On the Couch - Brock talks about 'tanking'

[DeeZee 7,425]

But it was Healy who fired the first shot and why I thought it was so contrived. He fired off with "are you talking about tanking, Brock"?

Gerard Healy is as weak as [censored] too. Can't believe he once played for the Dee's.

I cant stand Healy.....probably one of my most hated ex Demons behind Scully and Mclean.

[Roost It 1,434]

Even if you're right now isn't the time to do it. Now is the time to batten down the hatches and show that we'll only march to the beat of our own drum. Can we stand firm ?

Stand Firm on what. The hatches are broken, the drum needs a new skin and we're standing neck deep in our own [censored]. We just spent 6 years playing rubbish football and collecting prized picks only to seriously underspend on the football department, who were the very people deciding on who to pick. FFS Cale Morton, Jordan Gysberts, James Strauss, Tom Scully, Sam Blease, Luke Tapscott, Jack Trengove, Adam Maric, Lucas Cook are all top picks in strong drafts. I bought into the excitement. I backed these guys to take us forward. It wasn't the first time we've been sold a [censored] sandwich by this club and I doubt it will be the last. I'm a firm believer that it's time we cut some deadwood from the top of this club. They are clearly not up to the challenge.

[Jaded No More 68,966]

I actually think Paul Johnson has helped our cause with that article.

He never said we went out trying to lose, but that player development was our main focus, and making players more versatile in the long run.

That's not in any way illegal or against the spirit of the game.

The way we've developed some players this year, only goes to prove this. Players playing in multiple positions to try and fill gaps and develop their skills.

We were sh*t, the worst team in the league by far. We spent 1 game actively manipulating the play to try and lose, and we still nearly stuffed it up.

They can't prove anything, and the only way this blows up in our faces is if people with serious agendas against us, are trying to bring the club down.

[Guest fitness]

I simply cannot fathom what the story is in all this, other than Brock revealing this culture as the primary reason for him leaving the MFC?

Of course we (the club) were tanking. But surely, rightly or wrongly, the club administration and the coaching panel are entitled to make whatever decisions they want in regard to list management, player selections, moves during games etc. Players like Brock may not have liked it, but like GWS they clearly took a long term view of the club and the list.

All it sounds like to me is that the AFL are yet again being reactionary because a couple of journos have jumped up and down rehashing a story that has been widely known for years, among numerous clubs. What a joke "they are investigating". Haha.

If you run it through to conclusion you realise all these journos are trying to do is push for some kind of punitive action to be taken against the MFC. But when you lay it all out on the table, what rules could the the MFC have possibly broken to be penalised for?

I find the whole thing laughable.

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

What Brock said was true. Whys everyone shooting the messenger? If people think this year has been our lowest, you've obviously forgotten the indignity of following a club throwing matches and supporters cheering losses. I agree with Brock as it also went against everything I believed in as well.

Provide indisputable proof that Melbourne deliberately lost games. Not that winning wasn't a top priority, but that Melbourne actively tried to lose.

[Range Rover 1,935]

I simply cannot fathom what the story is in all this, other than Brock revealing this culture as the primary reason for him leaving the MFC?

The story is that there are some very pi$$ed off people who would like to see Melbourne stripped of our draft picks, Cameron Schwab sacked and Neeld's tenure doomed to failure.

Putting it simply, it's about bruised egos, revenge and money.

[Pipefitter 2,163]

Provide indisputable proof that Melbourne deliberately lost games. Not that winning wasn't a top priority, but that Melbourne actively tried to lose.

There are different ways that a coach can make winning a harder thing for the team. Less interchange rotations, playing players in different positions, sending players off to surgery, taking players off for extended periods when they were kicking too many goals, playing ball winners (Mclean) as forward pockets. All of these things happened. We tanked, we all know it.

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

There are different ways that a coach can make winning a harder thing for the team. Less interchange rotations, playing players in different positions, sending players off to surgery, taking players off for extended periods when they were kicking too many goals, playing ball winners (Mclean) as forward pockets. All of these things happened. We tanked, we all know it.

So Fremantle tanked when they rested their 10 best players against the Hawks in 2010?

[Pipefitter 2,163]

So Fremantle tanked when they rested their 10 best players against the Hawks in 2010?

I don't care about freo, or carlton, or whatever. I care about our club. I didn't agree with what we are doing at the time, and i still don't.

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

I don't care about freo, or carlton, or whatever. I care about our club. I didn't agree with what we are doing at the time, and i still don't.

But what we did (playing some players out of position to try new things) is what every team does. Why is that bad?

The point is you can't prove that Melbourne deliberately lost games, unless there is an email or The News of the World suddenly come back to life which clearly states that Melbourne wanted to lose.

[Pipefitter 2,163]

But what we did (playing some players out of position to try new things) is what every team does. Why is that bad?

The point is you can't prove that Melbourne deliberately lost games, unless there is an email or The News of the World suddenly come back to life which clearly states that Melbourne wanted to lose.

Which thankfully will help us not lose draft picks this year. It can't be proved. It would need some sort of leaked document of board room directive on the coach, which isn't going to happen. But i think we all knew what happened.

[DeeVoted 583]

One common demoninator here. One brother just recently on the MFC board, the other in the media.

Did one get info on what went on behind closed doors then flap their gums, at the family luncheon and suddenly its in the media again??

Just putting 2 and 2 together. Seems a bit odd after all this time Mclean suddendly gets quizzed on the matter.

Edited August 1, 2012 by Deevoted

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

Which thankfully will help us not lose draft picks this year. It can't be proved. It would need some sort of leaked document of board room directive on the coach, which isn't going to happen. But i think we all knew what happened.

To be honest I agree, during the Bailey years I was sick of tired on the focus on the future, ignoring the present. The idea that with a few draft picks everything would just fall into place.

My only gripe is that people (not necessarily yourself) use the playing players out of position as proof. And that all it takes is a dumb bogan in McLean to get sucked in and make an ill-informed comment for everyone to start laying the boot into the club for the 100th time this year.

[nutbean 8,838]

There are different ways that a coach can make winning a harder thing for the team. Less interchange rotations, playing players in different positions - like Rivers to Full Forward, Garland to centre half forward, Watts to CHB and Bate as a mid fielder, sending players off to surgery like we have done with a good number of players this season, taking players off for extended periods when they were kicking too many goals - we interchange any player that kicks a goal, playing ball winners (Mclean) as forward pockets like playing ball magnets like James Magner and Tom couch for periods of time as forward pockets . All of these things happened. We tanked, we all know it.

I think we are still tanking.

Edited July 31, 2012 by nutbean

[McQueen 17,865]

There's more damage in this article from Gardner.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/143205/default.aspx

[jayceebee31 761]

There's more damage in this article from Gardner.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/143205/default.aspx

This bloke in my opinion should be barred, his membership,if he has one should be either suspended or cancelled.

[Undeeterred 3,124]

There's more damage in this article from Gardner.

http://www.afl.com.a...05/default.aspx

Starting to become an opporunity for every person in the football world who has a gripe with Melbourne to have a ping.

Disgraceful behaviour from a former President - can you imagine John Elliott coming out and spilling the beans like that?

[Sir Why You Little 37,052]

There's more damage in this article from Gardner.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/143205/default.aspx

Fair comments by Gardner IMO.

[Satan 2,872]

I hear brock is claiming the badminton is being tanked in london

[stinga81 210]

This bloke in my opinion should be barred, his membership,if he has one should be either suspended or cancelled.

I've had the unfortunate situation a couple of times of sitting in front of him at the footy in the members, the way he rambles on and [censored] and moans about players and the former club he use to be head of, is embarrassing. The bloke has no class, and is bitter and twisted at that.

[daisycutter 29,622]

There's more damage in this article from Gardner.

http://www.afl.com.a...05/default.aspx

So, gardner is saying that Daniher was tanking?

This is certainly a new twist......or did I read it wrong?

[McQueen 17,865]

Fair comments by Gardner IMO.

Whatever peels the skin from your banana, wyl. Most normal people would consider this to be totally unwarranted given his previous position with the club.

[jayceebee31 761]

I actually think Paul Johnson has helped our cause with that article.

He never said we went out trying to lose, but that player development was our main focus, and making players more versatile in the long run.

That's not in any way illegal or against the spirit of the game.

The way we've developed some players this year, only goes to prove this. Players playing in multiple positions to try and fill gaps and develop their skills.

We were sh*t, the worst team in the league by far. We spent 1 game actively manipulating the play to try and lose, and we still nearly stuffed it up.

They can't prove anything, and the only way this blows up in our faces is if people with serious agendas against us, are trying to bring the club down.

Don't you mean Paul Gardner, not, Paul Johnson.If indeed, it was Johnson, what did he say. I haven't heard anything.My apologies to you Jaded,I have since read Johnson's article in the Age.

Edited August 1, 2012 by jayceebee31

[Sir Why You Little 37,052]

Whatever peels the skin from your banana, wyl. Most normal people would consider this to be totally unwarranted given his previous position with the club.

What is he saying that you disagree with? We all clapped and cheered when it happened.

[McQueen 17,865]

So, gardner is saying that Daniher was tanking?

This is certainly a new twist......or did I read it wrong?

Cameron left at the end of '07.

Gardner had half a season with Bailey.