demonscoast said:

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

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

Post # 24 of this thread

  Rhino Richards said:

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.

You dont read too well champ do you?

I dont believe they tanked four years as you have conspired in post #22.

I dont think they were good enough to achieve that other than in 2007 due to their lack of competitiveness from the impact of the draft penalties amongst other issues. However I do believe they had due motive and situation to do so last year. The problem is the proof. Clearly Libba has you bluffed. But smarter people seem to want substantive evidence.

I let you read back to find the other parts. Good luck.

  Rhino Richards said:

Post # 24 of this thread

You dont read too well champ do you?

I dont believe they tanked four years as you have conspired in post #22.

I dont think they were good enough to achieve that other than in 2007 due to their lack of competitiveness from the impact of the draft penalties amongst other issues. However I do believe they had due motive and situation to do so last year. The problem is the proof. Clearly Libba has you bluffed. But smarter people seem to want substantive evidence.

I let you read back to find the other parts. Good luck.

Still haven't answered it Rhino

YES or NO?

  demonscoast said:

Still haven't answered it Rhino

YES or NO?

I already did.

What do you think my quote from post # 24 says? Duh!

  Rhino Richards said:

I already did.

What do you think my quote from post # 24 says? Duh!

Not YES or NO....Just your version of it

Rhino - YES or NO?

  demonscoast said:

Not YES or NO....Just your version of it

Rhino - YES or NO?

For some inexplicable reason there is a Meatloaf song thats got stuck in my head

  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?

[/quote

What happens in athletics finals after a competition winner has been found after the event to have cheated the system for unfair advantage. Take their trophy off them & remove them from the records.

See sig

No Matter how you look at you have an ex carlton assistant coach saying that they did not do everything to win a match. This should at least make the AFL investigate the public allegation. It is my belief that carlton "Tanked" games to win the priority draft picks which netted then judd and krutzer. I obviously have no proof of this and thats why its just my opinion. My opinion is based on teams selected and matchups and how during games coaches actions and inactions affected the outcome of games.

Many teams in the previous years at the bottom have played "new blood" when finals were out of contention. I think this is a fairly sensible idea for a club. The question for each person is at what stage does this become "tanking" and not just "preparing" for next season. For years Kevin sheedy applied this method and publicly stated this philosophy. The AFL may have to bring in some guidelines/rules to set down what teams can and cant do.

I do agree with Gouga suggestion on draft picks. This makes winning more of a priority for the lower clubs. I dont believe any club would trade a chance at a premiership for number 1 draft pick. IE : "tanking" games to drop out of the eight. This also means coming last in the seasons gain you no benefit but still gives you a below 10 first round pick.

  45hotgod said:

if only it wasn't libba who said it, this statement would have more credence. unfortunately his last 6-9 months worth of comments have tarnished his name for me at least.

Exactly. In the oh so political world of Footy, it's your credibility that gets things done. Libba has zero credibility at the moment.

  Dappa Dan said:

Exactly. In the oh so political world of Footy, it's your credibility that gets things done. Libba has zero credibility at the moment.

and Carlton and the AFL know it.. they now playing a game of double bluff !! The AFL wont want to investigate.. it'll be the biggest can of worms in footy history !! that and it would interfere with Andrew's socialising !!

Look what he has said constitute tanking:

- Sending players off to have operations early rather than waiting until the end of the year

- Playing young players rather than necessarily the best 22 that week

Despite also saying:

- Coaches never talked about tanking

- Players were always trying to win

It's all very well hating Carlton (and we've all got plenty of reason to do that) but every club that isn't going to make the finals does the first two.

Did Carlton want to win Round 12? Of course

Did they want to win Round 22? Of course not

Can anyone prove that they "threw" the last game let alone the last 11 or part thereof? I'd be shocked if the answer was yes.

Reckon there is any chance we can stop whingeing?

As much as I loath the scum at Carlton, they are not he first team to tank. They have probably done it more than any other club, but they are not alone.

Tanking is hard to prove, and sanctioning Carlton is going to open up a huge can of worms. How can you prove we weren't trying to lose? what about Richmond?

The AFL need to remove the source of temptation. What's done is done, even if it is incredibly unfair.

Carlton tanked.

They're not the first.

It will be impossible to prove unless someone at Carlton did something incredibly stupid like record their intention to lose.

There'll be no penalty for Carlton.

The AFL will have to directly address tanking - there's a few strategies ...

A bottom 8 finals series to determine the high picks is the way to go, I'm convinced now.

  Before2Long said:

Fold the club I say.

it absolutely amazes me they can deny this stuff, everyone denies it, its pathetic and just goes to show how insular, naive or arrogant the media and especially the AFL leaders are, it happens, a lot of us were at that game last year and the cheats did not try

As a few have already pointed out, simply get rid of the priority pick.

However some form of lottery system might work for the clubs outside the 8 but not in terms of any priority pick. Just the first draft picks.

And while they're at it, the AFL should have a good hard look at the father/son rule.

I know it's been on their agenda for a while, but has anything changed yet?

father son rule is fine (you'll think so too when we have another three davey's running round in 18 years time).

they should make the bottom four teams go into a random draw to see what order they get the top 4 draft picks, thus ensuring no tanking. the team 12th upwards wouldnt tank because they still have a chance of making the finals. flawless.

  kezza07 said:

father son rule is fine (you'll think so too when we have another three davey's running round in 18 years time).

they should make the bottom four teams go into a random draw to see what order they get the top 4 draft picks, thus ensuring no tanking. the team 12th upwards wouldnt tank because they still have a chance of making the finals. flawless.

God I hope not, doesn't he have a bunch of Daughters? No offence to the girls out there.

  Gouga said:

There is a big difference! There is no rule against tanking

What about bringing the game into disrepute?

Deliberately engineering a loss where the emphasis, and the greater public expectation, throughout the entire existence of the game for over one hundred and fifty years is to achieve a victory on the scoreboard <_<

Throwing a boxing match would not be seen so leniently

I wonder if any Carlton folk put money on the loss? That would be interesting indeed!

What about people who lost money on the result? Would they have a case for a refund from Carlton if true?

Is there so little respect for our great game that the integrity of the results no longer matter or do only games between higher placed rivals matter. Throwing a GF would not be seen so lightly

I think, if true, that it is a very serious matter & quite possibly bordering on fraud, more so now that it is a professional sport (I also think I'm starting to sound like and old bugger too but that's beside the point )

If there is no transgression in tanking what was Demetridiot getting all worked up about re Roos ??