"Nothing to see here"...or not

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,813]

The Victorian gambling regulator has today put out a statement which says that the media stories earlier this year about Melbourne tanking provided no new information and the decision it made in 2009 still stands. The Herald Sun has whipped it up (paywall, so see below) by getting a comment from the State Opposition Leader (himself a former Gaming Minister) who has complained about the regulator's decision.

Some stories should be left to die, but this one has some form of zombie appeal to the Herald Sun. Here's a summary of the Herald Sun beat up:

(Mods, please merge with an appropriate tanking thread if necessary)

The state Opposition says the gambling watchdog’s “nothing to see here” verdict on the Melbourne tanking scandal “beggars belief”.

The Victorian Commission for Gambling and Liquor Regulation this morning said it will be taking “no further action” against the AFL over the Demons saga.

Five months after announcing a fresh inquiry into the affair, the VCGLR said it had determined that the league had not breached its obligations as a sports controlling body.

A statement released by the VCGLR refers to the AFL’s actions in notifying it of a potential problem in 2009, but not the confessions given by club officials to the league integrity unit in late 2012.

Liberal leader Michael O’Brien told the Herald Sun this morning: “There is a real question whether the VCGLR is doing its job when it comes to regulating sports betting.

“No sporting code can simply regulate itself when it comes to gambling integrity.

“Footy fans will be wondering, how can alleged tanking by football clubs be ignored by the gambling regulator?

 “The ‘nothing to see here’ response of the gambling regulator beggars belief.”

The VCGLR’s handling of this matter does nothing for public confidence in the regulator or in the integrity of sports betting in this state, he added.

---

---

Today’s VCGLR decision follows the Herald Sun’s publication of 80 pages of secret tanking transcripts in April.

The documents exposed how multiple Melbourne Football Club officials confessed to a conspiracy to lose matches during the 2009 season.

In a previously undisclosed admission, then Demons coach Dean Bailey told AFL investigators: “What was said to me was, if I win games I would get sacked. I was threatened. I didn’t like it.

“I think it was a terrible thing to be bullying and harassing not only me but the rest of the staff. Absolutely, I knew if we won those games, I felt that I would get sacked.”

But VCGLR director of compliance Adam Ockwell said this morning: “The Victorian Commission for Gambling and Liquor Regulation has completed its review of media reports regarding the AFL and the Melbourne Football Club that were published in April this year.

“The VCGLR found that the information and evidence published by the media formed part of its original investigation in 2009 which determined that the AFL had not breached its obligations as a sports controlling body.

“As no breaches of Victorian legislation were identified, the VCGLR will be taking no further action.

“In accordance with the Gambling Regulation Act 2003, the AFL as a Sports Controlling Body is required to notify the VCGLR in writing if it becomes aware of a breach or suspected breach of its policies, rules, codes of conduct or other mechanisms designed to ensure the integrity of the relevant sports betting event, as soon as practicable and in any event within 14 days of the breach or suspected breach.

“The VCGLR is committed to ensuring the integrity of betting on sports events.”

The Herald Sun report in April revealed for the first time that eight Demons football staff admitted they had been directed not to win more than four games; that players not seriously injured were kept off the ground during matches to stymie interchange rotations; and that the AFL’s investigators were provided with reports detailing “fake injuries” used to rule players out of team selection.

After winning just four games in 2009, the Dees secured the first two picks in the national draft, selecting Tom Scully and Jack Trengove.

The AFL announced the findings of its “tanking” probe in February 2013, declaring that Melbourne had not deliberately set out to lose games.

The AFL’s then-deputy chief executive, Gillon McLachlan, stated: “I actually don’t know what the def­inition of tanking is. In the AFL rules, it talks to performing on merits and the best of their ability. In my view, there was no tanking on match day

 

[DubDee 25,903]

Sweet Mother of god 

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,813]

4 minutes ago, DubDee said:

Sweet Mother of god 

As opposed to Mick Warner's mother...because clearly he's a son of a b*tch.

[Supermercado 2,797]

Funny that this would get another run just before Gold Coast get a priority pick. Can't wait to be lectured about how it's karma for something that we did 10 years ago, when nobody but Nathan Jones and the bootstudder are left.

Also, this line is a flat out fabrication based on the transcripts the Herald Sun posted earlier in the year. Nowhere in the two transcripts they put up does he say this:

“What was said to me was, if I win games I would get sacked. I was threatened. I didn’t like it."

 

[Ethan Tremblay 30,873]

Gil said we didn’t tank ‘on game-day’ so that’s good enough for me. 

[Sir Why You Little 37,048]

They just keep punching. 

There was no such rule on tanking anyway, still isn’t

They just make it up as they go along

Story of the AFL really...

[Bring-Back-Powell 14,851]

Was that in reference to the game we were actually in front at the end of the game before Jordan McMuffin fluked a goal from outside 50.

Or the game we shockingly lost by 40 points to a team that finished with a 20-2 record?

[Wells 11 5,406]

The sad , unpalatable truth for us dees is that we’re an easy club to hit. The skinny kid w glasses in the school playground. I long fr the day, and I may never see it, we’re up there punching w the big boys . A club to be feared and respected. 

 

[Sir Why You Little 37,048]

Always amazed me that Richmond never got done. They were far more blatant at Tanking. Wallace admitted it in interviews. 

Said he did nothing in the coaches box at times, so that they would lose, in order to get Cotchin

Wilson never said a word though in the Aged...

[Wells 11 5,406]

5 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Always amazed me that Richmond never got done. They were far more blatant at Tanking. Wallace admitted it in interviews. 

Said he did nothing in the coaches box at times, so that they would lose, in order to get Cotchin

Wilson never said a word though in the Aged...

It’s always [censored] me off too. Wilson was at her poisonous worst w us... on behalf of the AFL. Also utterly ignoring the blues the previous year. 

[Sir Why You Little 37,048]

7 minutes ago, Wells 11 said:

It’s always [censored] me off too. Wilson was at her poisonous worst w us... on behalf of the AFL. Also utterly ignoring the blues the previous year. 

Yes. We were definately the easy target

I have heard the Wallace audio in the Coaches box. It is far worse than anything poor Dean Bailey did

[Fork 'em 6,984]

Collingwood played in the 2002 and 2003 GF only to tank and lose their last 11 games to scoop up Thomas and Pendlbury at pick 2 and 5 in the 2005 draft.

Hawthorn tanked in 2004 to get both Roughead and Franklin at pick 2&5.
Richmond also tanked in 2004 with Wallace admitting as much  to pick up Deledio at 1 and Tambling at 4

Carlton tanked to win both the "Krueser and Gibbs cups" with assistant coach Libratore again admitting as much but warned to keep his mouth shut by the AFL.

Eagles tanked in 2008 to get Nic Nat at pick 2 after playing in both the 2005 & '06 Grand Finals.

And we were absolutely garbage for multiple years and yet were the only club that got stung for tanking.
What a hatchet job.

Edited August 29, 2019 by Fork 'em

[Sir Why You Little 37,048]

1 minute ago, Fork 'em said:

And we were absolutely garbage for multiple years and yet were the club that got stung for tanking.
What a hatchet job.

The least amount of damage to punch The MFC. No doubt about it. 

I am sure Wilson was briefed by Anderson on how to frame it

[Roger Mellie 4,034]

2 hours ago, Supermercado said:

Funny that this would get another run just before Gold Coast get a priority pick. Can't wait to be lectured about how it's karma for something that we did 10 years ago, when nobody but Nathan Jones and the bootstudder are left.

 

Exactly what I was thinking.

Then, after they get their pick, they'll then go for the big chunk of extra salary space (which I have less of a problem with).

[Redleg 40,948]

2 hours ago, Wells 11 said:

The sad , unpalatable truth for us dees is that we’re an easy club to hit. The skinny kid w glasses in the school playground. I long fr the day, and I may never see it, we’re up there punching w the big boys . A club to be feared and respected. 

 

There you have it. Everyone did it. Many admitted it. Only one club got investigated.

[deespicable me 1,487]

31 minutes ago, Fork 'em said:

Collingwood played in the 2002 and 2003 GF only to tank and lose their last 11 games to scoop up Thomas and Pendlbury at pick 2 and 5 in the 2005 draft.

Hawthorn tanked in 2004 to get both Roughead and Franklin at pick 2&5.
Richmond also tanked in 2004 with Wallace admitting as much  to pick up Deledio at 1 and Tambling at 4

Carlton tanked to win both the "Krueser and Gibbs cups" with assistant coach Libratore again admitting as much but warned to keep his mouth shut by the AFL.

Eagles tanked in 2008 to get Nic Nat at pick 2 after playing in both the 2005 & '06 Grand Finals.

And we were absolutely garbage for multiple years and yet were the only club that got stung for tanking.
What a hatchet job.

Beautifully put. I couldn't believe during that whole time how we were the only club being hung out to dry.

I actually liked the priority pick and the way the clubs managed to never win more than 4 games, or they would go on and win at least 7 or so. Not one team landed on 5 wins throughout the period of time there was a priority pick on offer. 

I hate how the priority pick is now at the discretion of the commission. Just corrupt. Why should those gooses get to choose. Play little tin pot gods. ###ck them. Either there is a formula that gives the club a priority pick or scrap it. This competition is getting less equal by the day.

[Redleg 40,948]

1 hour ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Always amazed me that Richmond never got done. They were far more blatant at Tanking. Wallace admitted it in interviews. 

Said he did nothing in the coaches box at times, so that they would lose, in order to get Cotchin

Wilson never said a word though in the Aged...

You remember her dad Ian, the former President of Richmond.

[Fork 'em 6,984]

19 minutes ago, deespicable me said:

Beautifully put. I couldn't believe during that whole time how we were the only club being hung out to dry.

The others are probably 5 of the 6 richest clubs in the AFL.
And we hardly have 2 brass razoos to rub together and we fork the 250k.

Edited August 29, 2019 by Fork 'em

[Sir Why You Little 37,048]

1 hour ago, Redleg said:

You remember her dad Ian, the former President of Richmond.

Oh yes. My Grandfather was born in Richmond. He was a feral tiger

She was going after Schwab on a personal level and took the Club for the ride

Edited August 29, 2019 by Sir Why You Little

[Jara 1,153]

OMG The hypocrisy 

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

This is exactly why we were found "not guilty" of tanking and fined anyway.

Because the AFL knew that to find us "guilty" of tanking was to bring in the gaming and licencing mob and that spelt DANGER. Big bikkies.

That they went after us and not the architects of the blueprint of tanking (Carlton) was an outrage. The whole thing was a disgrace and the AFL are a complicit party.

But fer chrissake ... the Hun going after us after all these years ... the same mob who wrote the defence brief for the Essendon drug thing?? Makes you want to give up on the AFL altogether.

[Jara 1,153]

Mazer Rackham - on the button!

[Jara 1,153]

Most of the info in this article came from Demonland:

 

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/spat-over-tanking-bedevils-dees-20130111-2clhj.html

[Fork 'em 6,984]

1 hour ago, Mazer Rackham said:

 But fer chrissake ... the Hun going after us after all these years ... the same mob who wrote the defence brief for the Essendon drug thing?? Makes you want to give up on the AFL altogether.

I can't believe they went with the headline earlier in the year on the eve of the Essendon game "Footy's biggest cover up" and then it was about us tanking.
Not the "Darkest day in sport" being Essendons drug cheating cover-up.
Not only is the AFL corrupt but 'Slobbo' Robinson the Herald sun chief football writer and Essendon supporter is too.
 

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,813]

12 hours ago, Mazer Rackham said:

This is exactly why we were found "not guilty" of tanking and fined anyway.

Because the AFL knew that to find us "guilty" of tanking was to bring in the gaming and licencing mob and that spelt DANGER. Big bikkies.

That they went after us and not the architects of the blueprint of tanking (Carlton) was an outrage. The whole thing was a disgrace and the AFL are a complicit party.

But fer chrissake ... the Hun going after us after all these years ... the same mob who wrote the defence brief for the Essendon drug thing?? Makes you want to give up on the AFL altogether.

If you read the gaming regulator's statement and the Herald Sun article you might be forgiven for believing the newspaper didn't understand the story. (Shock! Horror!) The regulator wasn't looking at the Melbourne Football Club. It was looking at whether the AFL has appropriate intergrity controls. That's necessary because the AFL has been approved by the regulator as a Sports Controlling Body. That approval allows the AFL to strike agreements with betting companies. If the regulator is not satisfied, it can remove the AFL's status. So, the story is not actually about the "tanking". It's more about what the AFL did or didn't do once the matter was brought to its attention.