you people can believe what you want, T viney will be nxt coach of the Demons, if we win 6games nxt season, the media will decide Baileys fate, just like Wallace and the rest of the sacked coaches.

No they dont. It might pay to actually understanding another view before slagging it.

I'm not sure what you're saying here - some people do.

Well I'm certainly accepting mediocrity right now as I type in response to your previous post.

I went on record as saying that I was uncomfortable with the way in which we finished the season and the obvious, almost embarrassing way in which we went about engineering losses. I'm trying very hard to accept that these were the actions of a ruthless club willing to exploit any rule or opportunity in a bid to fill the team with further draft talent. I've seen enough improvement in players like Frawley, Jamar, Garland, Morton and Jones to have a little faith in the ability of our coach to develop players. All of these guys were at the club before Bailey and all of them have improved in his time at the MFC.

So who are the players who've fumbled and turned over the footy who you think the coach has failed to develop properly? What should he have been doing? Who would you have replaced these players with?

The point in my previous post was simple. Celebrating the arrival of Scully and Watts is completely understandable but then having the temerity to turn around and question the means in which we went about gaining this young talent is naive. Don't tell me you're from the school of thought that suggests we didn't tank. How else can you single Bailey out for blame?

Good post GV.

I still cringe at the word "tank". I don't deny that our club experimented on occassions. After seeing other AFL teams go through the same predicament to advance and in essence in some cases survive, I can accept, what you're finding it hard to accept, that these were the actions of a ruthless club hell bent on filling the team with further draft talent. To get to where our club wants to go, and in part -more importantly- where the club's supporters and members want their club to go.

Edited December 7, 200916 yr by High Tower

After seeing other AFL teams go through the same predicament to advance and in essence in some cases survive, I can accept, what you're finding it hard to accept, that these were the actions of a ruthless club hell bent on filling the team with further draft talent.

I've accepted. I've moved on. I'm ready for 2010.

Can we get over the "T" word. It doesn't exist in the AFL, Demetriou says so.

Can we get over the "T" word. It doesn't exist in the AFL, Demetriou says so.

Yes, let's. From this point forth it will be known as the "E" word. After all the players gave 100%.

Yep, now that the Dees did it we can't call it tanking.

Yep, now that the Dees did it we can't call it tanking.

Jordan McMahon can.

Yes, let's. From this point forth it will be known as the "E" word. After all the players gave 100%.

It's a good point you make Hightower!

Whilst there is no doubt there was some creative field placings and resting of players in games last season ,something that can't be questioned is the effort given by the players. They go out to win every game and give 100% therefore for people to say the team "Tanked" is unfair to the players who certainly didn't.

Its worth remembering that its taken 7-8 years for the players St Kilda picked up when they were hopeless to be able to lead them to a position of serious challenger.

Could this mean that St Kilda persisted with the wrong coach for too long?

At this stage I have no idea if Dean Bailey can coach or teach. There has been improvement in players like Frawley and Grimes, but did anyone expect the young players not to improve in the first few years? The list has been turned over, but this does not tell us if Bailey is any good, is just shows that he has the guts to make the tough decisions.

I don't believe it is just luck that teams like Geelong, Brisbane, West Coast and Hawthorne have produced a long list of champions and won premierships in recent years. I believe Melbourne has had a problem developing star players over the last couple of generations of players. I'm not sure if it has been due to the training facilities, the staff or the culture, but it seems strange that Melbourne are probably the only Club in the competition not to produce a genuine superstar in the last ten years.

I like the things I'm hearing from Dean Bailey and especially Cam Schwabb. Hopefully those who believe that Bailey is a great teacher are correct and he will change this, and those good young players become great. However I hope that the club is going to have a good look at Baileys performance in the first half of this coming season, as I don't want to spend another ten years with a coach who was a nice bloke, but not up to the job.

The skill level and competitiveness of the team definitely improved from 2008 to 2009.The team was not far off the mark on quite a few occasions in 2009 as opposed to being nowhere near the mark on many occasions in 2008.

The next couple of seasons will be the indicator of whether we have the right coaching staff in place and they can only be judged properly if the club has a decent run with injury over those seasons.

It's a good point you make Hightower!

Whilst there is no doubt there was some creative field placings and resting of players in games last season ,something that can't be questioned is the effort given by the players. They go out to win every game and give 100% therefore for people to say the team "Tanked" is unfair to the players who certainly didn't.

My contention is that this type of thinking didn't come into place until Melbourne did it, therefore we've tried to weazel our way out of it.

My contention is that this type of thinking didn't come into place until Melbourne did it, therefore we've tried to weazel our way out of it.

Essentially I agree.

But we can use the Jordan McMahon after the siren kick win by Richmond as a good excuse to not "weazel our way out of it" next time we're in a pub discussing with opposition supporters, can't we ?

Edited December 8, 200916 yr by High Tower

I already have.

My contention is that this type of thinking didn't come into place until Melbourne did it, therefore we've tried to weazel our way out of it.

Not really ,it's just a fact. Players don't tank.

My contention is that this type of thinking didn't come into place until Melbourne did it, therefore we've tried to weazel our way out of it.

I think its not completely unfounded but we've unfairly copped an inordinate amount of criticism as the media has largely, until recently, ignored the topic of tanking.

The spotlight, for the last few seasons at least, has firmly focused on the worst-performing team in the competition, just as much as the best-performing team.

Everybody loves a conspiracy theory.

But it does, quite elegantly, teach us that to accuse another team of tanking is a huge call and is almost impossible at times (like when you play against richmond).

Carlton did cop it somewhat, but never as much as we have.

Funny thing is, opposition supporters, like sheep, until about round 15 would tell me how incredibly inept our team was (cos they read it in the heraldsun), then suddenly the tune changed and we were much better than our record showed and should have been winning games but we were 'cheating'.

Similar to the way many Melbourne fans labelled Carlton "Carltank." Well put KS.

Similar to the way many Melbourne fans labelled Carlton "Carltank." Well put KS.

Actually, i think the ideas are there but my post was a bit hard to read!

But yes, I can't find it in myself to accuse another team of tanking................ unless its an eagles supporter attacking us for last season.

Hypocrites.

Yeah I got what you were saying, I wasn't being sarcastic

Yeah I got what you were saying, I wasn't being sarcastic

Its alright, I understood.

I'm just trying to hold back on another tirade over why WCE should be scrutinized for tanking moreso than the MFC...

Yep, now that the Dees did it we can't call it tanking.

:D

Funny thing is, opposition supporters, like sheep, until about round 15 would tell me how incredibly inept our team was (cos they read it in the heraldsun), then suddenly the tune changed and we were much better than our record showed and should have been winning games but we were 'cheating'.

The same can be said for Melbourne supporters. From about Round 15, people here thought we were good enough to win, but didn't want to win. because we didn't win, some conclude that we were "tanking" on reflection...fact is, we simply were not good enough. They can't understand that players don't tank, yet refutably call it tanking. FD's can experiment, but players can't tank. Incredible. Think people.

fact is, we simply were not good enough. They can't understand that players don't tank, yet refutably call it tanking. FD's can experiment, but players can't tank. Incredible. Think people.

'Tanking' isn't limited to players.

'Tanking' isn't limited to players.

So in your opinion, does experimentation = tanking ?

So in your opinion, does experimentation = tanking ?

It can, sure. (You can also experiment without tanking).

Tanking is about intent. Experimentation is a tool you can use - it's a means to an end.