Will the tanking cheapen any future success?

[Nasher 33,616]

Wondering what people's thoughts are with this. If we have success in the future on the back of our prize for chucking games (Scully), do you think it will take some of the edge off it, knowing that the club manipulated the system?

[Deefender 232]

Nasher.

Do what has to be done.

Don't look back, only forwards.

Spare the supporters the brinkmanship of the

Richmond game.

Actually it's to the Dees advantage to tank to

such a degree that Demetriou finally puts

an end to priority picks. Meaning of course that

we were the last to have such a benefit.

[Nasher 33,616]

I'm very much in the pro-tank camp, deefender, and I agree with everything you've just said. However I had someone mention a contrary opinion recently and was wondering how others felt about it.

[CarnTheDees 52]

I was there yesterday, and if (hopefully) we have Tom Scully with a Norm Smith medal around his neck in 5 years then we will all know that it was because in this game Bailey did everything possible to lose.

So my response is - sort of.

[beelzebub 23,376]

success is often built from failure. I will have no compunction enjoying the cup raised and fully knowing it was aided by judicious application of a system not of our doing.

[dee-luded 2,959]

Wondering what people's thoughts are with this. If we have success in the future on the back of our prize for chucking games (Scully), do you think it will take some of the edge off it, knowing that the club manipulated the system?

Yes, I fear it will, If it happens onfield in an obvious way. It must be done as list management, early in the week, via the selection table.

Not out on the ground, where everyone is now putting the microscope on it, after Carltank invented it, & West Coast were employing it. They got shot down, fresh out of the sky.

[AzzKikA 2,371]

Yes, BUT WHO CARES!!!!!!!!!! So long as the future success is a flag.

[Jarka 767]

Nash, not wanting to be cynical about your thread but every recent GF win has had some sort of extra benefit above and beyond the normal drafting processes, do you think any of their supporters believe their success was cheapened?

Hawthorn - Clearly tanked, sold off senior players for extra draft picks, played their kids and was rewared with Buddy and Roughhead

Geelong - Probably the only 'clean' team however their father/son selections more than made up for it.

Port Adelaide - Benefited from the generous concessions they received when they entered the AFL

West Coast - Got Judd via a pp and Cousins via father/son

Sydney - Zone selections and extra salary cap room

Brisbane - Zone selections, extra salary cap room, priority picks and were given the carcass of the Fitzroy Football Club to pick through

Essendon - Matty Lloyd was a gift for off loading 3 duds to Freo, they had their choice of the best underage talent before the draft.

On top of this St.Kilda, Bulldogs, Collingwood and Carlton have all strengthened their list by taking a dip at the well that is the pp system. Why should we feel bad about it?

[Akum 2,660]

Wondering what people's thoughts are with this. If we have success in the future on the back of our prize for chucking games (Scully), do you think it will take some of the edge off it, knowing that the club manipulated the system?

Sorry to spoil the party, but I don't think we did chuck the game. If McMahon had kicked to his usual standard (10 out of 14 disposals ineffective), we would have won. If we tabnked, we must be the only side in history that plays better when we're trying to lose!!!

Tanking to me means what you've said - chucking the game, playing with the sole purpose of trying to lose. Nothing that happened yesterday was tanking under that definition. Even before PPs, clubs with no chance of making the finals would always experiment with players in different positions, especially if the "orthodox" line-up was doing badly, because they might learn something useful about their players for the future. But this isn't playing to lose, FCS.

I thought we learned a lot yesterday. For example, Griomes and Petterd marked themselves down as two that will stand up when the going gets tough.

And if we'd won, the moves of Frawley & Warnock forward would have been matchwinning. It's by no means unusual for sides to win games by shifting a tough defender into an ineffective forward line. I bet anything that when we're in the top 4 in a few years' time, this very move will win us an important game against a top side.

It would have been much more suspicious of tanking if DB had not made any changes and left Newton & Miller on the forward line & PJ in the ruck. That's the only tactic that would have guaranteed a loss.

But having said all of that, I'm still hugely relieved that we lost. But we didn't lose because we played to lose - we lost because we were very unlucky - or I should say very lucky!

[Adam The God 30,259]

Nope, wouldn't give it a second thought. Carlton are a dirty bunch, but I can tell you right now, they couldn't give a rats about 2007.

[Pello 1]

Sorry to spoil the party, but I don't think we did chuck the game. If McMahon had kicked to his usual standard (10 out of 14 disposals ineffective), we would have won. If we tabnked, we must be the only side in history that plays better when we're trying to lose!!!

Tanking to me means what you've said - chucking the game, playing with the sole purpose of trying to lose. Nothing that happened yesterday was tanking under that definition. Even before PPs, clubs with no chance of making the finals would always experiment with players in different positions, especially if the "orthodox" line-up was doing badly, because they might learn something useful about their players for the future. But this isn't playing to lose, FCS.

I thought we learned a lot yesterday. For example, Griomes and Petterd marked themselves down as two that will stand up when the going gets tough.

And if we'd won, the moves of Frawley & Warnock forward would have been matchwinning. It's by no means unusual for sides to win games by shifting a tough defender into an ineffective forward line. I bet anything that when we're in the top 4 in a few years' time, this very move will win us an important game against a top side.

It would have been much more suspicious of tanking if DB had not made any changes and left Newton & Miller on the forward line & PJ in the ruck. That's the only tactic that would have guaranteed a loss.

But having said all of that, I'm still hugely relieved that we lost. But we didn't lose because we played to lose - we lost because we were very unlucky - or I should say very lucky!

Yesterday was well and truly tanking from the coaching box. The players had a real crack and you could see and feel their disappointment after the game.

Experimentation is one thing but forwards to back, backs to forward, ruckman to backline, centre half forward to ruck, and Newton who has played most of his short career as full forward left on the wing for most of the day - come on. Let's get fair dinkum - Bailey was tanking and I congratulate him for it. It needed to be done for the long term benefit of the MFC. The problem was that Richmond were so bloody useless that notwithstanding all of the "help" we were giving them they nearly lost the unloseable game.

However, whilst I agree with the tactic I do have one big concern though and I'd be interested in others views on this. How does Bailey front up to his players and show leadership, gain respect and continue to motivate them in the future when players who have had a red hot go know that they were not supported in their efforts by the coaches who used them like pawns on a chess board to manufacture a loss? This issue worries me and I hope that Bailey doesn't "lose" the players over this who may no longer trust the coaching panel or lose some respect. What do you think?

[diesel 420]

Wondering what people's thoughts are with this. If we have success in the future on the back of our prize for chucking games (Scully), do you think it will take some of the edge off it, knowing that the club manipulated the system?

Nasher, I usually enjoy your comments but I think you are way off the mark accusing us of "chucking games" or "manipulating the system". The system is what it is and was established by the AFL, not us. It is designed to move clubs up and down the ladder in cycles and when you are at the bottom and out of finals contention you have to develop what you have for the future, not the right now.

The predicament we are in now leaves the club open to questions but why is Miller in the centre square seen as "tanking", whereas Merrett in Brisbanes forward line is a "good set up, structurally " and Hawkins in the ruck is seen as a way to "give him confidence" as two examples from recent weekends.

I will feel no guilt in a few years if we are flying (or loosing) and Ricky Petterd is asked to play in the middle or Grimes forward because I will know that in 2009 they were tried in these postions and will have the confidence and ability to play in them again.

Edited August 3, 2009 by diesel

[rpfc 28,430]

Nah.

My comfort in what DB is doing comes from the fact that the tactics of tanking have been used since DB's first game in charge - playing Garland and Weetra. Nevermind the fact Garland gives YM wet dreams, at that time both boys were, in the eyes of 75% of supporters, delist material.

DB is just stepping it up a notch in a vital three week period which culminates this weekend in the last tanking game.

Then we can all get a little less tense and enjoy the final 3 weeks of the season.

[Guest Rojik of the Arctic]

No. Couldn't care less. The same way I wouldn't care less if we got it from dodgy free kick, or a point that was called a goal. My problem with tank is that it robs me of watching my team win games now over a "maybe" future success.

[pantaloons 2,019]

It absolutely staggers me that there will be at least five Melbourne supporters who, if Melbourne wins the flag within the next few years, will be too busy lamenting our list management of 2008-09 to enjoy the premiership.

[Al`s DEMONS 0]

Nash, not wanting to be cynical about your thread but every recent GF win has had some sort of extra benefit above and beyond the normal drafting processes, do you think any of their supporters believe their success was cheapened?

Hawthorn - Clearly tanked, sold off senior players for extra draft picks, played their kids and was rewared with Buddy and Roughhead

Geelong - Probably the only 'clean' team however their father/son selections more than made up for it.

Port Adelaide - Benefited from the generous concessions they received when they entered the AFL

West Coast - Got Judd via a pp and Cousins via father/son

Sydney - Zone selections and extra salary cap room

Brisbane - Zone selections, extra salary cap room, priority picks and were given the carcass of the Fitzroy Football Club to pick through

Essendon - Matty Lloyd was a gift for off loading 3 duds to Freo, they had their choice of the best underage talent before the draft.

On top of this St.Kilda, Bulldogs, Collingwood and Carlton have all strengthened their list by taking a dip at the well that is the pp system. Why should we feel bad about it?

you just nailed it mate

[dee-luded 2,959]

Nash, not wanting to be cynical about your thread but every recent GF win has had some sort of extra benefit above and beyond the normal drafting processes, do you think any of their supporters believe their success was cheapened?

Hawthorn - Clearly tanked, sold off senior players for extra draft picks, played their kids and was rewared with Buddy and Roughhead

Geelong - Probably the only 'clean' team however their father/son selections more than made up for it.

Port Adelaide - Benefited from the generous concessions they received when they entered the AFL

West Coast - Got Judd via a pp and Cousins via father/son

Sydney - Zone selections and extra salary cap room

Brisbane - Zone selections, extra salary cap room, priority picks and were given the carcass of the Fitzroy Football Club to pick through

Essendon - Matty Lloyd was a gift for off loading 3 duds to Freo, they had their choice of the best underage talent before the draft.

On top of this St.Kilda, Bulldogs, Collingwood and Carlton have all strengthened their list by taking a dip at the well that is the pp system. Why should we feel bad about it?

Jeez, you forgot the biggest one of all, Carl$ton, white anting everyones players with brown paper bags full of goodies. Year after year.

[Vipercrunch 2,827]

I've decided to live in my own little world of make believe where all our football related decisions in the last few years would have been made exactly the same if there was no such thing as Priority Picks and the draft order was unrelated to ladder psition. Therefore, I will be able celebrate any future sucess with a clear mind.

[olgreydingo 51]

Are you kidding. Has anyone questioned, St kilda with 9 top ten draft picks in their current side, the Dawks with their 5 picks in the top 20 to get Ruffnut and Franklin an Co a few years ago, was the same scrutiny on Carltank two years ago what the media is giving us, Essendon cheating the salary cap that won them a flag, and so on. Give us a frigin break, Im so sick of it. if any opposition supporters complain, let them look in their own backyard first!! :angry:

[45HG 1,539]

Ha.

I'm actually proud that my team is taking itself seriously enough to build for a flag. We're not fluttering around the bottom half of the 8, happy for any decent press we may receive along the way and content to make up the numbers.

We are backing ourselves to be good enough to win the competition.

With all the other disadvantages we have, this is one way we can get a leg up.

[Sir Why You Little 37,038]

The football department did a top job yesterday. Last night i slept like a baby.

Bailey did not cheat yesterday-He used the game wisely to gauge more information about future player positions.

It is not in our best interests to gain premiership points at the minute-that is a fact.

Stop insinuating that some form of cheating took place

We have lost over 50 games in 3 years.We need Top Draft Picks to assist in climbing the ladder.

If we don't get them they will be used against us.

It;s our turn & it's just in time.

[Jaded No More 68,915]

It absolutely staggers me that there will be at least five Melbourne supporters who, if Melbourne wins the flag within the next few years, will be too busy lamenting our list management of 2008-09 to enjoy the premiership.

Agreed.

Not many, if any other club in the competition, has to overcome as many obstacles as we do to win a premiership.

The priority picks that we will receive at the end of the year will be the result of us being genuinely poor for three years, and what happened yesterday was done within the rules of the game. We have done absolutely nothing wrong.

When we win a flag, it will not be tainted in any way shape or form, it will be an f'ing miracle and well deserved for a club that has had to overcome everything from debt to death to get to the top.

[flog 20]

Bailey did not cheat yesterday-He used the game wisely to gauge more information about future player positions.

Stop insinuating that some form of cheating took place

agree that we didn't cheat but come on mate, gauging information about future player postions. Your not on the match commitee are you?

[Yze_Magic 3]

Not your best work Nasher.

[beelzebub 23,376]

manipulate, exploit, take advantage of, play for own ends : exactly what we should always be doing. We arent in this for the benefit of other teams are we ?

whats next...card counting wrong ?? lol