The fate of those who tank.

[nineteen eighty]

We were crap. We were 16 shades of crap.

Did we tank to finish bottom 4? Of course not. The notion is ludicrous.

We were in a position where we were one of the two worst teams in the competition. Not because we didn't want to win but because we lacked the personnel and experience to win.

Were we happier to lose that round 22 clash vs the Demons. In hindsight, unequivocally so. On the day, probably. We might have gone to some lengths to make sure we didn't win, under the banner of giving kids experience.

At the end though, it probably came down to accuracy. We had just the one less scoring shot than the Dees but we didn't convert. Anybody who thinks players intentionally missed goals has rocks in their head.

I don't think there is one person out there that believes the players threw a game. I certainly don't...not at all.

But I and most other posters (including many Blues supporters I know) believe the coaching staff with the administrations full support did very little to almost nothing to improve their ladder position.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

I'm not going to vouch for Libba's intelligence or otherwise, and he may not have expressed his belief very well, but it's pretty damning that one of your assistants remained under the impression the club tanked, 8-9 months down the track.

He recanted about a week after he made those statements. He gave scant compelling information as to how we tanked, admitted that nobody ever discussed losing. His contention was purely based around a 'vibe', a vibe that he apparently wasn't brought in on but other assistants were, the fact that a couple of players went for surgery Libba didn't believe they needed to have, players getting games he did not feel were deserved (geez that never happens in a bottom side) and Travis Johnstone not being manned up as loose man in defence in that last game. It was incredibly flimsy. In fact, any detractor not privy to the inner sanctum of the club could also have made those same claims.

 

[Poseidon]

I always find it funny that some supporters turn their noses up at the idea of tanking.
The only teams that tank are teams that are gonna be bottom 4 teams anyway. In a competition you work to give yourself an advantage and since it's more advantageous to finish last over 14th-15th then why not? When a coach takes over a developing side that means they need to plan for the future and so climbing 1 or 2 spots on the ladder takes a backseat to list development.

I don't buy all the crap about a 'tanking culture' or 'losing culture' either. Sure, players get conditioned to losing but they are competitors at heart and can quickly flip the switch when need be. Players like Murph, Scotland, Carrazzo etc all played in absolute rubbish/spoon winning sides but when you see them take the field today they certainly don't look conditioned to losing anymore do they?

 

[harmesy 37]

We have never tanked. 2009 we were in position for a PP late in the season and won a bunch of games. Our first ever wooden spoon was in a compromised draft. There is no evidence of any shenanigans with selection. Apart from Natanui and Gaff our really good picks have come late relatively late.

In 2007 your team (West Coast)was third on the ladder with 15 wins.
In 2008 your team (West Coast) was 15th on the ladder with 4 wins.

That is some turnaround.

You picked up Nick Natinui the next year as the number 2 pick.
If you had remained in third spot let's say in 2008 you would have picked up Ayce Cordy...whoever he is>?

I think there is a slight difference in the quality of player between Nick Nat and Ayce Cordy.

 

[Ice-Wolf]

In 2007 your team (West Coast)was third on the ladder with 15 wins.
In 2008 your team (West Coast) was 15th on the ladder with 4 wins.

That is some turnaround.

You picked up Nick Natinui the next year as the number 2 pick.
If you had remained in third spot let's say in 2008 you would have picked up Ayce Cordy...whoever he is>?

I think there is a slight difference in the quality of player between Nick Nat and Ayce Cordy.

Ayce Cordy was a father-son so no West Coast would not have picked up Cordy.

 

[harmesy 37]

Ayce Cordy was a father-son so no West Coast would not have picked up Cordy.

Yeah but pick 14 (3rd position) was taken on Cordy...ok they would have picked up Mitchell Brown, Sam Blease on Schoenmakers as they were the next picks.


I think 99% of football supporters would prefer to have Nic-Nat in their team than either one of these 4 players.

Maybe this West Coast supporter would like to hand Nick Nat over to the Western Bulldogs or Geelong then as it wasn't right that they picked up Nic-Nat at pick 2?

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Ratten pulled Fev off in the last quarter when it looked like you might actually win!!

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.

The only way it could have been more blatant, would be if you put the whole bench on the field and requested a head count to get your score wiped.

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.

On the first occasion, Brendan Fevola was 'rested'.

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.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Just to make it clear that Libba recanted his tanking allegations:
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/teams/libba-backflip-on-tank-claims/story-e6frf9k6-1111115808466

This was 4 days after his Footy Show interview aired.

He did maintain we were playing young kids in that round 22 game and he did allude that we were list managing and maybe that might be thought of as trying to lose.

"If they say to me, 'Do you think Carlton tanked?', I would say, 'I don't think they did'." Liberatore told SEN yesterday.

"We had something in vogue that we wanted to play the young kids no matter what. My understanding is if that might compromise a win or a loss that's their (the AFL's) direction.

He is clearly talking about the list management that all teams do in that position. We played Hampson, Jamison and Austin later in the year. Jamison particularly was on the rookie list and needed to be looked at to decide what his future would be.

Again he restated that he would have manned up Travis Johnstone but neglects to mention that Heath Scotland had a similar amount of possessions playing as spare man in defence with a greater disposal efficiency. We were poor defensively, we needed all defenders back there and not have them drawn out by the opposition. As long as Scotland was minimising the damage to the scoreboard and doing as good for us as Johnstone was for them, then we were happy by that point.

Incidentally, Johnstone got the 3 Brownlow votes .... Scotland got the 2.

 

[Scotland]

Sucks to be Carlton. Three finals series in a row and we're still talking about their tanking from 2005/6/7.

If Melbourne ever come good this place is going to go into meltdown.

 

[Frank Grimes]

Sucks to be Carlton. Three finals series in a row and we're still talking about their tanking from 2005/6/7.

If Melbourne ever come good this place is going to go into meltdown.

If Carlton manage to win a premiership with Kreuzer or Judd, I don't think their supporters really care if they tanked to get them both. I don't think they care that they tanked now anyway seeing they are close to a premiership.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Further info re Fevola being taken off the ground late in the game vs Collingwood in Round 18 2007.

1. He strained his thigh in round 16
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/fevola-in-doubt-for-season/story-e6frf9if-1111114021854

He did keep playing but was hampered (although still kicked goals for the next 3 games) before finally succumbing to a very large quad tear that was worsening and misdiagonosed after the game in round 20 vs Essendon where he had a shocker.

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/afl/fevola-sick-of-tanking-talk/story-e6frecll-1111114115969

BRENDAN Fevola yesterday scotched talk the Blues were guilty of tanking by revealing he could have pulled out of Saturday's clash against Collingwood with a virus.

The tanking debate flared after Fevola left the field at a critical stage between the 23.30 and 25.50-minute mark of the final quarter at the MCG.

The Blues were level with the Magpies at the 20-minute mark before Mick Malthouse's men kicked the last four goals to post a 24-point win.

Fevola said he left the field with a quadricep injury.

"I have had a pretty sore quad that has been well speculated on in the last couple of weeks," he said.

"Last week in the last quarter it got pretty sore as well.

"It got tight. The doc said come off and we'll assess it.

"I was off for only a minute. Unfortunately, they kicked two goals and then I came back on."

2 minutes he was off the field. He played with a virus after Dylan McLaren was warming up to take his spot. He had an injury that was identified weeks prior to that game. The Pies kicked two goals while he was off and I am not sure that Fevola had those defensive responsibilities. They also kicked another two when he came back on to finish the match. Go figure.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

If Carlton manage to win a premiership with Kreuzer or Judd, I don't think their supporters really care if they tanked to get them both. I don't think they care that they tanked now anyway seeing they are close to a premiership.

Well we would probably be more interested in how it makes us feel, than how other supporters view it. Brisbane apparently won 3 flags through concessions, Sydney 1 the same way. Eagles were all on the gear. Hawthorn did a Bradbury. There are people who will discredit success all over the place, and not be able to recognise any hard work that might have also gone into a flag.

By the way, if we tanked, we would still have been low enough to get Pick 3 which ultimately secured Judd so we could hardly tank to get both he and Kreuzer.

 

[Frank Grimes]

By the way, if we tanked, we would still have been low enough to get Pick 3 which ultimately secured Judd so we could hardly tank to get both he and Kreuzer.

If you only had one early pick and used it to get Judd then how will you get Kreuzer as well? Surely you wouldn't expect him to slip to your second round pick.

 

[Forward Press]

By the way, if we tanked, we would still have been low enough to get Pick 3 which ultimately secured Judd so we could hardly tank to get both he and Kreuzer.

iirc the debate with the Judd move was whether Carlton would offer pick 1 or pick 3. If you didn't qualify for the PP you wouldn't have both.

 

[Ants]

I don't really think there is a huge problem with tanking. I think most teams when in the right situation will do it. And I definitely believe that if a season is a write off, clubs will send players into surgery, rest older players so the pre-season can start earlier, and try out the youngsters to see if there is a hidden gem that they've missed - or double check them before delisting.

North did similar things in late 2009 after Laidley had screwed their prep/game plan and they were out of sync (killed my dream team Simpson going in for surgery). In 2006 Essendon after a horror start to the year almost picked up our longest losing streak. Was that deliberate? Hell no. After it happening and finding if we avoided winning too many more games for the year did we tank to get an extra pick? Hell yes.

St Kilda, Carlton, Bulldogs, Hawthorn and Melbourne have all spent periods over the last 15 years where they were legitimately crap. It would be staggering to believe that sometimes when faced at the back end of a year where one win made the difference in getting a top 20 pick (let alone top 6) that they wouldn't sacrifice the win. That doesn't mean they all did it. Or that they did it the same way. Hawthorn I don't think lost any games - but they clearly traded out/retired older players and pushed learning a system of play over short term wins. Frankly, if this means these clubs lost and odd 2-3 extra games over a 2-4 year period - do we really care? They were crap and needed another pick.

A bigger problem was a team like Collingwood who after having a bad injury run in 2005 tanked the last little bit/put players out to pasture and picked up an extra top 5 pick. Despite having been so recently up the top. The AFL rightfully tried to reduce the value of this by changing the rules - but Essendon still did it, WCE may have. Hard not to do when the season has gone to crap.

There is definitely value in tanking. Frankly, I think the AFL should just accept it happens and either provide incentives to bottom teams separate from one-off ladder position (so a St Kilda, Bulldogs, Carlton, Melbourne who were crap for multiple years get extra picks) and add a lottery.

Because really - does anyone think Melbourne didn't need the extra picks they got with Trengove and Strauss?

 

[Ron The Bear]

He recanted about a week after he made those statements. He gave scant compelling information as to how we tanked, admitted that nobody ever discussed losing. His contention was purely based around a 'vibe', a vibe that he apparently wasn't brought in on but other assistants were, the fact that a couple of players went for surgery Libba didn't believe they needed to have, players getting games he did not feel were deserved (geez that never happens in a bottom side) and Travis Johnstone not being manned up as loose man in defence in that last game. It was incredibly flimsy. In fact, any detractor not privy to the inner sanctum of the club could also have made those same claims.

Libba's evidence wasn't exactly the clincher, more like an arsonist pouring on more petrol after a building's been razed. You're free to believe what you want, as are the rest of us. FWIW I don't hold Carlton (or any club suspected of tanking) culpable; they merely did what needed to be done, and what the system encouraged.

 

[Frank Grimes]

Well we would probably be more interested in how it makes us feel, than how other supporters view it. Brisbane apparently won 3 flags through concessions, Sydney 1 the same way. Eagles were all on the gear. Hawthorn did a Bradbury. There are people who will discredit success all over the place, and not be able to recognise any hard work that might have also gone into a flag.

What is done is done and it can't be reversed. If a Carlton supporter feels bad that tanking has helped them to a premiership, then there is nothing that can be done about it. But going by the teams you mentioned, those facts don't seem to bother the supporters of those clubs and I'm willing to bet it wouldn't bother the Carlton supporters either.

 

[Roby]

I don't think there is one person out there that believes the players threw a game. I certainly don't...not at all.

But I and most other posters (including many Blues supporters I know) believe the coaching staff with the administrations full support did very little to almost nothing to improve their ladder position.

Why is ladder position important if there is no relegation?

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

If you only had one early pick and used it to get Judd then how will you get Kreuzer as well? Surely you wouldn't expect him to slip to your second round pick.

iirc the debate with the Judd move was whether Carlton would offer pick 1 or pick 3. If you didn't qualify for the PP you wouldn't have both.

It's the wording though. Tanking to get both might suggest we tanked to get each. Without any spectre of tanking we still would have got one (probably Judd). I just wanted to make that clear.

 

[Wonaeamirri33]

I don't think any other club has been adversely affected by other clubs 'tanking', it's just a self-indulgent excuse to throw insults at Carlton and Melbourne

This

 

[Silvagnis]

B-mantle blunder or daring Docker design?

In round 21, the Dockers, needing one win from their final two matches to secure a home final, decided to rest most of their remaining stars, and their team of inexperienced juniors and forgotten journeymen were thrashed, recording one goal in the first three quarters.

Fremantle was concerned about the short turnaround from their long trip to Tasmania, which left them with only a six-day break before the home ground clash with fellow finals aspirants Carlton.

The Dockers need to win this week to be assured of playing at home in the first week of the finals. Carlton needs to win, and for Hawthorn to lose, to host a final in Melbourne in two weeks.

In: Matthew Pavlich, Adam McPhee, Roger Hayden, David Mundy, Stephen Hill, Anthony Morabito, Nathan Fyfe, Chris Mayne, Hayden Ballantyne, Ryan Crowley, Paul Hasleby, Aaron Sandilands
Out: Steven Dodd, Ryan Murphy, Rhys Palmer, Clayton Hinkley, Jay van Berlo, Clancee Pearce, Justin Bollenhagen, Kepler Bradley, Byron Schammer, Jesse Crichton, Tim Ruffles, Zac Clarke

B-mantle blunder or daring Docker design?

I guess karma got the Dockers after they reversed their 116 point loss in Tassie and eliminated Hawthorn by winning a home final.

There's tanking and then there's tanking...

 

[Scotland]

Yes, resting players 2 weeks out from the finals is exactly the same as deliberately not winning more than 4 games to secure draft picks...

There are going to be lots of players rested in 2012, purely because with GWS/GC in the mix teams don't have to play their best to win.

 

[mrpez]

Sorry but I disagree. While Melbourne was bad, they were not the worse side if they actually tried to win games. I would say Richmond was the worst side that year. Did you even see the Richmond vs Melbourne game? Melbourne were desperately trying to lose that game and we were trying to win. In the end we only won by a goal after the siren to a side who was trying to give the game away. That's how bad Richmond was.

No disagreement bout that game or year - but that was 2009, I'm talking about the previous year, 2008.

 

[mrpez]

Question for The Old Dark Navy's

Do you think Melbourne tanked?

 

[Forward Press]

Question for The Old Dark Navy's

Do you think Melbourne tanked?

I'm not TODN, but:

Dean Bailey - "I had no hesitation at all in the first two years in ensuring the club was well placed for draft picks."