt have a sniff of what was going on?

Xman now pick up your sox! Be consistent you silly fool and start up a post saying the storm didnt cheat, it was their ceo

Who cares if Melbourne demon players knew. The players didnt cheat. They went out and played to win.

The storm players won the GF knowing they were paid above the salary cap because they signed two contracts!

[Xman]

Oh dear Xman. The entire club is accountable as it was in line to benefit from the cheating of the big wigs. The big wigs represent a club more than the players. The players are simply their puppets. As I said Bailey and Connolly pulled the stings of the entire club. To use your words exactly

The demons were punished because as a club they lost the premiership to get extra draft pickies using an illegal team which was arranged due to breaking the rules. they deserved punishment.

You are completely bamboozling yourself here Xman. I dont even barely have to type no more to highlight what a confused buffoon you are

As for your tanking definition its the most simple simon definition I've seen and in no way accounts for the complex ways in which teams can tank. You show no understanding of sporting organisations and hierarchy and the imact those in positions of power have over an entire club. You sir, are the prototype confused buffoon :_<>

It aint only my definition KE, or can't you read? the media for the olympics all used the word tanking to describe the badminton players who deliberately lost games to get a better draw.

Want to read it one more time?

[King-Eliagh]

You goose. Thousands upon thousands of people have used the definition I've used. Pretty much everyone on this forum, bar you uses my definition

[King-Eliagh]

By the same token Beaussie, you think the Melbourne Demons players didnt have a sniff of what was going on?

Xman now pick up your sox! Be consistent you silly fool and start up a post saying the storm didnt cheat, it was their ceo

Who cares if Melbourne demon players knew. The players didnt cheat. They went out and played to win.

The storm players won the GF knowing they were paid above the salary cap because they signed two contracts!

You dont know whether you're arthur or marthur right now do you Xman Those AFL players went out knowing if they tried their best they'd still lose. Their were players who were happy to not take part in a game, to 'restup/tank it up' so to speak when they knew they could play. Ohhhh the shame. 500 thousand k worth. And it shoulda been more!

Now stop getting off topic and be consistent and post up the storm didnt cheat!

[Xman]

You goose. Thousands upon thousands of people have used the definition I've used. Pretty much everyone on this forum, bar you uses my definition

Thousands......

Quote them then......

[King-Eliagh]

Its simple logic Xman. Everyone bar you on this forum admits and acknowledges melb tanked. Therefore they agree with my definition. On other forums there's a plenty also who follow this def. I actually got the def off an AFL forum .Then we've got the press and AFL personell who've stated the demons tanked. They also would agree with my def. It's prob in the hundreds of thousands actually. :D

[Xman]

Its simple logic Xman. Everyone bar you on this forum admits and acknowledges melb tanked. Therefore they agree with my definition. On other forums there's a plenty also who follow this def. I actually got the def off an AFL forum .Then we've got the press and AFL personell who've stated the demons tanked. They also would agree with my def. It's prob in the hundreds of thousands actually. :D

People are entitled to their opinion. You believe not trying to win is tanking. I believe deliberately losing is tanking. You have other sports fans in your corner. I have sports writers in mine.

Melbourne didnt deliberately lose, thats all I care about. Whether they didnt their hardest to win is a common practice in sport, especially in dead rubbers, in the name of development. If Connelly and Bailey used additional motives as a reason then they deserve punishment which is what they got.

WHere's the problem?

[King-Eliagh]

Its simple logic Xman. Everyone bar you on this forum admits and acknowledges melb tanked. Therefore they agree with my definition. On other forums there's a plenty also who follow this def. I actually got the def off an AFL forum .Then we've got the press and AFL personell who've stated the demons tanked. They also would agree with my def. It's prob in the hundreds of thousands actually. :D

People are entitled to their opinion. You believe not trying to win is tanking. I believe deliberately losing is tanking. You have other sports fans in your corner. I have sports writers in mine.

Melbourne didnt deliberately lose, thats all I care about. Whether they didnt their hardest to win is a common practice in sport, especially in dead rubbers, in the name of development. If Connelly and Bailey used additional motives as a reason then they deserve punishment which is what they got.

WHere's the problem?

Sports writers More sports writers adhere to my definition I'll bet. And well, given the AFL's mammoth fine on the melbourne club, I'd say the organisation you preach about also adhere's to my definition. though its bad pr and they'd much prefer a dodgy compromise on the details of what melbourne did, the fine and melbournes unflinching acceptance of the fine tells the whole story. That is it tells the story for folk who have the ability to read between the lines. Unfortunately Xman, you're not wise enough to do that yet. But one day sonny. One day you'll see the light

And again with the common practice in sport baloney When oh when will you see that everytime you say that you are completely utterly and publicly trumped by the fact melbourne were NOT doing this for the same reasons. They were doing it to get high draft pickies. Therefore tanking can clearly be used to define what they did, and rightly so. :D Trrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrumped I tells ya!