What should be the penalty for tanking?

[Bluelegs]

If confirmed I think Premiership points and removal of first round draft picks for multiple years should be enough I would have thought.

To hear people say that there should be no punishment because they are doing it within the rules of the game is ridiculous. To present a culture of deliberate losing is against sporting spirit let alone AFL spirit. I agree with Vlad, if it was found that a club had deliberately lost for draft picks, heavy punishment is deserved.

Against the spirit of the game won't hold up in court. You would be better off arguing it goes against the vibe of the AFL constitution.

 

[shiraz]

To be honest I think that the penalty for tanking should be that someone involved with it at Melbourne gets jail time.

Andrew Demetriou agrees and nominates Brock McLean...

The penalty for tanking should be the next year that team makes finals, they get relegated to 9th place (and don't get to take part in finals footy; team that actually finished 9th gets promoted to 8th), but receive the draft pick according to where they actually finished.

 

[Sunshine Saint]

Based on Melbourne and Carlton, they have both hurt the culture of their clubs by tanking
and now they are already both paying the price down the track, Carlton are lucky Judd/Visy helps them out.

But then, you take into account, Collingwood and West Coast tanking and benefiting from it in spades.
So we see how tanking can help.

It more or less started with St Kilda and it didnt really work for them either.

Melbourne, Carlton, St Kilda tanked for seasons and their cultures have been of a losing mentality.

I think sides who briefly tank - WC, Collingwood - have done well out of it.

If anything can be read into it, it would be tanking over seasons hurts culture down the road,
whereas tanking over a season, the mentality can be reversed.

There is a HUGE difference between St Kilda, Collingwood, West Coast as to what happened with Melbourne. We under performed, were nowhere near good enough and languished at the bottom of the ladder.

Melbourne on the other hand deliberately drove their team into the ground to pick up draft picks. And you are suffering the consequences of entrenching the culture of losing still.

On the other hand, Saints, Pies and Eagles have all built themselves up and have or are reaping the rewards of hard work.

 

[benno87]

I do think the difference between development and tanking needs to be made clear - If North Melbourne were 4-16 with two games remaining and they decide to send Petrie, Wells ad Swallow in for early surgeries and played juniors such as Kennedy, McKenzie and Curran in there place for development I see no problem in that, in fact I encourage it. We go out to win but the chances of winning are likely diminished by these management moves.

 

[SpeciousArgument]

I do think the difference between development and tanking needs to be made clear - If North Melbourne were 4-16 with two games remaining and they decide to send Petrie, Wells ad Swallow in for early surgeries and played juniors such as Kennedy, McKenzie and Curran in there place for development I see no problem in that, in fact I encourage it. We go out to win but the chances of winning are likely diminished by these management moves.

people on this board seem to think that losing a game = tanking

This is tanking

 

[cancat]

I don't think anyone really even knows what exactly tanking is and whether or not you can even distinguish it from a side that is genuinely bad.

Is a team playing young guys and guys out of position tanking, or just seeing if they can get something more out of players or getting experience into young players. You often see teams that are doing well play forwards in the back line early in their career to do things like improve their defensive pressure. If a team has a lot of young and/or average players why should we punish them for doing this kinda stuff?

Agree completely. The only way that tanking could be proven is if a coach admitted to the AFL that he was not trying to win particular games. But that's not going to happen because the AFL will severely punish any coach who made such an admission.

The only way out of this mess is for the AFL to remove any incentive to tank. I doubt this will happen under the current administration.

 

[SCHUMACHER]

They should be forced to play all their home games at Etihad for a year

 

[Funkalicous]

I don't think players try to lose. I think coaches and administration undermine the player's efforts. If a player deliberating tries to lose then they should be banned indefinitely for bring the game into disrepute. As it stands, tanking, like we saw in the Olympics doesn't occur in the AFL. If coaches want to try players is different positions, or put guys away for early surgery, regardless or the benefits or consequences, that's their decision IMO.

 

[Books]

All Vlad has done is warn all clubs not to admit anything. When nobody offers "proof" he will insist he was right all along and tanking has never existed.

However, hopefully he is not really as stupid as he looks.

They need to take away the incentive. This means
1. Some sort of lottery system for the draft.
2. Do not EVER AGAIN link compo draft picks to a teams ladder position. That just provides double incentive.

 

[IanW]

There is a massive grey area between tanking for draft picks and list development.

In one, you're trying to lose to improve draft position.

In the other, you're getting games into kids, trying players in different roles and getting players physically right for later games.

If your players think you're tanking, your team's culture gets smashed, as they come to the realisation that the coaching staff thinks winning is losing and losing is winning.

Thats the main punishment for tanking.

And I think you'll find after what happened to Melbourne, it'll be a long time before we see a Kreuzer Cup again.

 

[Wonaeamirri33]

Melbourne should...

Former Richmond coach Terry Wallace has confirmed he did "absolutely nothing" in a game two years ago, knowing a win would cost the club prized recruit Trent Cotchin.

As the AFL continues to deny tanking exists, Wallace told the Herald Sun he was compromised as the Tigers took on St Kilda in Round 22, 2007.

"It was a no-win situation for everyone in the coach's box," Wallace said. "We decided the best way to operate was just to let the players go out.

"I didn't do anything. I just let the boys play. There weren't any miracle moves in the last couple of minutes."

Richmond led by nine points 12 minutes into the final term, but the Saints kicked the last three goals to win by 10 points.

http://www.news.com.au/terry-wallac...re-trent-cotchin/story-e6frf3e3-1225752963181

Yeah, we tanked in '09. And so did you in '07.

 

[Smedtsy]

I think that the wooden spooners (tanking or not) should be put into their state league, with the best team in those leagues entering the AFL in their place.

 

[Wonaeamirri33]

Should have their compensation picks taken away. A very hefty fine and possibly even suspend them from top 30 draft pick this year.

You mean like Collingwood, because of what they did in 2005?

Three goals in front of North Melbourne, 26 minutes into the last quarter, Collingwood made no obvious effort to sandbag its advantage. North kicked the last four goals of the game to win. Six days later, Collingwood played Carlton. In the second quarter, Nathan Buckley kicked three goals to square the match.

In the third, Buckley was sent to full-forward, and stood there, marooned and doing hamstring stretches, as Carlton kicked nine goals in a row to romp away with the match.

This was August, 2005. At the time, I reported that Buckley had almost sabotaged Collingwood's carefully laid plan with his run of goals. No one at Collingwood objected. Some at Carlton did, but only because it undersold the Blues' win. They weren't having much of a season, either.

Duly, the Magpies - grand finalists two years previously - finished second last to Carlton and secured a priority draft pick. With selections two and five, they took Dale Thomas and Scott Pendlebury. Five years later, the two players were cornerstones in a Collingwood premiership.

In 2005, a senior Collingwood figure reportedly was displeased with the plans for the Carlton game. Mollifying him, others said that it might mean a loss to Carlton that day, but wins for the next 10 years.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...-and-parcel-20110804-1idmx.html#ixzz22AkXMKlI

Always check your own backyard first, before shooting over the fence at anyone else.

What about the other 7 teams that also tanked?

EFA mate. Us, you guys, Richmond, West Coast, Collingwood, Hawthorn, Fremantle, and St Kilda. And very likely Essendon as well.

 

[Wonaeamirri33]

Quite possibly the funniest thing ever posted on BigFooty.

It's this kind of thinking that's seen you unable to win a final in 2891 days, and unable to beat the Demons in three years of trying, even when we're struggling as much as we are now. 1141 days and counting there.

That's what I call funny. Equally so when an Essendon fan attempts to fake-laugh about a player who was BOG against their team the last time we played. Who wins more contested ball in an average week than the vast majority of his team ever does.

The team of Dyson Heppell, Leroy Jetta, Alwyn Davey, Angus Monfries...

Yeah, we used our #1 draft pick on Watts, and it was exactly the right choice. Beat your captain in the last quarter of that game too of course.

 

[akneal]

You mean like Collingwood, because of what they did in 2005?



Always check your own backyard first, before shooting over the fence at anyone else.



EFA mate. Us, you guys, Richmond, West Coast, Collingwood, Hawthorn, Fremantle, and St Kilda. And very likely Essendon as well.

Did i say we didn't tank? The OP simply asked a question and i answered it. The difference between us and you is that we did it well.

 

[Wonaeamirri33]

Very true

Definite respect for that reply.

As I've said before of course, tanking doesn't even work if you don't have a good football department in place when you're doing it.

 

[00Stinger]

Melbourne should lose all their 2012 draft picks.

Do Richmond lose theirs for tanking to get Cotchin as well?

 

[Frank Grimes]

Mmatch fixing has the element of gambling and profiteering off losing.

Anyone that is tied to a clun and tries to profit off the result gets punished as it is. Don't punish tanking, but continue to punish players and coaches that bet.

Tanking is pretty much profiteering. They may not recieve money but recieve better draft pick instead.

 

[Frank Grimes]

Is it tanking if you can no longer make the finals and begin experimenting with younger players?
Not necessarily to lose so you get good picks, but to give experience into younger blokes so they will be better come next year.

If the aim is to still win with the young players then it is not tanking. If the aim is to actuaully play the young players with the purpose to lose then it is. The problem is identifying the reason for one way or the other. Which is why no team will ever be found guitly of tanking unless if the administration and the coach actually confesses.

 

[Frank Grimes]

Do Richmond lose theirs for tanking to get Cotchin as well?

Yes. Providing every other club who tanked loses theirs as well.

 

[Monkey King]

people might be a bit more inclined to do something about it if either team had made any actual impact with their tanking. melbourne are still around the bottom and carlton around the top 8. big whoop really.

This mentality is really blowing my mind. StKilda have played in GF's. Hawthorn and Collingwood have won flags and are challenging. Unless you've got your head in the sand or a stuck in propagandist beat up, every one of these clubs has tanked to the same potential as Carlton. Why the hell is Carlton being automatically lumped with Melbourne's systematic tanking and these clubs not?

 

[Frank Grimes]

Yeah, we tanked in '09. And so did you in '07.

I know the article says we tanked. But I don't understand the strategy used for us to tank. We get the lead with the playing structure we have and Wallace tanks by "doing nothing" and staying with the same structure. He's that bad of a coach that he can't even tank properly lol.

 

[RuFiO]

Your picks go to Melbourne.

 

[Wonaeamirri33]

Yes. Providing every other club who tanked loses theirs as well.

Very well said indeed

 

[Wonaeamirri33]

To be honest I think that the penalty for tanking should be that someone involved with it at Melbourne gets jail time.

Yeah, and only someone involved with it at Melbourne. Only the Melbourne Football Club you make these hysterical comments about. No other club who's been involved with it.

We know. You don't like the Demons. We get that already

There is a HUGE difference between St Kilda, Collingwood, West Coast as to what happened with Melbourne.

The difference being that St Kilda is your team, and you like the other two clubs mentioned more than you like Melbourne.

The rest of that post is just made-up bollocks that you haven't got a hope in hell of substantiating.

What it amounts to is that as far as you're concerned, St Kilda, Collingwood & West Coast = good tanking. Us = bad tanking.

This mentality is really blowing my mind. StKilda have played in GF's. Hawthorn and Collingwood have won flags and are challenging. Unless you've got your head in the sand, every one of these clubs has tanked to the same potential as Carlton. Why the hell is Carlton being automatically lumped with Melbourne's systematic tanking and these clubs not?

Another very good point here