PaulRB

This is starting to make more sense of our recent history, including 186 the player schism and issues with CC and CS... Perhaps this is part the cancerous culture that we need to fully address and eradicate from the club in order to move on. Is Caro taking us on a cathartic journey deep into the heart of the MFC?

I think as the implications for the other "tanking" clubs of Melbourne being retrospectively investigated and punished sink in, a few other presidents will be having a quite word with the AFL to go easy.

Hey Sloonie, given we just moved on or delisted over a dozen players we may be dealing with a player who has already left the good ship Melbourne. And, irrespective the gene is out of the bottle. The club needs to keep talking to the AFL so they know what the AFL may be planning and develop appropriate and rigorous responses. If we get away with no draft sanctions we'll have done well, and a witch hunt of who said what would only serve to agitate the waters further.

Given how we stumbled into this years season while the Dons were already in fourth gear, I'd be circumspect about predicting the round 2 result going our way.

So according to the logic of The Age article, the crime that the MFC should be punished for is NOT tanking, but "talking about tanking"... It being OK to tank if no one from the club involved talks about it. What a joke.

Broad definition to me would be: to consciously gain advantage though losing.

Some key factors in our favour. 1. everyone knew and understood it was to the MFC's advantage to lose those games. 2. at the time CS was supported by AD who in effect "approved" our strategy. 3. the previous year we have experienced Carlton doing exactly the same thing we were to do the next year, and get away with it. 4. the rules in this area are ill-defined unlike salary cap breaches, and to date no club has been sanctioned for "tanking". 5. analysis of the finishing positions of many clubs over the past decade indicates a broad statistic trend toward "tanking" by many clubs. 6. the then president is unavailable to be called to the stand (apologies if this sounds callous), so unable to prove it was a decision of the "club" or several over-zealous administrators. 7. the MFC has lost many games, and had bad, worst seasons than the year they "tanked". 8. the evenness of the AFL competition will be damaged by the AFL hand the MFC sanctions. Any fine would most likely be paid by the ALF anyway. 9. the MFC may be prepared to take the AFL to court to contest any sanctions they may seek to impose That said, when the dust settles I'd be keen for the club to move those involved in this period on, and ensure such foolish episodes are avoided in the future.

A good draw with winnable home games in the first half of the season, when we'll need them.

Should be able to drag it out given "Tanking investigation "timeless""

I can't get the image of Chris Connelly doing a Dr Evil impersonation and saying "Everyone put it in "the vault" and zip it!" out of my head. It can be so embarrassing being a supporter of this club.

I wonder what Tom Scully thought during the Melb Vs Tigers game. Perhaps some of his disrespect for the MFC came from the manner of him arriving there? Karma is a [censored].

I'm all for bringing down every other team that has similarly "tanked". But I'm also keen to use this episode to continue to clean and improve our club, for the sole reason of preventing such follies occurring again down the track.

We've already lost (in my eyes). I'm keen now to ensure those driving the "systematic losing for draft picks brigade" are held responsible for bringing the club into disrepute and possible AFL sanctions...

At least the coach and most of the current FD were not at Melbourne when this occured and should be able to plow on with pre-season, as this issue now consumes the rest of the club. When will it end. Sigh

Desperate graspings of a drowning argument. We're already losing the PR arguement, MFC brand being tarnished weekly, and a legal fight with the AFL over the degrees with which we "tanked" or didn't "tank" should be a bonus for our membership, and progress as a club.

Like most things it's about motivation and degree. the group strategy discussions revealed in The Age imply we'd switched our motivation heavily to gaining high pick by losing and were up to it to a high degree. Greed does that. Shame for us hapless supporters because it's crap to watch at the time and now looks likely to haunt us for years to come.

I agree. However I think from my perspective of a Melb supporter, I'd like to know how the club is going to deal with the actions of "whomever" bringing the club into disrespute? This squalid episode has eroded the brand of the MFC. A front page article in The Age stating we have acted with dubious morals need a response by the club. No to refute it but to work out who and why we've allowed ourselves to be in this dubious situation. It requires some self examination, honesty and action to ensure it doesn't happen again.

Playing semantics with the definition of the word "tanking" does not remove the moral flaw of trying to milk the system (get high draft picks) while claiming to be doing other wise (win every game of footy). The tragedy of our fascination with high draft picks that lead us to become "comfortable" losing games is that it is based on the belief that the MFC cannot rise honestly through hard work but must try and "bend the rules to rise... A moral weakness founded on a profound lack of self-belief.

In the context of higher draft picks for finishing lower the following strategies Season ending surgeries/rehab? Removal of older players for younger players? Experiementation with player positions? Can be pursued for one of two reasons Legitimately using the above strategies to set the players and team up for the following year, trying out new roles etc in anticipation of drafting, building a better team etc... OR Using the above strategies to ensure we obtain higher draft picks through losing. The actual motivation behind these strategies is unable to be proven as most would claim reason 1 was the rational. My view is that we were doing it for both reasons and given the prize (high draft pick) that we probably drifted toward the second reason (The moral slip). We should not be punished for it because the motivation is impossible to prove and every other club is playing the same game, and has done for over a decade without sanction. Finally we should hold those leading the club responsible for bringing the club into disrepute by playing it so close to the line (and porentially crossing the line), i.e they let the lure of the high draft pick effect their judgement and have brought the club into disrepute. Same kind of flaw Adelaide is dealing with.

186 was not an isolated event/effort, it had been brewing for months and most of us were expecting a belting. the sheer size and humiliation of the loss finally broke the spell of BS we were being sold that this crappy phase was a "anticipated and necessary part of the great re-build"... It took this almighty walloping for the club to start to shake off the tupour of the past ten years of mediocracy. And we're not out of the woods yet.

I'd like to see the AFL ensure every team plays every other team by Rd 17 and the ladder order then is used to set the draft order. Then Rounds 18-23 can be played out by each club as their situation dictates, without the accusation of tanking being superimposed.

Intricate does not equal confused. I agree with his propositions as you have listed them.

suspect they meant "crutch".

In a competitive business such as the AFL, it is the singling out of us as the only club under investigation that stinks, given the numerous example of other clubs having done the same things we've been accused of. Don't know if that can be used as part of a legal challenge but I'd certainly want the MFC screaming it loud and clear if the AFL hammer us.

Same strategies the GWS used in the last two drafts trading their Mini-draft picks for ND picks.