North looking at resting players

[praha 10,592]

The AFL have sanctioned Nought and Fremantle to Tank this week

The Commission should be sacked en masse...

Well, "tanking" is defined has losing for tangible gain. I don't see how Freo resting players equates to "tanking" because they aren't set to benefit in any way apart from players being rested. I imagine they are still quite capable of winning. $6 for the win is a good bet imo.

North, on the other hand...

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

deliberately losing to gain something.

that is not what they have officially requested

they have asked to be allowed to improve their players' health before the finals

they have in no way stated they are doing this in order to lose the match

it may well be that they prefer to lose, but it doesn't matter cos thats not the official reason

i dont even know why theyre bothering

its not like their week1 opponent/venue is going to be the difference b/n winning a flag or not

they are still going to have to face the big boys anyway

[stuie 7,374]

that is not what they have officially requested

they have asked to be allowed to improve their players' health before the finals

they have in no way stated they are doing this in order to lose the match

it may well be that they prefer to lose, but it doesn't matter cos thats not the official reason

i dont even know why theyre bothering

its not like their week1 opponent/venue is going to be the difference b/n winning a flag or not

they are still going to have to face the big boys anyway

If the lose they play in Melbourne, if they win they play in Adelaide.

Get it yet?

Do you really think they would come out officially and say "we want to lose"?

[praha 10,592]

I think North is acting too big for its boots. It's a defeatists approach to finals. They should field their best side this week, play themselves into form, and be prepared to go to Adelaide and try and win a game of footy.

Freo is different. North imo is just silly and arrogant, although wouldn't expect any less from a Scott brother.

[sue 8,678]

The Freo situation is different than North because Freo would get a home final whether they win, lose by any amount, or draw. Therefore it is not in itself a precedent for also allowing North to rest.

However it is still unfair to other teams. For example, it gives Freo a chance to play a number of untested players thereby giving them information about those players' future prospects. If a club near the bottom did that they'd be accused of tanking. I do not buy the 'they have earned the right to do it' line that is being pushed by some in the media.

[rjay 24,205]

Isn't that what we were doing then by losing to improve our list? Same principal.

No we were losing because we just weren't good enough.

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

If the lose they play in Melbourne, if they win they play in Adelaide.

Get it yet?

Do you really think they would come out officially and say "we want to lose"?

um yes I get it , did you actually read what I wrote?

they probably do prefer to lose but that's not the issue that is officially in discussion with the AFL

if they DID come out and say 'we prefer to lose' then yes the outrage would be justified

but they have plausible deniability

[Sir Why You Little 35,394]

Well, "tanking" is defined has losing for tangible gain. I don't see how Freo resting players equates to "tanking" because they aren't set to benefit in any way apart from players being rested. I imagine they are still quite capable of winning. $6 for the win is a good bet imo.

North, on the other hand...

Freo i have no problem. They are clear on Top of the ladder and Port are outside the Race.

As you say Nought on the other hand

I do have a major problem with the AFL giving it the green light.

Match fixing in years to come. They really are fools.

[stuie 7,374]

um yes I get it , did you actually read what I wrote?

they probably do prefer to lose but that's not the issue that is officially in discussion with the AFL

if they DID come out and say 'we prefer to lose' then yes the outrage would be justified

but they have plausible deniability

And what do you think the chances are of them saying that? It's a moot point. We told the AFL we didn't tank but we still got fined.

Just because you say you're not doing something doesn't mean you're not actually doing it.... You must be a very trusting person.

[Bombay Airconditioning 6,054]

I think North is acting too big for its boots. It's a defeatists approach to finals. They should field their best side this week, play themselves into form, and be prepared to go to Adelaide and try and win a game of footy.

Freo is different. North imo is just silly and arrogant, although wouldn't expect any less from a Scott brother.

Some great points, because North are currently on fire. Only defeating one team above them in their recent streak before coming unstuck last week.

Arrogant flogs.

Edited September 3, 2015 by Al's Demons

[Mazer Rackham 14,970]

They told everyone they're doing it and even which players are to be rested.

They are not pulling out 6 players 2 hours before the match with "general soreness".

They are not pretending to play to win while actually trying to lose.

They might even go out and try to win! (They did, last time they tried this.)

There is nothing deceitful in what they are doing.

They are doing this to give themselves their best shot at WINNING the FLAG.

Which is a long, long, long way from giving yourself the best shot at finishing bottom.

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

And what do you think the chances are of them saying that? It's a moot point. We told the AFL we didn't tank but we still got fined.

Just because you say you're not doing something doesn't mean you're not actually doing it.... You must be a very trusting person.

so in your view, the AFL's official response should be 'aaaaah we don't believe ya North, we know what you're up to, it's unfair, you are not allowed to make any changes at all this week'

think about it

[Chris 2,892]

What a load of bull! Tanking is deliberately throwing a match. That's NOT what's happening here. Rather, these clubs have won enough games during the season to put themselves in the enviable position of being able to rest some of their key players, giving them what they believe to be their best chance of ultimate Finals success.

Good luck to them!

(Maybe, some year soon, the MFC will be in this position, too! We can only hope!)

From the font of all knowledge wiki.

"There are a wide variety of behaviours which could be considered to be tanking. These include:

• Instructing the players to deliberately lose matches
• Employing unusual tactics in matches, including using players in positions where they do not usually play^[2]
• Resting star players with minor injuries, who would likely not be rested if the team were contesting finals^[3]
• Playing younger players who do not yet have much experience at AFL level^[4]"

Tanking is far more than throwing a match. Part of the problem the AFL have with finding people guilty of tanking is that they wont put a definitive definition on exactly what it is. I think a simple definition such as 'tanking is any action that a club takes that decreases their chance of winning in order to increase the chance of winning in the future' would do the job nicely, it also fits all the points above. Freo and North are tanking as they are not trying to win this game with everything they have in order to increase their chance of winning the grand final, you may think that is OK but how is it different from us resting heaps of players and reducing our chance of winning so we have more chance of recruiting well and winning more games next year?

[biggestred 4,439]

Freo is fine as they are locked in and have earnt top spot. Also their opponents cant move either.

North winning or losing can affect 3 other teams. I call [censored]

[stuie 7,374]

so in your view, the AFL's official response should be 'aaaaah we don't believe ya North, we know what you're up to, it's unfair, you are not allowed to make any changes at all this week'

think about it

What was their response to us?

[Sir Why You Little 35,394]

From the font of all knowledge wiki.

"There are a wide variety of behaviours which could be considered to be tanking. These include:

• Instructing the players to deliberately lose matches
• Employing unusual tactics in matches, including using players in positions where they do not usually play^[2]
• Resting star players with minor injuries, who would likely not be rested if the team were contesting finals^[3]
• Playing younger players who do not yet have much experience at AFL level^[4]"

Tanking is far more than throwing a match. Part of the problem the AFL have with finding people guilty of tanking is that they wont put a definitive definition on exactly what it is. I think a simple definition such as 'tanking is any action that a club takes that decreases their chance of winning in order to increase the chance of winning in the future' would do the job nicely, it also fits all the points above. Freo and North are tanking as they are not trying to win this game with everything they have in order to increase their chance of winning the grand final, you may think that is OK but how is it different from us resting heaps of players and reducing our chance of winning so we have more chance of recruiting well and winning more games next year?

Exactly.

And now the AFL have allowed Match Fixing to go ahead

The AFL will look back on this decision in future as a very foolish thing to do

[Jaded No More 60,506]

The difference between tanking and this kind of list management is that for what Freo and North are doing, they expect to reap their benefits this season. Tanking is a systematic distortion of this season for the benefit of next season (or even later).

Except the result of the Freo game can also impact the order of the ladder outside of the 8 which impacts draft order, which has long term consequences

[Willmoy1947 3,878]

Come on let's all have a bet. Got a good tip that "************** is gonna lay down, points range, this weekend in the AFL !!!!!!!

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

What was their response to us?

We didn't ask for permission...

[chook fowler 18,650]

and mad Monday is off for the Saints.

Dwarves are giving a collective sigh of relief

Edited September 3, 2015 by chook fowler

[stuie 7,374]

We didn't ask for permission...

Didn't think you had to ask for permission to make positional changes...

[Sir Why You Little 35,394]

and mad Monday is off for the Saints.

Dwarves are giving a collective sigh of relief

Mad Tuesday for maximum media coverage?

[loges 6,421]

It only matters how powerfully your club is perceived or how much clout you have with the AFL commission. We were made scapegoats, others get approved or swept under the carpet

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

Didn't think you had to ask for permission to make positional changes...

oh yeah just go ahead and move the goalposts

we are not talking about positional changes. North hasnt asked for positional changes.

we are talking about team selection

but you obviously must realise that

[stuie 7,374]

oh yeah just go ahead and move the goalposts

we are not talking about positional changes. North hasnt asked for positional changes.

we are talking about team selection

but you obviously must realise that

Move the goal posts?

You've been happy to compare the two situations until it goes against you.

Positional changes are clearly a smaller matter than resting half your team, but obviously you must realize that...

If North lose they play in Melbourne against a team they always beat. If they win they travel to Adelaide. Are you really this naive?