North looking at resting players

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

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?

your comprehension skills are alarmingly poor

just read again what I have already written

I am not going to repeat nyself

[mo64 5,875]

If I were the broadcasters, I'd be livid with the AFL's decision to allow clubs to rest players en masse.

In the NBA a few years ago, the San Antonio Spurs rested 3 key players in what was a back-to-back game, and the commission fined them $250,000. You would think that a club resting players for 1 game over an 82 game season would be ok, but the commission assessed that it's damaging to the product, and not in the spirit of the league.

The AFL have set a pretty dangerous precedent IMO.

[stuie 7,374]

your comprehension skills are alarmingly poor

just read again what I have already written

I am not going to repeat nyself

Just give up mate. You're incredibly naive if you don't think North are tanking.

[rjay 24,959]

If I were the broadcasters, I'd be livid with the AFL's decision to allow clubs to rest players en masse.

In the NBA a few years ago, the San Antonio Spurs rested 3 key players in what was a back-to-back game, and the commission fined them $250,000. You would think that a club resting players for 1 game over an 82 game season would be ok, but the commission assessed that it's damaging to the product, and not in the spirit of the league.

The AFL have set a pretty dangerous precedent IMO.

They have...

...but if you look at a lot of their decisions they have been very consistent. Lack of integrity in all areas is a common thread.

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

Look at the first thing I wrote

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

and you continue to say this

Just give up mate. You're incredibly naive if you don't think North are tanking.

are you really that stupid you continue to miss the point, or are you another one of the sad cases around here who just likes to be a deliberate peasant in order to pick arguments

pathetic

I hate you

[stuie 7,374]

Look at the first thing I wrote

and you continue to say this

are you really that stupid you continue to miss the point, or are you another one of the sad cases around here who just likes to be a deliberate peasant in order to pick arguments

pathetic

I hate you

And what was OUR official reason?

You missed that point from the very start.

I argued your point, you then said I "moved the goal posts" once you realized you were drowning. That's what I call pathetic.

[Chris 2,892]

You too would be funny if I didn't think you were serious.

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

And what was OUR official reason?

You missed that point from the very start.

I argued your point, you then said I "moved the goal posts" once you realized you were drowning. That's what I call pathetic.

we never asked anyone about anything so we never supplied an official reason

OBVIOUSLY

[Sir Why You Little 37,051]

we never asked anyone about anything so we never supplied an official reason

OBVIOUSLY

We never asked anything but we Told everybody

This was the sheer stupidity of the whole saga really...

[SaberFang 7,151]

So what's the AFL going to say when a bunch of fringe, no-name North VFL players go out with the sole intention of injuring, corking and knocking around Richmond players, knowing they'll be dropped the week after and the suspensions will be irrelevant?

Does ANYBODY at the AFL have a brain cell between them? Apart from being a blatant violation of their own integrity rules, are they actually so short-sighted as to not see the benefits that North can reap here?

Edited September 3, 2015 by Lamashtu

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

So what's the AFL going to say when a bunch of fringe, no-name North VFL players go out with the sole intention of injuring, corking and knocking around Richmond players, knowing they'll be dropped the week after and the suspensions will be irrelevant?

Does ANYBODY at the AFL have a brain cell between them? Apart from being a blatant violation of their own integrity rules, are they actually so short-sighted as to not see the benefits that North can reap here?

the fact is there is no rule that prevents them from doing this, so the AFL can't just arbitrarily tell them what to do

might be a rule as of 2016 though!

[stuie 7,374]

the fact is there is no rule that prevents them from doing this, so the AFL can't just arbitrarily tell them what to do

might be a rule as of 2016 though!

So under what rule were we fined then?

[daisycutter 29,621]

the fact is there is no rule that prevents them from doing this, so the AFL can't just arbitrarily tell them what to do

might be a rule as of 2016 though!

what about the "bringing the game into disrepute rule"?

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

So under what rule were we fined then?

what about the "bringing the game into disrepute rule"?

it's not the same

we got fined (and apparently brought about the disrepute) because of comments that were made around the club - not because of the players we omitted

I will say though that the consequences of what North are doing are far more important - they are messing with the premiership

Edited September 3, 2015 by Curry & Beer

[iv'a worn smith 1,979]

We were found not guilty of tanking. Our only crime was to employ people who were found to bring the game into disrepute, hence the fine. Go Figure.

I can to some extent understand Freo's position having already won the minor premiership. However, to me it treats your opposition with some level of contempt to do so. Not too mention, I reckon it is dangerous to play with your form heading into finals. In the case of North, to me this is nothing less than tanking, for the purposes of a better draw in the first week of the finals. Both also set a dangerous precedent, particularly in the future, where such actions could actually affect how the top 8 actually may be formed, come season's end, if this were to occur season after season.

[H_T 3,049]

Will be interesting what the bookies do here. I'd start Richmond $1.01

What a farce. The AFL have set a precedent.

And there's no jokes here from the vault. This is straight into a microphone.

Can some media guru ask that question to Gil again. What's the definition of tanking?

[ucanchoose 1,816]

If I were the broadcasters, I'd be livid with the AFL's decision to allow clubs to rest players en masse.

In the NBA a few years ago, the San Antonio Spurs rested 3 key players in what was a back-to-back game, and the commission fined them $250,000. You would think that a club resting players for 1 game over an 82 game season would be ok, but the commission assessed that it's damaging to the product, and not in the spirit of the league.

The AFL have set a pretty dangerous precedent IMO.

The only reason they were fined is that it was a nationally televised rematch with the Miami Heat. Apples and mouldy oranges

[daisycutter 29,621]

it's not the same

we got fined (and apparently brought about the disrepute) because of comments that were made around the club - not because of the players we omitted

I will say though that the consequences of what North are doing are far more important - they are messing with the premiership

point was that the "bringing the game into disrepute rule" can mean whatever the afl wants it to mean

but you knew that

[Sir Why You Little 37,051]

So what's the AFL going to say when a bunch of fringe, no-name North VFL players go out with the sole intention of injuring, corking and knocking around Richmond players, knowing they'll be dropped the week after and the suspensions will be irrelevant?

Does ANYBODY at the AFL have a brain cell between them? Apart from being a blatant violation of their own integrity rules, are they actually so short-sighted as to not see the benefits that North can reap here?

Very Interesting point here Lam...Nought Could bring in "Hit Men" for one job only, whereas the A Squad would be on "Best Behavior" before the Finals even begin

The Scott Brothers enjoyed a bit of violence off the ball in their day....

[Chook 15,013]

Since when is that the definition of tanking? Since when was there a time frame on it?

The base definition is deliberately losing to gain something. That's all there is to it.

But where do you draw the line? Resting a midfielder for a few minutes on the Bench might make you worse off for a short time, but you'll be better off once they're back. Is that "tanking"?

You have to draw a line between strategy and tanking somewhere. I think at the end of each season is a pretty good place to draw that line.

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

point was that the "bringing the game into disrepute rule" can mean whatever the afl wants it to mean

but you knew that

so you're encouraging the AFL to just randomly make rulings here and there and be inconsistent between clubs and different situations

if they dont like something just arbitrarily call it disrepute

great idea

[FarNorthernD 5,861]

If the footy gods have a sense of humour North will find themselves up by 13 points with 6 minutes to play. I would then like to see Coach Scott work his way through that conundrum

[Sir Why You Little 37,051]

so you're encouraging the AFL to just randomly make rulings here and there and be inconsistent between clubs and different situations

if they dont like something just arbitrarily call it disrepute

great idea

It's not an idea...They are already doing it.

[Kumamoto_Ken 1,531]

If the footy gods have a sense of humour North will find themselves up by 13 points with 6 minutes to play. I would then like to see Coach Scott work his way through that conundrum

An 'accidental' interchange infringement?

[sue 9,107]

We were found not guilty of tanking. Our only crime was to employ people who were found to bring the game into disrepute, hence the fine. Go Figure.

I can to some extent understand Freo's position having already won the minor premiership. However, to me it treats your opposition with some level of contempt to do so. Not too mention, I reckon it is dangerous to play with your form heading into finals. In the case of North, to me this is nothing less than tanking, for the purposes of a better draw in the first week of the finals. Both also set a dangerous precedent, particularly in the future, where such actions could actually affect how the top 8 actually may be formed, come season's end, if this were to occur season after season.

Precisely. Imagine if Collingwood was kept out of the finals on percentage by some 'non-tanking' fiddle by a team trying to rearrange where they play or against whom. The line of torches and pitchforks heading towards AFL headquarters would be a sight to behold.