The fate of those who tank.

[m0zza]

Hawthorn finished 9th in 2003, a spot above us that year. Your top 5 goal kickers were Thompson 38, Lekkas 37, Rawlings 34, Dixon 21 and Everrit 17.

Let Rawlings go to the PSD in the Veale deal. Traded out Harford and some other players as well.

Dropped to 15th in 2004 (4 wins) and traded away your full forward and major goal kicker in Nathan Thompson that year, did not give contracts to some other senior players.

2005 finished 14th (5 wins) traded away Hay and Lonie. Lekkas retired. Your full forward now being the HFF Mark Williams. Franklin and Roughead play their first season.

You don't need to make wholesale changes to impact the side, as we have seen just subtle on-field changes is enough to throw games, but taking out the major goal scorers makes it fairly easy to produce a team that isn't going to perform and the club continued to auction off senior players at the right price, going further with trading away Everitt in 2006 after he because the AA ruckman in 2005.

Hawthorn broke no rules and they didn't get rid of anyone that would have been around long enough to rebuild, but the course of action was deliberate and they fielded a much weaker team intentionally than they could possibly have all in the hope that they would strike gold during the rebuild. They were just very lucky they scored Franklin during that period. They also picked up a lot of good younger players so didn't just rely on priority picks, but he was the jewel in the crown, I doubt the Hawks would have got close to the flag in 2008 without him.

Still bitter about poor trading by your club!
2003 Unable to secure Jade Rawlings
2004 Paid high for Nathan Thomson but was fair value for you
2005 Overpaid for Jon Hay and his issues

Hawthorn's list management in this period was severely hampered by long term back ended contracts, leaving few options

Everitt was finished when traded to Sydney
Harford was finished before being traded to Carlton
Lekkas and Lonie were not highly regarded by supporters in 2005 and few were opposed to their Hawthorn careers ending then

 

[Monkey King]

Casey's arrangements may or may not have been dodgy but they were rubber-stamped by Demetriou at the time.

No they weren't. Vlad came out years after Casey and said there parts of the deals that surprised him; they were subsequently investigated by Ken Wood, who couldn't uncover enough evidence to pursue charges.

Meanwhile Demetriou stated Carlton have "no case to answer" regarding tanking allegations.

Your weighted subscription to Demetriou's determinations is no small irony when you're advising other supporters to just accept your distorted views on footy folklore as fact despite having nothing but suspicion to support you.

I throw it back at Carlton supporters whenever they get a bit too uppity and all they can do is grin inanely and say "Juddy!". At least they've taken ownership.

Taken ownership of what? Your suspicions? Innuendo? What they've taken ownership of Ron, is you. Blues fans love having a chuckle about getting Juddy because they interpret your unsubstantiated tanking accusations as an expression of the associated offended. And really, what better way to respond to that than with ... Juddy! LOL

 

[Ron The Bear]

No they weren't. Vlad came out years after Casey and said there parts of the deals that surprised him; they were subsequently investigated by Ken Wood, who couldn't uncover enough evidence to pursue charges.

Meanwhile Demetriou stated Carlton have "no case to answer" regarding tanking allegations.

Your weighted subscription to Demetriou's determinations is no small irony when you're advising other supporters to just accept your distorted views on footy folklore as fact despite having nothing but suspicion to support you.

"Then AFL football operations manager Andrew Demetriou quizzed Holland and Brayshaw on whether his contract with Richmond breached the salary cap."

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...ds-tiger-lawsuit/story-e6frg7mo-1111115978710

Do you really think fault was going to be found when it happened on Demetriou's watch?

You're steering off topic. And you're right, Carlton's tanking isn't folklore, it's football lore.

 

[lionel_luthor]

Demetriou and the AFL let 'tanking' happen, or at least condoned it with the priority pick system, they should be the ones who should cop all the criticism, not the clubs who took advantage of it...

Carlton's current position as legitimate premiership contenders proves they did the right think by 'allegedly' tanking.

Better to be in our position then a club constantly finishing middle of the road every year and not making any progress like North.

 

[Blues_Man]

You're steering off topic. And you're right, Carlton's tanking isn't folklore, it's football lore.

As is Richmonds ..i mean your coach came out in the Media and openly admitted tanking ..the hilarious part is that it didn't help you one bit ...the muppets your club had in charge made drafting blunder after drafting blunder.

The only folklore here is that the tigers have been inept on and off the field for the last 3 decades . but theres always rd one next year to get excited about

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Demetriou and the AFL let 'tanking' happen, or at least condoned it with the priority pick system, they should be the ones who should cop all the criticism, not the clubs who took advantage of it...

Carlton's current position as legitimate premiership contenders proves they did the right think by 'allegedly' tanking.

Better to be in our position then a club constantly finishing middle of the road every year and not making any progress like North.

Don't disagree with that, AFL are up to their eyeballs in this. Just look at their "investigations" into the comments by Libba, Wallace, and Bailey. Where fact or not, the AFL appeared to me to be less concerned with finding the truth than they were either killing the messenger (Libba) or getting the statements watered down (Wallace and Bailey).

Then again, look how effective their investigation into Mifsud's claims was

 

[Monkey King]

"Then AFL football operations manager Andrew Demetriou quizzed Holland and Brayshaw on whether his contract with Richmond breached the salary cap."

Nope! Obviously from what came out a few years later, Demetriou didn't tick off the actual deal made at all, just the parts he was told about ...

"AFL investigations manager Ken Wood also began inquiries as league boss Andrew Demetriou admitted there were parts of the claim that surprised him." - Link

You're steering off topic.

Not at all. Your level of bias when it comes to evaluating the evidence at hand and your duplicitous approach to the topic needed to be tested for mine. And it's clear your acceptance of "evidence" against the Blues borders on blind.

 

[garygee]

Lucky? Perhaps.

But Richmond had the option to take Franklin and didn't. Nor do we know for certain that Franklin would have developed into the player that he is today had he been drafted by Richmond or another club.

I believe luck plays a huge part in winning premierships but I also feel supporters rate the importance of low draft picks too highly and the importance of player development too little.

Oh, and before you talk about Hawthorn as though we had a charmed run of lack via the draft, don't forget we've picked up more than our share of duds just as every other club has - Thorp, Dowler, Muston, Ellis...

This.....

 

[Wonaeamirri33]

I believe luck plays a huge part in winning premierships but I also feel supporters rate the importance of low draft picks too highly and the importance of player development too little.

This point especially is paramount as far as I'm concerned. Can't overstate how important player development is. And the state of the football department in general. Especially from the point of view of a Demons supporter. recruitment - while being an area highly problematic for us, particularly from 2000-2005 - is far from being the most significant element. It's only one issue amongst many factors.

For our part, the situation we have now on the field is, more than anything, a product of the overall state of our football department and club infrastructure prior to this year, in some respects deficient up until relatively recently, but in other respects the deficiencies have been obvious right throughout the whole period until the end of 2011.

Coaching, player development, team discipline and on-field leadership (problems in those two areas flow directly from the first two, it's safe to say) have all clearly been at issue continually until the end of last year. Whereas our facilities and off-field infrastructure have certainly improved in recent years - but were certainly at issue for a long time previously.

Obviously if we'd had better facilities earlier on, our middle-age players and senior group could have reached a higher level than they're currently at, irrespective of the merits of our recruitment choices. If we'd had better coaching and training staff throughout this whole time. If we'd had a head coach capable of enforcing proper team discipline, by which I mean preventing the development of a culture where sub-standard workrate and effort becomes permissible. All of these things have a substantial impact.

Fortunately, the overall picture in all these areas this year for us is far better than it's been in years. We finally have a coach who is what I call a drill sergeant- we've been crying out for that - our facilities are good, our staff are of as high a calibre as we've had for a long time, IMO, including training, player development etc, and recruitment.

But it's going to be a frustrating length of time to wait before that genuinely becomes apparent in our on-field performance.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Don't disagree with that, AFL are up to their eyeballs in this. Just look at their "investigations" into the comments by Libba, Wallace, and Bailey. Where fact or not, the AFL appeared to me to be less concerned with finding the truth than they were either killing the messenger (Libba) or getting the statements watered down (Wallace and Bailey).

The AFL have shown themselves to be self serving on many occasions I agree. In the Libba case however, they did not kill the messenger. Libba recanted 4 days after making the comments, before the AFL had contacted him. In his backing down he said 'if the AFL ask me, I will say that I don't think they tanked.'

From there it takes a conspiracy theory to take it anywhere else.

There was a massive amount of media coverage of Libba's claims and a heap of public opinion. If you are forming an opinion to get your head on TV, rather than based on anything concrete, you may want to back away from it. I would say that though.

 

[Rack Watts]

No need to tank. Might as well keep your culture and pride in check.

Since 2004;


Pick 5 has included:

Lance Franklin
Scott Pendlebury
Travis Boak
Michael Hurley
Ben Cunnington

Pick 7:

Patrick Ryder
Joel Selwood
Rhys Palmer (Shh, he won a rising star)
Daniel Rich
Josh Caddy

Pick 8:

Ben Reid
Lachlan Henderson
Tyrone Vickery
John Butcher
Dyson Heppell

 

[Ned_Flanders]

The AFL have shown themselves to be self serving on many occasions I agree. In the Libba case however, they did not kill the messenger. Libba recanted 4 days after making the comments, before the AFL had contacted him. In his backing down he said 'if the AFL ask me, I will say that I don't think they tanked.'

From there it takes a conspiracy theory to take it anywhere else.

There was a massive amount of media coverage of Libba's claims and a heap of public opinion. If you are forming an opinion to get your head on TV, rather than based on anything concrete, you may want to back away from it. I would say that though.

Not making it a big conspiracy by any means, I just suspect the usual AFL slag off behind closed doors with journos would have happened to discredit Libba (which isnt too hard to be honest), and keep the story's focus on his lack of cred rather than the possibility of tanking being legit.

All being equal, the claim should have been investigated just to confirm Libba is a nutter. Even worse was sweeping the Wallace and Bailey comments under the table after a brief chat. I don't get how an official making a bet needs a 4 month investigation, but even the hint of throwing a game can be resolved over a latte.

Personally I think the AFL know tanking is there, but that its pretty obvious when it is happening, and its happening for list development reasons (and not for corrupt gambling ones). As such, its better for them to not dig too much, and pretend it doesn't happen, because a proper investigation would raise more problems than it would solve (i.e. only way to kill tanking 100% is to kill the draft). This is just IMO of course.

 

[Ron The Bear]

Your level of bias when it comes to evaluating the evidence at hand and your duplicitous approach to the topic needed to be tested for mine. And it's clear your acceptance of "evidence" against the Blues borders on blind.

Pay attention, I've conceded my club tanked. Pity you can't be up front about your own but I guess dishonesty is in Carlton's DNA.

This thread is about tanking, and Carlton owns the word. As they do salary cap rorting, but this isn't the place even though you shamelessly raised the subject yourself.

 

[Monkey King]

Pay attention, I've conceded my club tanked.

Wallace came out and admitted as much. What's to concede? But you should really take your own advice Ron. What I'm talking about is not tanking, but the use of suspicion as evidence to confirm fact. And that's pretty much all any accuser has offered up - suspicion and innuendo. If this is adequate to reach a determination, then it's clear the Tigers are as dead-set a salary cap cheat* as you will find.


* Note: unlike you, I can't claim this as fact, as I know there is no evidence to support my suspicions. So I guess this is just an issue of standards, and you're welcome to yours

... and Carlton owns the word.

Only among those who share brain cells mate.

 

[Blessed]

Tanking = win.

 

[Roby]

We don't play for draws like cricket and soccer, its about getting a win.

if you think AFL is a better game for encouraging kids to cheer on their team to deliberately lose its a sad perspective to have.

This not about kids, it's about professional AFL clubs. At this level it's about premierships, that is what everyone is trying to do. Clubs plan 10 years ahead for these things.

 

[EasternTiger]

Not sure it's really that much of an issue really. The Blues have done it well though, one has to admit. They are now reaping the tanking rewards.

Apologies if it's been posted before but the Libba interview pretty much sums it up.

[youtube]3hyWGJUV5tA[/youtube]

 

[Catsace]

Geelong didn't tank, but they did kind of accidentally finish crap for a few years and get a plethora of draft picks partly from trading out senior players in strong draft years (99 & 01). Bizzell, Mansfield, Colbert and Murphy. They certainly didn't do it deliberately (Colbert and Murphy obviously demanded trades) but they did kind of do it by accident. This did mean they finished lower than they otherwise would have, but they also deliberately avoided the deep reaches of the ladder and priority picks.

Of course, they also got a big boost from F/S selections - Scarlett, Nablett, G. Ablett, Blake and Hawkins.

Accidently 'crap'....well Geelong's version of crap is a 9-13 season when Gary Ayers was coach. Certainly 1998 was a disappointing season when we finished in the finals in 1997, and were at one stage 7-5 on the ladder and in finals contention. We were rather poor in the latter part of that season, but again, when you consider we had players like Tristan Lynch, Scott Bamford, Jason Mooney (who wound up retiring due to chronic knees) and others like Hamish Simpson, Joel McKay and so....9-13 is about all that would be expected.

Our worst season since 1986 was 2003, with a 7-14-1 result. We were at no stage in a tanking position, indeed the last four games of the year saw a draw with the finals-bound Eagles, and wins over Port and St.Kilda.

However a word to any Bulldog fans here who bag Rhode....please explain to me how eight of the Doggies 14 Premiership points that year were at Geelong's expense??!!

Mansfield was about 29 when he wanted to go to Carlton at the end of 1999, furnishing a pick 31 which netted Paul Chapman.

We spent early picks in the year 2000 in recruiting Mitchell White, partly to compensate for losing the youthful Colbert who walked in 1999....White played just over 20 games and was a bust, as was Justin Murphy who recanted back to Carlton in 2002 after a mixed season that ended in that acrimonious Rd 22 game against the Blues (Milburn/Silvagni). From memory we spent a pick 11 to get him. Bizzell....to be frank unsure of his reasons for leaving, he was talented but inconsistent and we got picks 17 and 24 for him, while Melbourne received pick 55. Canny trading by Geelong if you ask me. We certainly dipped out on that score!

But in answer to some of the suggestion we got a plethora of draft picks, well with Colbert we did get two early picks as compensation plus Mooney. Our first pick was pick 8 for Joel Corey. Steven Wells did extremely well with also getting Ling (38), Enright (47) and Chappy (31). That's tanking, certainly!?

2001....we got a pick for Murphy...who wanted out anyway. Getting Gazza as F/S helped, but again Kelly was pick 17, Stevie J pick 24. Wells knew it was a strong draft, and again we scooped the pool. Bartel was pick 8....is that not an unreasonable result for a 9-13 season?

In conclusion, the last season Geelong won fewer than seven matches was 1973, and the last season finishing bottom 4 is 1986. That is as far from tanking as could ever be.

 

[Ron The Bear]

Wallace came out and admitted as much. What's to concede? But you should really take your own advice Ron. What I'm talking about is not tanking, but the use of suspicion as evidence to confirm fact. And that's pretty much all any accuser has offered up - suspicion and innuendo. If this is adequate to reach a determination, then it's clear the Tigers are as dead-set a salary cap cheat* as you will find.

Wallace's comments were made years down the track. I commented during the game that there was something not quite right going on. But you have no mind of your own and until Carlton tells you today is Saturday, you don't believe it. I see...

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

But in answer to some of the suggestion we got a plethora of draft picks, well with Colbert we did get two early picks as compensation plus Mooney. Our first pick was pick 8 for Joel Corey. Steven Wells did extremely well with also getting Ling (38), Enright (47) and Chappy (31). That's tanking, certainly!?

You really should reward Colbert with a premiership medallion for his great sacrifice.

 

[Ancient Tiger]

He was off for all of a couple of minutes as he was pulling up lame. He ended up having surgery for a large quad tear that he continued trying to play with.



Is there an argument in there somewhere? It's the BF main board, not that other site. Getting backslapped for saying little is a little harder to come by.



Look, you guys can hold whatever opinion you like, but when the truth is bent to justify that opinion, it has to be countered. Not for the first time with this little furphy either.

Fev was at his petulant best (worst) in the preceding game against Freo. He had a shocker, refused to chase, sulked continually, gave token efforts to stopping his opponent getting the ball, abused his teammates and allegedly abused an assistant coach in the change rooms after the game. The media were riding his arse the whole week and riding us for letting his destroy the team. He received a club suspension and he deserved it. Where do you get the hide to claim he was 'rested' as though that was the club's official reason?

At least I will provide proof.
http://www.carltonfc.com.au/Season2007/News/NewsArticle/tabid/4311/Default.aspx?newsId=46379

No doubt I will drag it out next time someone makes up their version of the truth.

No doubt ODN, you can argue well.

There is no doubt, however, in most peoples minds, that Carlton tanked. Heck, even my mates who are Carlton supporters say they tanked. So in the end you can say that there is no evidence blah blah blah, everyone will believe they tanked and you cannot change peoples minds. I know the AFL investigated them and found nothing. Well, surprise, surprise surprise! As if anyone at the club was going to say, oh yes we did tank!

Anyhow, who cares! You got what you wanted - Kreuzer and Judd. In the end, that's all that matters and it's paying dividends.

 

[Final Siren]

As is Richmonds ..i mean your coach came out in the Media and openly admitted tanking

You are the same muppet who posts this in every thread about tanking. You can suspect whoever you like, but it's just untrue to say Wallace "openly admitted tanking." Go look at the article you always bring up, and find the line: "Wallace stressed he did not tank."

 

[Blue1980]

The clubs that only tanked for 1 season (where they had a bad run early, injuries racked up and they couldn't get going) I don't really have a big problem with (teams like Collingwood/West Coast/Hawthorn/Essendon (maybe, we were quite bad though). Teams like Carlton/Melbourne tanked for years. I remember a classic match going back a few years ago between Carlton and Melbourne where neither team wanted to win. It was fun watching the coaches play their best midfielders in the back pockets and make all other kinds of positional moves to make sure they lost. Carlton out-tanked the hell out of Melbourne that day. Melbourne would then go on to win the next 2 wooden spoons in the next 2 years as their group became more experienced at tanking.

Tanking does have it rewards though and Carlton are reaping them right now. I can't see how people can deny that it happened. However future tanking may be less beneficial given changes to priority pick rules but the ones that have already done it are the true beneficiaries.

Melbourne is in a bad way right now but they will have the chance to be in a decent position in a couple of years again (they will have some nice high picks this year including a f/s and their compensation for Scully) providing they can start improving their recruiting and instil some fighting spirit in their group.

You honestly think we were tanking for years. I will accept 07, but to say we tanked 05-06 is nuts. If we were tanking we wouldn't of topped up with recycled players in 2004 and finished 11th.

Have a look at our sides of 05-06, you could not claim those sides could of won more than they did. Go back and give me some specific examples of games we threw in those years.

Basically no side comes up with a plan to tank before a season begins, most clubs have done it on a one off basis. Problem was you could have one poor year until 2005 and you got a priority first round pick which was way too much.

Glad the priority picks have gone now though.

Also when people say tanking doesn't work, its basically been offset of recent times by Geelong. They obviously benefited out of the father-son's but mainly thorough brilliant recruiting.

Tanking has worked, its the problem with a system which rewards poor performance.

 

[Reminiscence]

Anyhow, who cares! You got what you wanted - Kreuzer and Judd. In the end, that's all that matters and it's paying dividends.

Certainly is, getting beaten by West Coast in the Semi's last year by 3 points

Laughable at the notion that WC tanked for Darling. He was pick 26, only notion of tanking came up because you're recruiting staff all stuffed up and didn't grab him. Only when he had an awesome first year did people say 'Eagles did a tank job.' Our senior players were in terrible form (go look in the past and see how many of us wanted the heads of Lynch, Embley etc.) or had injuries (Glass, Kerr). We didn't tank in 2010. We were bloody terrible.

Only did so well in 2011 because of the resurgence of these senior players, return of Kerr and the step up all of our youngsters made.


Other laughable notions include Carltank supporters believing they didn't tank. Kruezer Cup.

Melbourne, using Brad Millers as a Ruckman in 09 was rather pathetic as well. Didn't help that you moved...if memory serves me correctly Frawley? to the fwd line? That would be us moving Glass to the FWD line.

 

[Final Siren]

Laughable at the notion that WC tanked for Darling. He was pick 26, only notion of tanking came up because you're recruiting staff all stuffed up and didn't grab him. Only when he had an awesome first year did people say 'Eagles did a tank job.'

Yeah, I can't believe people who say that. The Eagles had an opportunity to tank for a much better pick than that, and didn't do it.