On the Couch - Brock talks about 'tanking'

[Sir Why You Little 34,658]

BS. Revisionism. Just another case of WYL going off half-cocked on these boards.

I beg your pardon? Head out of the sand HT 2008 was year one..

[rpfc 27,573]

Ask Dean Bailey. I am sure he will have specific dates...

You are either willingly not comprehending when we 'tanked' or you just don't know what 'tanking' is.

Either way you are as frustrating as a jam jar that you can't open and you hurt your hands trying to open even though you could have just walked over and got the rubber gloves out from under the sink but you were too lazy to.

That is how frustrating you have been of late.

[old55 21,402]

FMD, why do you feed this idiot?

If a top official at the MFC has instructed the coach to tank, we deserve whatever we get as a club and that official should be taken to court.

Back in 2008 i knew what they were doing, so did we all. I had a lot of trouble agreeing with it.

But you did agree with it:

http://demonland.com/forums/index.php?/topic/16100-what-is-the-essence-of-a-football-clubs-existence/page__st__175#entry253045

What is Wrong with finding out whether a few young kids can Hack the Battle, near the end of the season when all is done, & the club is already planning out the next Pre season & season Proper?

Why do many People Perceive This as cheating? I call it knowing all the pieces on your chess board. Being Smart.

Cheating is Rorting the Salary Cap or Performance Enhancing Drugs.

Please do not put our Footy Dept in those Categories

http://demonland.com/forums/index.php?/topic/16027-the-t-word/#entry250849

I am totally with you man,don't know whether i will even attend the last few games, as Barracking for a loss is just not right. But I want those 2 Draft Picks at melbourne as my Christmas Present.

I will get over the next 6 confusing weeks if we can start Winning Regulairly next year.

[Hannibal 5,814]

He has overseen a failed rebuild and as CEO must take responsibility.

Footy is such a game of inches. At the end of 2006 the Geelong Board was in favour of terminating Mark Thompson, but he got a lucky reprieve. If he'd got the chop, Brian Cook, the then (and now) CEO, after 7 years at the helm would have presided over a failed rebuild. The opposite is now true.

John Worsfold only kept his job after their spoon because he had a year to run on his contract. He's now in a healthy position.

The Saints win a flag if not for a heartbreaking bounce of the ball.

Life and sport can be so fickle.

[Sir Why You Little 34,658]

FMD, why do you feed this idiot?

But you did agree with it:

http://demonland.com/forums/index.php?/topic/16100-what-is-the-essence-of-a-football-clubs-existence/page__st__175#entry253045

http://demonland.com/forums/index.php?/topic/16027-the-t-word/#entry250849

Yes i did agree some of the decisions (talked into it in some cases) but i always had doubts it would work long term.

It was a choice of 2 paths...the easy one or the hard one. We chose the easy one and it backfired. We recruited too many kids and not enough senior players. A problem to this day.

[old dee 22,945]

Yes i did agree some of the decisions (talked into it in some cases) but i always had doubts it would work long term.

It was a choice of 2 paths...the easy one or the hard one. We chose the easy one and it backfired. We recruited too many kids and not enough senior players. A problem to this day.

Spot on this is IMO the major cause of our problems right now.

That and a small problem created by our inabaility to recruit kids that are better than average.

[Johnny Karate 559]

Correct. Whoever is pushing this agenda has absolutely no regard for the Melbourne Football Club, its history and its loyal suffering supporters.

These faceless cowards are willing to send the club to the wall owing to their own selfish, no doubt money-driven motives.

Rats in the ranks indeed.

So my other great sporting passion in life is Rangers FC. Tims' fans need not troll, I don't believe in that sectarian bollocks nor does my father who grew up in a very orange neighborhood of Glasgow. We aren't skinheads who chant bigoted slogans & go round giving Glasgow smiles & kisses to anybody who's not Aryan. Just as most Celtic fans aren't IRA worshipping terrorists.

But I digress: Rangers are the most succesfull team in Scotland & date back to 1872. While the league is pathetic now, it hasnt always been & we've been winning trophies since Noah was a boy. The Old Firm Derby is still recognized as one of the great contests in WORLD sport.

Anyhoo, because of the financial wheelings & dealings of a few Rangers ended up in crippling debt & with a large tax bill, subsequently liquidated, managed just to get a Newco up and sent packing to Scottish Div 3.

The point of this indulgence? While numpties who support other clubs may rejoice because the" Huns" are no more or cry "Karma" - the real perpetrators in this were owners who fleeced thousands of paid up Rangers supporters. They who overpaid broken down hacks, they who were happy with the status of being Rangers (title x), they who cheated HRMCR. But who pays when the conmen are gone? The fans, people like me & my dad who barely have a club to support anymore, who have to carry the can for supposed "cheating", when all we did was turn up en mass & support our club.

I feel for Melbourne Storm fans too. MFC fans have had to bare the burden of being "merger lovers". It's the fans who get punished when the top brass at any club effs it up.

[rpfc 27,573]

FMD, why do you feed this idiot?

But you did agree with it:

http://demonland.com...175#entry253045

http://demonland.com...rd/#entry250849

lol

Edited August 2, 2012 by rpfc

[H_T 2,941]

FMD, why do you feed this idiot?

But you did agree with it:

It's a good question old55.

Nice retrieve from the archives.

I'm sure he will try and wriggle out of it with more revised BS. Probably something along the lines of "I was talked into it"

[old dee 22,945]

I have a question old55

If the management and Board have done all things well

How come after 5 years we are effectively last with one genuine win and with the worst list in the competition?

Or am I in the middle of a great big bad dream?

[Sir Why You Little 34,658]

It's a good question old55.

Nice retrieve from the archives.

I'm sure he will try and wriggle out of it with more revised BS. Probably something along the lines of "I was talked into it"

Haha. And you know all the answers HT. I was never a fan of tanking. Made me want to throw up, but if the AFL was going to dangle such a carrot then most would grab it.

It still has done nothing but harm the very fabric of the club though. And why i want to read an early edition of the Red & Blueprint.

[old55 21,402]

Just don't engage him

[Sir Why You Little 34,658]

Just don't engage him

And when have we ever spoken anyway old??

[rjay 23,949]

Footy is such a game of inches. At the end of 2006 the Geelong Board was in favour of terminating Mark Thompson, but he got a lucky reprieve. If he'd got the chop, Brian Cook, the then (and now) CEO, after 7 years at the helm would have presided over a failed rebuild. The opposite is now true.

John Worsfold only kept his job after their spoon because he had a year to run on his contract. He's now in a healthy position.

The Saints win a flag if not for a heartbreaking bounce of the ball.

Life and sport can be so fickle.

This is one of many points but Geelong were not sitting where we are now and Cook had a succesful record on and off field to back him up.

[Redleg 37,891]

Bailey said last year at his farewell press conference: "I had no hesitation at all in the first two years (2008-09) in ensuring the club was well-placed for draft picks. I was asked to do the best thing by the Melbourne Football Club and I did it. I put players in different positions," Bailey said.

An AFL investigation which followed Bailey's bombshell found the Demons had no case to answer over tanking allegations.

And so it should have, as nowhere has he said" I deliberately threw games or told players to do so". Every coach would do the best thing by their club and clearly have in the past.

[Ouch! 2,041]

Amongst all this, the only good I can see that can come out of this is a moratorium or amnesty. Even if something comes out from the discussions with Brock, the AFL will not be stupid enough to punish this club alone in regards to this. Even Demetriou with his ostrich views on Tanking would have to see that

'list management'

'giving games to youth',

'experiementing with player positions'

'resting players to keep them fresh' etc has occurred at at least half of the clubs in the AFL over the best part of the last decade.

I actually don't like the thought of the AFL saying 'no case to answer' personally,... then it's not the end of it, and it will raise its head again in some other form ... maybe here, maybe at another club. But this happens, and all clubs know it and will do their best to maximise things to their benefit. Seeing any club's members or supporters being happy at losing games is a very bad look, and none of us actually WANT that. We all want our clubs to be strong and successful. Tanking is an AFL problem, not an MFC one!

For all people saying that the MFC could get booted out (as per Brian Taylors ramblings) I'll simply say that the AFL has a media deal that is heavily dependent on 18 games a week over the 22 rounds. They cannot afford to lose money here, it will not happen. for it to take away draft picks... the AFL cannot also afford for the MFC to be a basketcase on the field for a further 5 years (which would be the minimum time it would take to rebuild with such penalties)

The AFL will need to provide a clear set of guidelines on what it constitutes as tanking and forget the past and enforce it for the future.

Oh and the last thing I want to add is that CS only got an extension to the end of 2012, I still feel it is likely that he will call it at the end of this year and whether it is because of conspiracy theories or skeletons, I reckon we will have a new CEO next year....

Edited August 2, 2012 by Oucher

[Redleg 37,891]

and a small problem created by our inabaility to recruit kids that are better than average.

Finally a little gem on this thread.

[Hannibal 5,814]

This is one of many points but Geelong were not sitting where we are now and Cook had a succesful record on and off field to back him up.

Yeah, I agree. Which makes it even more fickle, don't you think ?

[sue 8,463]

The NAB cup: It has been mentioned before, but I'm surprised there has been little comment on it, and none in the media.

It is a real competition (people bet on it - note to Victorian govt.). Many clubs openly say they are 'experimenting', don't care about winning. Just getting ready for the real season. For many clubs at this time of the year the real season is next year. cvan they not 'experiment' too.

[7-UP 107]

This year in America, NFL commissioner ( similar to A. Demetriou) found that one of the assistant coaches paid the players to hurt opposition players and take them out of the game and after further investigations found the coach and GM know this was occuring.

Next thing you know the coach got suspend for a full season, the GM and few players got suspended for few games and assistant coach got suspended indefinitely, I wonder how NFL would have thrown the books if they found out one of their teams are tanking for picks ?

[Range Rover 1,935]

I've posted them on other threads but as a quick overview I think he is a devisive figure with players, supporters and the media. I don't think he should have been re appointed after the trouble he caused the club in the late 90's both financially and through loss of draft picks. I don't think he has handled key sponsorship issues well both the getting of those sponsors and retaining them. I think energy watch was a debacle which could have been avoided, I have my own theory on this but I can't substantiate it so the mods would not like me to add it here. He has overseen a failed rebuild and as CEO must take responsibility.

I think it is time for a change and now is the time to do it, we are getting kicked around so lets get on the front foot like we did with the football department make some changes that need to be made and give Neeld support to re build the club on field.

I hope that spells out what my thoughts are.

That's fine. You or anyone else are quite within your rights to form a ticket and challenge him.

But this knifing by media that could potentially ruin the club and punish our supporters? No way, Jose.

To quote George Bush Snr (or the Dude, if you prefer) ... "This agression will not stand, man".

Rpfc is indeed right. This dumb, ill-thought through putsch will only galvanize those in power and bring ignominy on to those who planned it.

Edited August 2, 2012 by Range Rover

[binman 38,755]

Amongst all this, the only good I can see that can come out of this is a moratorium or amnesty. Even if something comes out from the discussions with Brock, the AFL will not be stupid enough to punish this club alone in regards to this. Even Demetriou with his ostrich views on Tanking would have to see that

'list management'

'giving games to youth',

'experiementing with player positions'

'resting players to keep them fresh' etc has occurred at at least half of the clubs in the AFL over the best part of the last decade.

I actually don't like the thought of the AFL saying 'no case to answer' personally,... then it's not the end of it, and it will raise its head again in some other form ... maybe here, maybe at another club. But this happens, and all clubs know it and will do their best to maximise things to their benefit. Seeing any club's members or supporters being happy at losing games is a very bad look, and none of us actually WANT that. We all want our clubs to be strong and successful. Tanking is an AFL problem, not an MFC one!

For all people saying that the MFC could get booted out (as per Brian Taylors ramblings) I'll simply say that the AFL has a media deal that is heavily dependent on 18 games a week over the 22 rounds. They cannot afford to lose money here, it will not happen. for it to take away draft picks... the AFL cannot also afford for the MFC to be a basketcase on the field for a further 5 years (which would be the minimum time it would take to rebuild with such penalties)

The AFL will need to provide a clear set of guidelines on what it constitutes as tanking and forget the past and enforce it for the future.

Oh and the last thing I want to add is that CS only got an extension to the end of 2012, I still feel it is likely that he will call it at the end of this year and whether it is because of conspiracy theories or skeletons, I reckon we will have a new CEO next year....

Good post Oucher. Punishing, or even investigating MFC in isolation would be ridiculous. I also, would like them to draw a line in the sand and basically say there has been a whole range of activities (such as those you note) over the last 10 years by a range of clubs that have the potential to raise suspicions and bring the game into disrepute.

Whilst it is very difficult to legislate against such activities (eg resting players) they could advise clubs that from now on they will be investigated when there are suspicious activities (in much the same way betting irregularities are looked into). This would at the least act as a disincentive to play silly buggers.

In horse racing not giving your mount the best chance of winning is a grave offence for jockeys, but often extremely difficult to assess. Stewards are required to investigate any cases where this (and other similarly grey area issues) may have occurred. The AFL could clearly define what they regard to be suspicious bevaiours and play a similar role to stewards in racing. No jockey likes to be investigated as it questions their integrity and it would at least give clubs pause for thought (or a con to consider) when deciding on how they might approach the last few games of a season.

This would of course only have a limited impact on the behaviors of clubs. More crucially the AFL have to find a way to limit the advantage a club might get for being lower on the ladder, whilst still ensuring the principals of the draft and equalization are maintained. Tough ask but that's why they get the big bucks.

The interesting part of the dialogue about tanking for me (and related to the horse racing parallel) is how it is defined. There seem to be distinction that many commentators seem to make between going out to lose (tanking) or not giving your side the best chance of winning a given match (such as last season Geelong resting 5-6 of their best players, or sending players off for non essential surgery before season's end), which seems to be accepted practice. Going out to lose would require a coach to instruct players to miss shots at goal or other specific direction. However no one is suggesting this has occurred (though there is a hint by BM an Bailey they have been put under pressure to minimize the chance of winning). All the examples of so called tanking seem to involve a coach not maximizing the chance of winning a specific match, which as i said many commentators seem to suggest is ok. If this definition is used there will be hundreds of examples, including this year.

Edited August 2, 2012 by binman

[Bossdog 2,002]

So does this mean that coaches MUST coach according to AFL or the media....They are not allowed to veer from what is thought to be OK???????

Must coaches put in a game plan to the afl and the media before each match and adhere to this plan all game....

This is just stupid......The media is just not that important.......

Edited August 2, 2012 by Bossdog

[old dee 22,945]

That's fine. You or anyone else are quite within your rights to form a ticket and challenge him.

But this knifing by media that could potentially ruin the club and punish our supporters? No way, Jose.

To quote George Bush Snr (or the Dude, if you prefer) ... "This agression will not stand, man".

Rpfc is indeed right. This dumb, ill-thought through putsch will only galvanize those in power and bring ignominy on to those who planned it.

I think this has a way to play yet RR

The fat lady is not even in the room yet

[rpfc 27,573]

The fat lady is not even in the room yet

Of course she isn't.

She doesn't sweat the small stuff.

But boy does she sweat...