Tanking scandal documents

[DV8 2,271]

2 hours ago, rjay said:

Carlton had previously practiced their tanking skills in 2006 with the Gibbs cup before fronting up again in 2007 for the Kreutzer cup...

Seriously, and we get the label...

When Essendon and Carlton met in round 16 of 2006, the sides were firmly entrenched at the bottom of the ladder, with Carlton having lost its last seven games and Essendon a then-club-record fourteen. Speculation that the result would decide the wooden spoon (and hence the first draft pick) led to the game jokingly being dubbed the "Bryce Gibbs Cup" by some in the media.^[3] The match ended in a draw.

Cap tan Fitz',  was on board the AFL, back then...  they control all they want to. 

 

We are a soft target, for all-conquering commissions.

[Aus in Engerland 75]

On 4/4/2019 at 9:44 AM, rjay said:

If we pick the clever clubs then Collingwood, Hawthorn and West Coast covered up well. They set the standard...

Carlton had influencers (the guy who leaves the room) at the top to help them cover up and the Tiges, who knows why Wallace (and club) was never investigated over comments he has made.

I think we all accept that Carlton were the master tankers of tankland, and Melbourne had a good run at 'bringing the game into disrepute' *cough *cough, but as to the rest, I'm not so sure.

Collingwood and Hawthorn, maybe/maybe not, but West Coast. I don't buy it.

The reason is that the only two years they got priority picks were in the compromised GC and GWS drafts. Their reward was pick 26 and then pick 28. No top of the first round rewards, only end of extended R1 picks. Hardly tankorama stuff.

We also have to remember that at the time they were basically rubbish. In 2005-7 they had the best midfield (possibly ever) and a good defence, but the forward line was rubbish. Ash Hanson? Q Lynch? And they were best of them. By 2009 even Phil Matera (2005) and Ash Sampi (2006) along with Hanson and Lynch were all long gone. Kennedy had arrived but was yet to fire and there was no midfield left. Judd had gone, Cousins was gone, Kerr was on his last legs, as was Cox. The fallout from Chick (who Hawthorn couldn't have been happier to offload) and Cousins's antics, along with the finished midfield and never-existent forward line meant they were just rubbish.

The only game they made questionable selection decisions was the 2005 Grand Final where they left out their two best goal kickers (Lynch, Matera) for questionable reasons. But I don't think that even Carlton would tank in a GF!

No need to tank, and no reward if they did. Let's put it another way. If they tanked, they were f****** rubbish at it.

[rjay 23,867]

5 hours ago, Aus in Engerland said:

Their reward was pick 26 and then pick 28. No top of the first round rewards, only end of extended R1 picks. Hardly tankorama stuff.

 

Gaff at pick 4 ensured they managed the list...pick 4 in a compromised draft is a pretty good reward.

5 hours ago, Aus in Engerland said:

We also have to remember that at the time they were basically rubbish

The rubbish defence doesn't stand up as we know.

We can only wish we were as rubbish as WC were...

...their list was streets ahead of ours.

Put their 2010 list up against our list of the same year and any of the lists where we had bottomed out (nice way of say we were s...) 

...it's embarrassing to compare the lists side by side.

[jnrmac 18,914]

6 hours ago, Aus in Engerland said:

I think we all accept that Carlton were the master tankers of tankland, and Melbourne had a good run at 'bringing the game into disrepute' *cough *cough, but as to the rest, I'm not so sure.

 

The only game they made questionable selection decisions was the 2005 Grand Final where they left out their two best goal kickers (Lynch, Matera) for questionable reasons. But I don't think that even Carlton would tank in a GF!

 

WTF? tanking in a GF? FOr what purpose? so they could get draft picks to win a GF?

[Guest]

List wise, the Eagles were streets ahead of us. However, let's not forget they had just been involved in the biggest scandal the game had possibly seen at the start of 2008 (until the supplements scandal came about). It tore the club apart and resulted in a LOT of turnover. The club's priorities had to change from 'we want to win the flag this year' to 'how can we be a club that parents feel comfortable in sending their sons to?'. It wasn't an environment where immediate success was a given.

The reality was that we were a bloody horrible football team in 2008 and were going to shif the bed regardless. In 2009, I think we were at the level of the Lions of last year: a team with plenty of potential that could push teams but we had no idea where that potential would lead to. I personally think had we actually given our all, we might have won around 5-7 games. 

The Lions have rebuilt and I think how they have (and we did post Roos) done this is the model for emerging teams. Don't put ceilings on the kids you have, make sure you have experienced heads in there to show them what it takes to be a player (I.e. Luke Hodge, Daniel Cross) and give players games when they deserve it.

I've been through the Hawthorn example before and why I don't agree that they tanked. However, it's a moot point anyway. That is talk of the past and to think that is applicable to today is a waste of time.

Edited April 16, 2019 by Hillary Bray

[Aus in Engerland 75]

9 hours ago, jnrmac said:

WTF? tanking in a GF? FOr what purpose? so they could get draft picks to win a GF?

I obviously needed an irony emoticon.

Dodgy selection decisions were the preserve of tanking clubs and that is the only game WC did the dodgy selections. Therefore, no tanking.

And as for tanking to get Gaff? Makes no sense. Pick 4 was for finishing last, not a priority selection. So as a carp team they were getting pick 4 rather than pick 5 (Brisbane). Are you seriously suggesting that a team would tank, and get the only wooden spoon in the clubs history, for an advance from pick 5 to pick 4? And a mid 20s priority pick? No way!

Maybe if the 2009 draft situation was in place where the priority pick was pick 1 and finishing last got picks 1 and 2. Then I might buy it.

And as Hillary Bray says, the club had been ripped apart and was a mess both on and off the field. Gardiner, Cousins and Chick had gone though the legacy was still there. Chad Fletcher was not so much off the rails as completely out of the station. And Kerr wasn't far away. Thankfully, he for one, appears to have broken away from that group when the club re-invented itself.