I can still remember the sad days when the tanking controversy ripped through the Melbourne Football Club. We were pilloried in the press as every move the club made was examined under a microscope. Sentences uttered, even those made clearly in jest, were considered as damning by journalists hungry for sleazy headlines ready to condemn the Demons for committing heinous crimes that were ignored when committed earlier by the likes of Collingwood, Hawthorn, Richmond and Carlton. The atmosphere was toxic.

But today, tanking is becoming almost respectable, little more than a minor moral dilemma facing Al Clarkson as North Melbourne embarks on its campaign to snare as many concessions from the AFL as it can get without causing embarrassment to the competition’s power brokers. It seems that nobody cares about integrity as much as they did in the days when it was a crime to tell a joke.

To tank or not to tank?

POSTSCRIPT: Robbo claims in the article that “Demons coach Dean Bailey actually admitted he was asked to not win games”. I don’t believe that’s true - my recollection is that Bails never went as far as admitting that at all. We all knew the drill but nobody had to be told what was  at stake. Whatever you wanted to call it - tanking, list management, whatever, the practice was encouraged at the highest official  level and the idea of selective sanctions at the time against one club for allegedly bringing the game into disrepute constituted rank hypocrisy by the AFL and many in the football industry. Attitudes might have changed but the hypocrisy has not.

Maybe the bottom four teams should go in a draw for the first four picks. 

For me the coach that laid this out perfectly for the AFL world to see is Adam Simpson. Cleary there’s been no incentive to win, but the moment he got word the board was going to get rid of him he started to flood players behind the ball and tried to defend. His win was the ultimate F U to his employer. He was obviously doing the right thing by the club, but when they turned on him he repaid the favour.

18 minutes ago, YearOfTheDees said:

Maybe the bottom four teams should go in a draw for the first four picks. 

would be great this year. We could end up with pick 1!

And Geelong are currently sitting at draft pick 8. Win this week and it is guaranteed pick 10. Lose and could be pick 6.  But nothing to see with half the team booked in for early surgeries or injured including Hawkins and Cameron.

 

Just now, Watson11 said:

And Geelong are currently sitting at draft pick 8. Win this week and it is guaranteed pick 10. Lose and could be pick 6.  But nothing to see with half the team booked in for early surgeries or injured including Hawkins and Cameron.

 

Precisely. At the time that Melbourne was being attacked for tanking, the fact that it sent some players in for surgery before the end of the season was Exhibit A in claims that the club was committing the major criminal activity of tanking. Today, it’s okay.

25 minutes ago, Freddy Fuschia said:

Precisely. At the time that Melbourne was being attacked for tanking, the fact that it sent some players in for surgery before the end of the season was Exhibit A in claims that the club was committing the major criminal activity of tanking. Today, it’s okay.

I think that we were ripe for the taking at the time - there was little substance to our club, so we were easy targets. The truth was that every club had done it, with Carlton possibly the worst offenders.
 

However, we had a leadership that believed the fortunes of the club would magically turn around with high draft picks alone. The bottom line is that if you entertain the idea of losing, your culture is no good.

51 minutes ago, Watson11 said:

And Geelong are currently sitting at draft pick 8. Win this week and it is guaranteed pick 10. Lose and could be pick 6.  But nothing to see with half the team booked in for early surgeries or injured including Hawkins and Cameron.

 

Seems fair to me .

Just because you drop seven players at the same time, including five of your best ten, doesn't mean you aren't taking the game seriously.

So I'm told.

Anyway, the changes were made before the betting odds were calculated, and that's what really matters.

[Censored] I hate the AFL Palace.

1 hour ago, The heart beats true said:

For me the coach that laid this out perfectly for the AFL world to see is Adam Simpson. Cleary there’s been no incentive to win, but the moment he got word the board was going to get rid of him he started to flood players behind the ball and tried to defend. His win was the ultimate F U to his employer. He was obviously doing the right thing by the club, but when they turned on him he repaid the favour.

It's like Bas Rutten's self defence videos.

"He tried to kill me so now I gotta return the favour" 

1 hour ago, 3183 Dee said:

I think that we were ripe for the taking at the time - there was little substance to our club, so we were easy targets. The truth was that every club had done it, with Carlton possibly the worst offenders.
 

However, we had a leadership that believed the fortunes of the club would magically turn around with high draft picks alone. The bottom line is that if you entertain the idea of losing, your culture is no good.

Now that tanking is considered good practice, I assume the AFL will be refunding the fine we paid?

2 hours ago, Freddy Fuschia said:

Precisely. At the time that Melbourne was being attacked for tanking, the fact that it sent some players in for surgery before the end of the season was Exhibit A in claims that the club was committing the major criminal activity of tanking. Today, it’s okay.

The club should seriously consider asking the AFL to repay the fine they imposed on us, accounting for inflation as well.

4 hours ago, Whispering_Jack said:

I can still remember the sad days when the tanking controversy ripped through the Melbourne Football Club. We were pilloried in the press as every move the club made was examined under a microscope. Sentences uttered, even those made clearly in jest, were considered as damning by journalists hungry for sleazy headlines ready to condemn the Demons for committing heinous crimes that were ignored when committed earlier by the likes of Collingwood, Hawthorn, Richmond and Carlton. The atmosphere was toxic.

But today, tanking is becoming almost respectable, little more than a minor moral dilemma facing Al Clarkson as North Melbourne embarks on its campaign to snare as many concessions from the AFL as it can get without causing embarrassment to the competition’s power brokers. It seems that nobody cares about integrity as much as they did in the days when it was a crime to tell a joke.

To tank or not to tank?

POSTSCRIPT: Robbo claims in the article that “Demons coach Dean Bailey actually admitted he was asked to not win games”. I don’t believe that’s true - my recollection is that Bails never went as far as admitting that at all. We all knew the drill but nobody had to be told what was  at stake. Whatever you wanted to call it - tanking, list management, whatever, the practice was encouraged at the highest official  level and the idea of selective sanctions at the time against one club for allegedly bringing the game into disrepute constituted rank hypocrisy by the AFL and many in the football industry. Attitudes might have changed but the hypocrisy has not.

I still feel angry about it tbh. The Caro attack ( sanctioned by the AFL appeasing the gambling industry)  happened what was it 3 years after the events actually happened...and was targetted at ONLY us. Not the blues, Hawks, Swans, Pies that had ALL of them done the same thing! Still gets under my skin. The only thing that I will say about it is it gave us a true bottom..it was from there we laid the foundation for a flag. 

One of the architects of the Horethorn tank in the 2000 and zeros is still at it this very day.

Agree, really grinds my gears the price we ended up paying considering those who had done it before and that now it's considered good practice.

I'm open to a weighted draft lottery to be conducted in week before the finals with all the non finalists in contention. Something like the wooden spooner has a 25% chance of getting the Number 1 pick all the way up to 9th who has a 1% chance. Then from Pick 11 onwards it's all on ladder position.

Or alternatively have teams aquire points over a 4 year rolling period. 1 point for winning the flag and 18 points for finishing last. Whoever has the most points over that 4 year period gets Pick 1 all the way up to whoever has the least amount of points having Pick 18.

they fined us $500k for 'not tanking' and then gave us $1.5m the next week to right the club's football structure

3 hours ago, Watson11 said:

And Geelong are currently sitting at draft pick 8. Win this week and it is guaranteed pick 10. Lose and could be pick 6.  But nothing to see with half the team booked in for early surgeries or injured including Hawkins and Cameron.

 

The difference between pick 8 and pick 6 is nothing.  There are multiple examples of good/better players being selected behind others. 

Geelongs next pick in this draft is pick 82.  They have more problems than trying to gain pick 6 instead of 8.

You cannot rebuild with 1 player. Tanking used to be all about gaining EXTRA picks under a defined formula.  That disappeared years ago, so there is no longer any incentive to tank.

 

The main problem at The MFC back then, was we had Loose Lips that were happy to go Public. 
If certain tactics had been kept “in house” the gutter journalism would not have occurred. 
Wilson also had her own agenda against the CEO of the day

Teams tank every year. It’s the smart thing to do 

West Coast and North winning in consecutive weeks doesn't bode well for the vital signs of tanking ...

We tanked too obviously and I admit I was in favour of it but I was wrong, it was bad cultural practice and teams have learned from that.

3 hours ago, Wells 11 said:

I still feel angry about it tbh. The Caro attack ( sanctioned by the AFL appeasing the gambling industry)  happened what was it 3 years after the events actually happened...and was targetted at ONLY us. Not the blues, Hawks, Swans, Pies that had ALL of them done the same thing! Still gets under my skin. The only thing that I will say about it is it gave us a true bottom..it was from there we laid the foundation for a flag. 

Exactly.

Did we tank, most probably.

Did we get dragged over the coals way too much compared to other clubs, most probably.

The damage it did and the misinformation it spread throughout the league has been uncalled for. Even now opposition fans accuse you of getting done for tanking. Yet at the time Gil couldn't explain what tanking was. The verdict was not guilty of tanking but a $500k fine. It never made sense and the AFL swept it under their massive rug very well.

Just own it.

Of course we tanked, so did plenty of others most notably Carlton. I still don't see the issue with it, you can say it was wrong and impacted us culturally blah blah but if we scored Franklin/Roughead or Pendlebury/Thomas from it or say we got a Petracca/Oliver combo from it I doubt anyone would care.

Our culture was cooked for other reasons, nothing to do with tanking.

Edited August 26, 20232 yr by Dr. Gonzo

On the couch tonight, Gary Lyons introductory question was:

 

‘Did North do the right thing in forgoing pick 1 for a rare victory?’
 

That is an implicit endorsement of the tactics of ‘tanking’ being not only a legitimate but a preferred option to obtain higher draft picks. 
 

I hope people but this in their memory banks for future accusations of tanking, as we now have a clear statement that this is perfectly fine by a senior AFL journalist on the premier FOX footy show. 
 

Unless there is an article that comes out in the next week that questions this framing (remember that Lyon is commenting on the capacity of a journalist), then we have absolute confirmation that tanking is again, not only fine to do, but preferential. 
 

[censored] unbelievable how the narrative has changed since we got fined. The AFL has ZERO standards. 

Just remember this post whenever anyone complains about tanking again. 

It was around this time when I chose Fork 'em as my Demonland name.

Fork 'em all I say.

 

Edited August 28, 20232 yr by Fork 'em

On 8/26/2023 at 11:24 AM, 3183 Dee said:

I think that we were ripe for the taking at the time - there was little substance to our club, so we were easy targets. The truth was that every club had done it, with Carlton possibly the worst offenders.
 

However, we had a leadership that believed the fortunes of the club would magically turn around with high draft picks alone. The bottom line is that if you entertain the idea of losing, your culture is no good.

The Kruezer Cup Carlton laid 4 tackles to 3/4 time

 

Travis Johnstone had 43 possessions. Ran around by himself all day