According to this article, any AFL club that finds itself out of the finals race two thirds of the way through a season and happens to be called "Melbourne" now has limited options in going about the final rounds of the year: Melbourne defeats in 2009: two case studies

These clubs cannot:

■ send injured players off for surgery early in order to get them right for the next pre season;

■ experiment by trying players in different positions during games to establish some versatility for the future;

■ test young players out by giving them a taste of the game at its highest level;

■ rest players to prevent fatigue or the possibility of a breakdown through over work;

■ discipline players who break team rules by making them play in the VFL; and

■ give players the opportunity to have a final game (particularly if it's a milestone game) prior to retirement.

Sadly, teams can no longer afford to develop their players because every move they make must come under close scrutiny to determine if such moves might co-incidentally affect a team's prospects of winning or achieving the best possible result.

There have been several instances of the above in the past and it is expected that the AFL will soon launch investigations into a number of clubs which received priority picks in the past decade including the Blues, Bulldogs, Magpies and Eagles. They might also want to take a look at new franchise GWS which recently made ten changes to its team for the game against Fremantle including dropping NAB Rising Star favourite Jeremy Cameron. After that, one has to ask the question whether the Giants were really trying to win the four points against the Dockers and if they weren't were they bringing the game into disrepute?

Yet playing Garland and Rivers up forward, Dunn and Watts in the backline and Howe on the wing is fine in 2012.

They can't prove sh!t

In similar vogue the AAACas well as ASIC are to investigate possible share price manipulation by media companies. There is growing suspicion that the market value of certain companies has been influenced by the directives to print outrageous and malicious rubbish in order to affect the trading value of the repsective companies.

Yet playing Garland and Rivers up forward, Dunn and Watts in the backline and Howe on the wing is fine in 2012.

They can't prove sh!t

Well said but perhaps this is the agenda? Imagine the frenzy if we lose to Gold Coast!

Seriously though, if we are to be sanctioned by the AFL for this trial by media, that will remove all the hope I have. I love the club, but if the league, media & former players & officials are hell bent on pushing us to the brink, we are destined to be an eternal basket case or fold. It's as miserable as I've felt as a Melbourne supporter & that will be the straw that broke the camel's back.

I'll just follow West Coburg. The AFL, its loyal cabal of vultures & former players & officials bitter that the MFC isn't their meal ticket anymore can G&GF!

According to this article, any AFL club that finds itself out of the finals race two thirds of the way through a season and happens to be called "Melbourne" now has limited options in going about the final rounds of the year: Melbourne defeats in 2009: two case studies

These clubs cannot:

■ send injured players off for surgery early in order to get them right for the next pre season;

■ experiment by trying players in different positions during games to establish some versatility for the future;

■ test young players out by giving them a taste of the game at its highest level;

■ rest players to prevent fatigue or the possibility of a breakdown through over work;

■ discipline players who break team rules by making them play in the VFL; and

■ give players the opportunity to have a final game (particularly if it's a milestone game) prior to retirement.

Sadly, teams can no longer afford to develop their players because every move they make must come under close scrutiny to determine if such moves might co-incidentally affect a team's prospects of winning or achieving the best possible result.

There have been several instances of the above in the past and it is expected that the AFL will soon launch investigations into a number of clubs which received priority picks in the past decade including the Blues, Bulldogs, Magpies and Eagles. They might also want to take a look at new franchise GWS which recently made ten changes to its team for the game against Fremantle including dropping NAB Rising Star favourite Jeremy Cameron. After that, one has to ask the question whether the Giants were really trying to win the four points against the Dockers and if they weren't were they bringing the game into disrepute?

That article mentions putting Bate in the middle and Dunn in the backline as questionable decisions. We haven't come under the same type of scrutiny for playing them in those positions this year!

It also bothers me that the Richmond game is the one that everyone thinks of when they talk tanking. We were leading the match when the siren sounded!

Did anyone hear Paul Gardner on SEN a few minutes ago? As a "neutral supporter" he essentially backed up Brock's comments.

Sure he can have an opinion, but this public comment just adds more weight to the discussion and drops us more in it.

What is his agenda?

It seems that struggling clubs are not allowed to try to take some positives out of the season and build for the future ie, really waste the rest of an already dead season.

Typical knee jerk thoughtless dumb response.

Why is it that so many sports journalists in this country are so bloody stupid? Can we import some BBC guys and upskill them in AFL?

. We were leading the match when the siren sounded!

by god we were clever !!

Was Jurrah really benched in the 3rd quarter, and didn't return to the field until late in the 4th?? Did that really happen?

Did anyone hear Paul Gardner on SEN a few minutes ago? As a "neutral supporter" he essentially backed up Brock's comments.

Sure he can have an opinion, but this public comment just adds more weight to the discussion and drops us more in it.

What is his agenda?

Hes a sook...hes got lots of company too.

Paul -ive got more important things than attend games - Gardner !!

Did anyone hear Paul Gardner on SEN a few minutes ago? As a "neutral supporter" he essentially backed up Brock's comments.

Sure he can have an opinion, but this public comment just adds more weight to the discussion and drops us more in it.

What is his agenda?

He was very high & mighty about it for someone whose off field tanking contributed to us being $6m in debt.

Sanctimonious windbag, he even suggested the players weren't trying. [censored] off Paul you have NFI.

We were leading the match when the siren sounded!

by god we were clever !!

This is absurd. If we got beaten by 10 goals I can understand the hand wringing but if ANYTHING had happened differently in that match we would have won it.

It's no like we kicked the ball to Jordan McMahon deliberately, it's not like he was a certainty to kick it, and in fact the siren blew before he marked it and it shouldn't have been allowed!

On one hand the media think we are irrelevant idiots, and on the other we are brilliant masterminds of the most complex rig in the history of sport. Which one is it?

Maybe I haven't downloaded the article properly or fully, but I cant see anywhere that these restrictions are proposed.

Not being allowed to send a player off for early surgery??!! What about OH&S issues. We all know that clubs push injured players if they are still "in the race" - that must be a bigger OH&S issue than allowing an injured player time to recover for next season. Maybe they are the ones who should be sanctioned.

And surely there must come a time to try out young players....what do they propose?

Resting fatigued players - perfectly appropriate OH&S management.

What an absolute load of garbage.

Well said but perhaps this is the agenda? Imagine the frenzy if we lose to Gold Coast!

Seriously though, if we are to be sanctioned by the AFL for this trial by media, that will remove all the hope I have. I love the club, but if the league, media & former players & officials are hell bent on pushing us to the brink, we are destined to be an eternal basket case or fold. It's as miserable as I've felt as a Melbourne supporter & that will be the straw that broke the camel's back.

I'll just follow West Coburg. The AFL, its loyal cabal of vultures & former players & officials bitter that the MFC isn't their meal ticket anymore can G&GF!

Agreed. They clearly want to take us down (the AFL because they don't really want us around and there can be little doubt some aggrieved about-to-be-sacked MFC employees are out for blood).

Cameron Schwab and Don McLardy better stand up to the plate and show some balls if the [censored] really hits the fan.

Maybe I haven't downloaded the article properly or fully, but I cant see anywhere that these restrictions are proposed.

Not being allowed to send a player off for early surgery??!! What about OH&S issues. We all know that clubs push injured players if they are still "in the race" - that must be a bigger OH&S issue than allowing an injured player time to recover for next season. Maybe they are the ones who should be sanctioned.

And surely there must come a time to try out young players....what do they propose?

Resting fatigued players - perfectly appropriate OH&S management.

What an absolute load of garbage.

I think that WJ is being facetious

lol

Nothing will come of this.

The St Kilda game?

Liam Jurrah had to kick a goal over his head from 40 METRES OUT to keep us in the game early!

So bloody ridiculous and HSOG is going to hate the comments about Gardner that are about to flow forth on this site - the guy should have not spoken to the media about his concerns.

Oh, and for the conspiracy theorists out there - Schwab was not there when Gardner was there so essentially Gardner is saying that he was not the engineer of our 'dastardly act.'

I just heard Paul Gardiner say that during some games it looked like Melbourne's effort was questionable.

Has he not seen them play this year?

I just heard Paul Gardiner say that during some games it looked like Melbourne's effort was questionable.

Has he not seen them play this year?

Probably left early...

Probably left early...

What, before the first bounce?

Did anyone hear Paul Gardner on SEN a few minutes ago? As a "neutral supporter" he essentially backed up Brock's comments.

Sure he can have an opinion, but this public comment just adds more weight to the discussion and drops us more in it.

What is his agenda?

Fairely obvious, isn't it?

What, before the first bounce?

Saw the 22 on the screen and 'high-tailed' it...

Isn't it funny that he thinks he saw tanking in early 08! No-one thought we tanked then. No-one at all.

In fact, we just came off our 'proud' we won't tank to get an extra pick after the first round in THAT Carlton game at the end of 2007.

Gardner does not know what he is talking about. Poor bloke. Just wants in the news.

Maybe I haven't downloaded the article properly or fully, but I cant see anywhere that these restrictions are proposed.

Not being allowed to send a player off for early surgery??!! What about OH&S issues. We all know that clubs push injured players if they are still "in the race" - that must be a bigger OH&S issue than allowing an injured player time to recover for next season. Maybe they are the ones who should be sanctioned.

And surely there must come a time to try out young players....what do they propose?

Resting fatigued players - perfectly appropriate OH&S management.

What an absolute load of garbage.

Glad you understand the point I'm making about this and many other articles.

It's probably worth pointing out that the AFL has no choice but to investigate McLean's comments. It can't be in charge of the integrity of the competition and then ignore comments such as these. I note that The Age has today also reported that the gambling regulator in Victoria is also "investigating" the matter. If you put 2 and 2 together, it's clear to me that the AFL has to investigate or it may be in trouble with the gambling regulator.

None of the above necessarily means that the AFL will find any issues of concern and I am 100% confident that the AFL is not pursuing this investigation because of some hidden agenda against the Demons (which is being suggested elsewhere on this site).

I've yet to hear anything on this issue that suggests any player was told to go out and not get a kick.

THAT would be tanking.

Anything else that happened is well within the rules and conventions.

Does anyone really believe that, in the histroy of AFL drafting, there have not been one or two teams every season 'resting players', 'experimenting with positions' ,with 'season ending injuries'?

The AFL draft is structured in a way that forces this to happen.

This is why I loathe the sporting media in this country.

Rather than support the sport that they happily sponge off, and contribute little to, they love to dig some dirt.

I hate it when these vultures dare to call themselves journalists.

I really hope the AFL will conclude that McLean, by being unable to say that he was told by 'x' not to play to win, has brought the game into disrepute.

Maybe it is time to stand up & sue some people.

I've yet to hear anything on this issue that suggests any player was told to go out and not get a kick.

THAT would be tanking.

Anything else that happened is well within the rules and conventions.

Does anyone really believe that, in the histroy of AFL drafting, there have not been one or two teams every season 'resting players', 'experimenting with positions' ,with 'season ending injuries'?

The AFL draft is structured in a way that forces this to happen.

This is why I loathe the sporting media in this country.

Rather than support the sport that they happily sponge off, and contribute little to, they love to dig some dirt.

I hate it when these vultures dare to call themselves journalists.

I really hope the AFL will conclude that McLean, by being unable to say that he was told by 'x' not to play to win, has brought the game into disrepute.

Maybe it is time to stand up & sue some people.

Interesting point.

Question for the lawyers on this site: If the AFL 'clears' the MFC, can anyone involved at the MFC at that time sue McLean for defamation?