Just to keep floggin' a dead horse.

I've run through last season's results towards the end of the year and here's a summary:

Richmond were the first team to be mathematically "out of the finals" after Rd 15. Their record from this point forward was Played 7, Won 2, Lost 5.

Melbourne were next after Rd 17. Record: P 5, W 2, L 3.

Then Carlton in Rd 18. Record: P 4, W 0, L 4.

Then finally WBulldogs in Rd 21. Record: P 1, W 0, L 1.

This gives us a Lottery Pool as follows:

Melbourne 40% win/loss ratio

Richmond 28.5% w/l ratio

Carlton 0%

WB 0%

To make this system "fairer" teams would have to qualify for the "spoon pool" by playing at least 3 games after their finals hopes are gone, in other words you have to be out of the finals race before the start of round 20.

So in the above case you get more balls in the draft lottery based on your win/loss ratio from the point forward of when you were out of the finals race. So lets say Carlton get the baseline minimum of 10 balls, Melbourne get 10 + 40 (=50) and Richmond get 10 + 29 (=39).

Okay I think i'll give up now.

Edit: just imagine how [censored] you'd be if this was the way it really worked and Carlton still drew pick 1 in the lottery!! haha

Okay radical idea number 2:

Teams in the bottom 4 at the end of the Home and Away season, play a top 4 draft pick mini finals or world cup soccer style "group" series. It runs concurrently with the actual finals series and the final finishing order determines the order of the top 4 draft picks.

Now that would be exciting. Compete for the spoon and then play in september for draft picks.

P.S. if this ever got up, i reckon they'd need to scrap the NAB cup.

This system could work hand in hand with Gouga's idea about the bottom 8 receiving picks 1-8 in reverse order to what they get them now. Instead of the bottom 4 competing for the top 4 draft picks it could be the entire bottom 8 playing a "draft finals" in september so all teams get to play.

  leucopogon said:

Okay radical idea number 2:

Teams in the bottom 4 at the end of the Home and Away season, play a top 4 draft pick mini finals or world cup soccer style "group" series. It runs concurrently with the actual finals series and the final finishing order determines the order of the top 4 draft picks.

Now that would be exciting. Compete for the spoon and then play in september for draft picks.

P.S. if this ever got up, i reckon they'd need to scrap the NAB cup.

The AFL needs you urgently!

  Gouga said:

There should not and will not be any penalties. I have no doubt Carlton tanked, but as has been stated before, the AFL allowed this to happen and connot turn around and punish them.

Agree. This will be dismissed as the bitterness of one person's big mouth. I doubt Libba will ever be involved in the AFL again. Good thing too.

  Rhino Richards said:

Carlton have been put in the position they are to large extent by the pernicious impact of the salary cap penalties they receive for rorting the salary cap breaches. The impact of this has decimated their list and denied them an access to the talent pool. However it goes without saying that internal Carlton issues since the salary cap exposure have also played a significant part

The denial of draft picks effectively stuffs a club up for up to 10 years. The decisive impact of the salary cap breaches sent Carlton effectively to the wilderness on the field. And despite a series of No 1 picks in recent years, you look beyond that and their list is crap. They have huge holes that will take significant time to fill as talented players mature. Carlton have been a rather unskilled team of recent years and prior to 2007 I dont think there was any issue of tanking. They were just awful. I believe with the appointment of Swan and the mounting issue with Pagan at the start of this season effectively gave them the basis to throw the season and to chase Judd. Very difficult to prove. And just basing it on the bitter words of an ex assistant coach with an axe to grind is very dangerous and not substantive evidence.

The AFL rules are as much to blame for this.

So whats the penalty for Carlton....remove draft picks?

Sympathetic to Carlton...are you for real? - I don't agree with you on this Rhino

We all know that Carlton tanked last year (MFC were on the bad end of it - 2 games against them), and that is all the evidence you need.

Marc Murphy and Andrew Walker is the only other evidence you need to know that they tanked previous years, everyone knows that. Putting a crap/ young team on the park is no excuse because that is precisely how they are achieving it, year in year out.

It's easy to say that Carlton have a crap list and so therefore it is OK right now (draft penalties or not), but like Hawthorn, you wait until they mature and Carlton become an unbeatable force in years to come -you won't be saying it. They simply took what was a bad situation for them (draft penalties), and tried to turn it into an advantage by fielding a crap team. The trouble is that can only stay believable for so long.

In my mind, there is no difference between rorting the system by breaching salary cap, and tanking games - Both are aimed at getting an edge on the comp, against the rules, and not in the spirit of the game.

I don't know how far you should go with penalising draft picks etc., but I know that the AFL has to set a good but fair example...Carlton's actions more than deserve draft penalties in my opinion, given that they landed extra draft picks and then Judd from their dishonest actions.

Whether they get penalised or not, they will get what's coming to them if they aren't already

Go Dee's!

Libba - in The Age he is quoted as saying the club's actions ( referring to his allegation of tanking) made him feel 'extremely uncomfortable' - yeah, so uncomfortable that he resigned from the club there and then, and went public with his reason for resigning !!!

His outburst now might well be the case, but his action of saying it now indicates to me hypocrisy and sour grapes- if he still had his coaching job at Carlton , I doubt we would have heard a word from him.

AFL - they investigated Roos on a similar allegation re NAB Cup - they HAVE to investigate Carlton.

Draft selections/ tanking - abolish priority picks, and run a raffle or raffles for 1st choice etc - but I don't know of how many teams to go in the raffle/s

  demonscoast said:

In my mind, there is no difference between rorting the system by breaching salary cap, and tanking games - Both are aimed at getting an edge on the comp, against the rules, and not in the spirit of the game.

There is a big difference! There is no rule against tanking, there is against breaching the salary cap however. Any team can tank, carlton are the ones unethical enough to do it.

Also, at the risk of being unpopular, I'd like to point out in the later rounds last season many posters on this site were saying they hope we tank. How can you want it for our club and then be critical of another club that actually did it?

  demonscoast said:

Sympathetic to Carlton...are you for real? - I don't agree with you on this Rhino

Apologies but I just deal in the facts not populist conspiracy theories. :D

  Gouga said:

There should not and will not be any penalties. I have no doubt Carlton tanked, but as has been stated before, the AFL allowed this to happen and connot turn around and punish them.

As for a fairer system. I proposed on this site a couple years ago the team that finishes 9th should get the number 1 pick and so on down to the team that finishes 16th gets pick 8. Then for the top half the team that finishes 8th gets pick 9 and so on up to the team that finaishes 1st gets pick 16. And the following rounds continue in the traditional order.

The idea being teams pushing for finals, but not quite good enough, get rewarded. The reward allows them to move into the top half. The teams that finish down the bottom half still get a good pick which allows them to move up the bottom half and compete for better picks.

If this system was in place teams won't be bottoming out and then all of a sudden bouncing into finals. Teams will slowly build and improve. I beleive the league will be much better for this and there will be absolutely no motivation to lose games!

Of course priority picks to be scrapped as well.

Then set a penalty from this season onwards - If some guidelines are laid out now, with ample pre-warning - goodbye tanking!

I also like your ‘9th place idea, there’s potential there with a little refinement

  Rhino Richards said:

Apologies but I just deal in the facts not populist conspiracy theories. :D

Carlton tanking is not a conspiracy theory you dimwit

  demonscoast said:

Carlton tanking is not a conspiracy theory you dimwit

Do you have tangible evidence?

  Gouga said:

There is a big difference! There is no rule against tanking, there is against breaching the salary cap however. Any team can tank, carlton are the ones unethical enough to do it.

Also, at the risk of being unpopular, I'd like to point out in the later rounds last season many posters on this site were saying they hope we tank. How can you want it for our club and then be critical of another club that actually did it?

Best see my other response to you, because that addresses what you see as a difference between the two

40% verses 0% - we have a lot more integrity

I see your point, and yes there was a part of me that would have liked to see us get a better draft position, but I would've only felt good about it if we were genuinely bad

I never felt good about the prospect of stooping lower than Carlton, and didn't think there was that much to gain anyway - I'm glad the club saw it that way also (at least proportionately)

  Brocky said:

Do you have tangible evidence?

Libba may be washed up in a big way, but I hardly think he's going to risk a colossal lawsuit for the sake of relevance in the form of a footy show announcement. We KNEW they were tanking. Nobody with a shred of sense could deny it. This 'revelation' confirms it for all those dunces who live in a world of rainbows and candy canes and refuse to believe this sort of underhandedness actually goes on.

I'm disappointed that Carlton got rid of Pagan. Personally, I think he was practically told to tank and refused too.

  Brocky said:

Do you have tangible evidence?

What's Tangible evidence?

Were not in the courts here....

Do you know that they tanked...YES or NO?

If your answer is Yes, then that's evidence enough

  calabreseboy said:

I'm disappointed that Carlton got rid of Pagan. Personally, I think he was practically told to tank and refused too.

Correct!

Just like Libba

  Diablo said:

Libba may be washed up in a big way, but I hardly think he's going to risk a colossal lawsuit for the sake of relevance in the form of a footy show announcement. We KNEW they were tanking. Nobody with a shred of sense could deny it. This 'revelation' confirms it for all those dunces who live in a world of rainbows and candy canes and refuse to believe this sort of underhandedness actually goes on.

Well said Diablo

The whole problem is the priority pick. If it were not in place then the game in question would have been for the difference between pick 2 and pick 3 with the 'loser' getting pick 2 and the 'winner' pick 3. While this might still represent a small problem it does not compare with that presented by the priority pick where the 'loser' got picks 1 and 3 and the 'winner' pick 4. Had we lost the game than we would have got pick 2 and 18 and they would have got pick 3.

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Keep the draft with the teams selecting in reverse order; just get rid of the proirity pick. I would favour that over any situation where a team that might have won 7 or 8 games getting a pick before a team that won none.

  demonscoast said:

What's Tangible evidence?

Tangible from dictionary.com:

1. capable of being touched; discernible by the touch; material or substantial.

2. real or actual, rather than imaginary or visionary: the tangible benefits of sunshine.

3. definite; not vague or elusive: no tangible grounds for suspicion.

4. (of an asset) having actual physical existence, as real estate or chattels, and therefore capable of being assigned a value in monetary terms.

You want the AFL to penalise Carlton. How can they do that without actual evidence? Without tangible evidence it is just a theory.

Its a very clever policy of Carlton's.. They can claim plausible denial. I dount th ewords 'tank' 'throw' etc were used anywhere except over a beer out of earshot. All conversations would have "implied" a certain tact be used...nudge nudge ...know what I mean !!! etc

Ratten could well have been talked to in such a fashion as to leave in no dount teh 'opinions' of the borad ( read Swan ) and that it might be appropriate prior to offical contracture that he 'show' the club his true alliance !!

People are asking for the smoking gun...the 'evidence".. How naieve..you poor fools.. There never wil lbe short of a taped convo. we have no "proof " of a black hole per se.. how can you..it literally doesn texist.. so how do you prove it 'does'... You interpolate.. You observe.. you then fit it all together and you have a case to show that such and such is more than X% likely to exist !!

So too with tanking. You look at teams fielded...you look at coaching methods ( or lack of actions etc ) you look at results etc.

Aprt from teh idea it was a poorly kept secret ..you only need look at what transpired to see that Carlton tanked..!!

if it looks like a duck...sounds like a duck.....flies like a duck...Im guessing its a DUCK !!

they tanked !!

If such an idea was sufficient fro Demetrifool to go Roos on then surely Carlton have a casse to answer.

  Brocky said:

Tangible from dictionary.com:

1. capable of being touched; discernible by the touch; material or substantial.

2. real or actual, rather than imaginary or visionary: the tangible benefits of sunshine.

3. definite; not vague or elusive: no tangible grounds for suspicion.

4. (of an asset) having actual physical existence, as real estate or chattels, and therefore capable of being assigned a value in monetary terms.

You want the AFL to penalise Carlton. How can they do that without actual evidence? Without tangible evidence it is just a theory.

Are you real, definite, in physical existence or capable of being touched? If so, your my tangible evidence....so would be Libba

That's why I asked you the YES or NO question, of which you haven't answered.

Do you know that they tanked?

  demonscoast said:

Carlton tanking is not a conspiracy theory you dimwit

Show me the proof to back your statement gorgeous!

Four years of tanking you say!!! About as much substance as a 13th century English village witch burning parade.

You and Libba make a fine pair!

  Rhino Richards said:

Show me the proof to back your statement gorgeous!

Four years of tanking you say!!! About as much substance as a 13th century English village witch burning parade.

You and Libba make a fine pair!

So did they Tank Rhino? - YES or NO are the only answers

I'm betting you don't answer it....prove me wrong

  Rhino Richards said:

Show me the proof to back your statement gorgeous!

Four years of tanking you say!!! About as much substance as a 13th century English village witch burning parade.

You and Libba make a fine pair!

I think you've hit on a fine idea there RR...strap Chri$ Judda$ into a dunking chair...

If he drowns - they didnt tank,

If he doesn't drown that means they did tank and we burn him at a stake.

I'm not bitter and twisted, no really, Im not!

  DeeReaming said:

I think you've hit on a fine idea there RR...strap Chri$ Judda$ into a dunking chair...

If he drowns - they didnt tank,

If he doesn't drown that means they did tank and we burn him at a stake.

I'm not bitter and twisted, no really, Im not!

Classic!

What kind of tank would you use?