One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => View from the Outer => Topic started by: one-eyed on October 30, 2012, 02:28:09 AM
-
Tanking affair darkens for Dees
Caroline Wilson
The Age
October 30, 2012
THE AFL investigation into the Melbourne tanking affair has escalated with several key witnesses coming forward with fresh evidence, including repeated versions of at least one football meeting in 2010, the season in which the club was trying to win no more than four games.
The Age believes Melbourne now faces possible sanctions after league investigators re-interviewed several players and coaches who played a role in the four-point loss in round 18 to Richmond.
It is believed that recently a handful of club personnel have corroborated versions of discussions that took place leading up to some of Melbourne's strange losses that year - culminating in the Richmond loss, which saw Melbourne fans cheering when Tiger Jordan McMahon goaled after the siren.
Club president Don McLardy and his chief executive Cameron Schwab - both of whom also held leadership positions in 2009 - did not return calls from The Age last night. Among those re-interviewed by AFL investigator Brent Clothier were then senior coach Dean Bailey and all his assistants, former captain James McDonald and several teammates.
Advertisement
Football operations manager Adrian Anderson has come under pressure after the fresh tanking allegations, given his keen attention in other areas of the game to preserve its integrity.
Anderson said this month he understood the cynicism from AFL fans and the media but this was misplaced. ''It will take as long as it takes to do a thorough and proper job,'' he said.
The late Melbourne president Jim Stynes, in his book released several months ago, said of the affair: ''Melbourne never sat down our coach, Dean Bailey, and instructed him not to win games. But he, I and everybody at the club knew what an important bearing on the club's future that extra draft pick might have.''
Former player Brock McLean - whose comments prompted the probe - told Fox Footy's On the Couch that tanking prompted him to leave the club. ''Definitely,'' responded McLean, when asked whether his club's priority was not winning in 2009, ''and I think you would have to be blind Freddy to not figure that one out.''
McLean is on leave but has been re-interviewed by the AFL. In 2011, an earlier investigation by the league found the Demons had no case to answer for their actions during Bailey's tenure.
Anderson re-opened the investigation after Bailey, at his farewell press conference after being sacked, came close to admitting he had tanked.
AFL supremo Andrew Demetriou has consistently defended the Demons.
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/tanking-affair-darkens-for-dees-20121029-28g2n.html#ixzz2Ahb3WyBU
-
why didnt we go down this path?
if it was us being investigated for cheating the incident with edwards would barely be getting a mention.
another missed opportunity Richmond :banghead
-
Totally agree Al :banghead
Plus think of how far up the ladder we'd be with all those draft picks
Instead it's just meaningless win after meaningless win at Richmond :banghead :banghead
-
With the delisting of Graham and Post, and possible draft sanctions on Melbourne and Adelaide, this is turning into the greatest off season ever :birthday :santa
-
Hope the get munged over.....smash em :clapping
-
Senior Demons drove tanking
Date: October 31, 2012 88
Caroline Wilson: Chief Football Writer for The Age
View more articles from Caroline Wilson
Secrets from 'the vault'
THE AFL has uncovered a secret meeting involving at least 15 members of the Melbourne football department in which coaches were reminded of the importance of forfeiting matches in order to gain early draft picks.
Former Melbourne football boss Chris Connolly addressed the 2009 meeting, which it is believed was code-named ''the vault''.
The term vault relates to where the meeting took place - in the tin shed that runs between the two stands at Melbourne's old training ground at the Junction Oval. It is understood 15 people attended what began as a match committee meeting after the club's round 15 win over Port Adelaide, which was its second win in succession and lifted its tally for the year perilously close to its planned limit of four wins.
Advertisement Connolly is understood to have urged those at the meeting to ''stay the course'', warning that Melbourne supporters and other stakeholders would come down on it should it fail to secure a prized priority pick, which the club would receive if it won just four games.
The club is now receiving legal advice after at least four witnesses were recalled by the AFL and admitted the club planned to deliberately lose games of football. Among those to have confessed the meeting took place upon being re-interviewed are former coach Dean Bailey and his then assistant Josh Mahoney. The AFL investigation continued today with those witnesses recalled, including Demons' former recruiting manager Barry Prendergast, now at Carlton.
It is not known whether the meeting referred to a specific game or cluster of matches. Melbourne had several suspicious losses in 2009 including successive defeats over rounds 17 and 18 respectively to Sydney (18 points) and Richmond (four points). The Demons won just four games in 2009, and were rewarded with the first two picks in the national draft, collecting Tom Scully (a priority choice) and Jack Trengove.
It is understood Melbourne remains determined to fight any sanction and is looking at the legal definition of ''tanking'' in a bid to redefine their actions and those of other clubs over the past decade. The club is expected to come before the AFL Commission as early as next month.
As many as 10 witnesses are understood to have rolled over under pressure from AFL investigators Brett Clothier and Abraham Haddad, the league's intelligence co-ordinator.
Mahoney, who is now in charge of the Melbourne football department, did not attend Monday's first official pre-season training session. Bailey, who has not returned calls from Fairfax, fears he could be suspended by the AFL for his role in the affair.
Now a senior assistant with the Adelaide Crows, Bailey came close to blowing the whistle on Melbourne last year at his final press conference, after he was sacked, but failed to reveal the meeting in a subsequent AFL investigation. Bailey has told colleagues he regrets following the club line, which the AFL could establish was driven from the top.
It is not clear whether Jim Stynes' legacy will be tarnished by the investigation. Stynes, who was club chairman from 2008 to 2012, only partially addressed the tanking issue in his 2012 book before he died. The AFL recently named a community scholarship in his honour.
Chief executive Cameron Schwab, who was not present at the Connolly meeting in question, is also being investigated for alleged incriminating conversations with coaches. Schwab, who almost lost his job last year before Bailey was sacked, recently signed a new three-year agreement with the club. Connolly was removed from the football department at the end of 2011 but still works at the club.
The AFL has also interviewed former Demon assistants Mark Williams, Scott West, Kelly O'Donnell and Sean Wellman. Club president Don McLardy said he would make no comment until the investigation was completed.
AFL chief Andrew Demetriou, who constantly defended the club, counselled Schwab at the time and repeatedly denied tanking was taking place, said he was remaining at arm's length from the inquiry given his role as an AFL commissioner.
In August this year Demetriou again said he did not believe tanking existed in football but described it as one of the game's worst crimes.
The investigation was sparked by former Demon Brock McLean after he spoke of his misgivings about the club's manipulation of games on Fox Footy in July.
At least one other former player, Melbourne's then captain James McDonald, has also been interviewed although it is not known whether he has been recalled.
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/senior-demons-drove-tanking-20121030-28h3c.html
-
im mindful to respect the dead but i wonder what Stynes stance and position on this whole affair was?
-
Karma.
-
im mindful to respect the dead but i wonder what Stynes stance and position on this whole affair was?
Exactly
I've always thought that perhaps the AFL didn't go harder at investigating this previously because of who was president at the time and what he was dealing with
-
im mindful to respect the dead but i wonder what Stynes stance and position on this whole affair was?
Exactly
I've always thought that perhaps the AFL didn't go harder at investigating this previously because of who was president at the time and what he was dealing with
IMO they could possibly now be ready to destroy the Flees now that Jimmy has gone. ooh and rightly so hope they get everything thats coming to them
-
im mindful to respect the dead but i wonder what Stynes stance and position on this whole affair was?
Exactly
I've always thought that perhaps the AFL didn't go harder at investigating this previously because of who was president at the time and what he was dealing with
IMO they could possibly now be ready to destroy the Flees now that Jimmy has gone. ooh and rightly so hope they get everything thats coming to them
I hope so lads. You've hit the nail on the head Daniel. Obvious to everyone but too afraid to ask. Time to look deeper into this and punish them Carlton style.
-
I find it hard to get too angry or righteous with the dees.
After all they are/were afflicted with Mrs Watts and Mrs Morton.
It is a more a shake of the head and a deep sense of pity.
-
I find it hard to get too angry or righteous with the dees.
After all they are/were afflicted with Mrs Watts and Mrs Morton.
It is a more a shake of the head and a deep sense of pity.
thats nice, i dont
those tossers were laughing in our faces that mcmahon game. No ones laughing now and theres no Jimmy to hide behind.
-
I find it hard to get too angry or righteous with the dees.
After all they are/were afflicted with Mrs Watts and Mrs Morton.
It is a more a shake of the head and a deep sense of pity.
thats nice, i dont
those tossers were laughing in our faces that mcmahon game. No ones laughing now and theres no Jimmy to hide behind.
That's the problem Chuck having no emotion to a club like this would only take half a chance to kick the boot in like Nought yet copy anything we do and call it their own. Plageurism is what they called it when I was at uni.
Exactly Daniel whilst I hat losing to Nought as we are a better club than them in every way Melbourne smugness in their fans who hop on and off based on the quality of the snow season just riles me. Losing to them is like losing in footy to your sister. Just not on and should never happen. Soft and spoilt are the Dees and they deserve every hard line inspection into this.
-
Tanking evidence mounting against Melbourne Demons
Michael Warner
From: Herald Sun
November 01, 2012
RICHMOND hearts sank when Carlton's Brock McLean fluked a match-winning goal with 42 seconds left on the clock on July 28.
But if the kick hurt the Tigers, it has done more damage to his old club Melbourne.
Three nights later, man-of-the-moment McLean dropped a bomb when invited to appear on Fox Footy's On The Couch.
The Demons, he declared, weren't trying to win games in 2009. He said it was why he quit the club. It was an explosive claim that reignited the AFL tanking debate and triggered a fresh investigation. Only this time the evidence against Melbourne is mounting.
The latest allegation surrounds a secret meeting of Melbourne football department staff at the Junction Oval in 2009.
It is said at least three club officials, past and present, have admitted to league investigators that the importance of losing games to secure a priority pick was discussed at that meeting.
Melbourne's loss to Richmond at the MCG a few weeks' after the meeting of football officials has long been hailed as exhibit No.1.
In laughable circumstances, Richmond's Jordan McMahon kicked a goal on the siren to win the match for Tigers. The Round 22 loss to St Kilda, involving several puzzling moves, has also been identified.
In August this year, the Herald Sun detailed accounts of another suspect game - Melbourne's Round 17 loss to Sydney at Manuka Oval.
Demons figures who attended an inner-sanctum dinner the night before the match say a football department boss openly indicated steps had been taken to reduce the prospects of a win.
"We'll be right - we've made eight changes," the official declared.Melbourne had already announced five key changes at team selection.
Then on the eve of the game, two more pulled out with ailments.Seven changes in all - not eight as predicted - and in a forgettable encounter the Swans got home by 18 points.
Even one of Melbourne's club doctors said "Blind Freddy could tell the team wasn't picked for optimal performance" late in the season.
In the Canberra match, Melbourne used its interchange bench 67 times. Its season average was 85. But Andrew Demetriou's reaction to the Herald Sun story was typical for a tanking non-believer.
The AFL boss dismissed the report as "lots of colourful language to try and determine an outcome".
"We don't go by that sort of story. We go by evidence," Demetriou said. "We've got a guy, (AFL investigator) Brett Clothier, who's very capable.
"If he gets to the bottom of something then we will deal with it but at the moment there's no evidence to sustain this allegation of tanking."
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/teams/tanking-evidence-mounting-against-melbourne/story-e6frf9mf-1226507824767
-
Andrew Demetriou's tanking defence
by: Patrick Smith
From: The Australian
November 01, 2012
AS the AFL investigators dig deep into the culture of tanking in the league - you would presume the inquiries would not start and end at Melbourne - there is another serious issue the AFL Commission must consider.
Andrew Demetriou is a commissioner as well as the competition's chief executive. He is unanimously considered the best sports administrator in Australia. The health and spread of the competition, its social policy initiatives and the power of the league to get its way make it impossible for anyone to question Demetriou's influence. He's d'man.
Which brings both power and almighty influence. And it is from this all but insurmountable base that Demetriou's stance taken through the years of tanking is worthy of close scrutiny.
It was Demetriou who defended clubs the loudest and longest. Yesterday, he told The Australian his position on tanking had not changed. "I don't believe teams go on to the ground to lose matches. I simply don't," he said.
A point of view that will give Melbourne comfort as its football department and executive are prodded and pulled by AFL investigators.
And any selection of quotes from Demetriou on tanking - no matter if it was the early 2000s until last month - verify his constant, long-term and passionately held position.
Given that clubs admit privately that tanking was commonplace as far back as the late 1990s, Demetriou's position would seem to have given the clubs the camouflage they needed to throw matches in the hunt for better draft picks.
Demetriou denied this vigorously when questioned by The Australian yesterday. Three questions were answered vehemently if abruptly.
Do you think you should accept any blame for the practice of tanking in the AFL? NO!
Do you think your constant denial of tanking has harmed your reputation? NO!
Do you believe you are in any way required to explain your position to your fellow commissioners? NO!
Demetriou said his confidence that no team went on to the field determined to lose did not give clubs the right to do exactly that. "That's just rubbish," he said.
If that was the argument then Demetriou is right. But that is not the discussion in which Demetriou appears vulnerable. It is his choice of definition for tanking that allows him to deny any blame that the practice flourished while he has been chief executive.
Tanking occurs when clubs decide not to win matches. They do not do that by telling players not to win, to drop marks, to kick behinds and not goals, to ignore opponents.
Clubs tank by making it impossible, as best they can, that the side they place on the field can win the match. Not that they don't try to win the match, rather they can't win the match. So clubs send any injured players off for operations. Got a headache? Then you are booked in for a lobotomy. Got a cough? Lung transplant. Niggles are deemed life-threatening and cramp possibly terminal. It might be the only time players willingly line up to clean out their joints. Demetriou calls that list management.
Then you can play some of your better players in their worst or most unproductive positions. This is called experimentation by Demetriou.
Then there is the trick of pulling in-form players off the ground if it is likely they might become influential or, heavens above, match-winners. This is called player development. Throw in the old reliable "youth policy" and you have the art of tanking as practised by AFL clubs.
Demetriou's argument allows for clubs to do all of these things. List management, experimentation, player development and giving youth a chance on the big stage. These, Demetriou argues, are legitimate end-of-season operations to prepare for the coming season. He does not give any credence to the view that, added up, they lead to tanking. "You can't prove any of that," he said yesterday. So Demetriou refuses to believe that the aim and consequence of all these different manipulations is to lose matches. Thus he frees himself of any responsibility for tanking by sticking to the narrowest of definitions:
Tanking is taking the field with the intent to lose the match. The broader and widely accepted definition is taking the field having made it impossible to win.
Yesterday, Demetriou said he simply rejected the broader definition of tanking. And would not even accept that moving players to the detriment of the team during a game was a tanking tactic. No, said Demetriou, that's experimentation or player development. Or whatever.
No wonder all investigations bar one by the AFL into tanking claims was shortlived and timid. It might be instructive that the AFL's only meaningful, whole-hearted examination of tanking claims (Brock McLean's infamous blind Freddy remark on Fox Footy) began when Demetriou was in London for the Olympic Games.
Tanking has proven Demetriou to be fallible and leaves him vulnerable to claims his aggressive dismissal of tanking suggestions gave succour to clubs to try it or continue the practice. If the commission is not concerned by this misjudgment, and believes its CEO to be correct, then it is not half as smart as it thinks it is.
And it thinks itself a genius.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/opinion/andrew-demetrious-tanking-defence/story-e6frg7uo-1226507834798
-
Good stuff from Smith.
Time to turn the spotlight on Dimmy and his cronies.
-
if sending players to surgery once your year is shot or going down a youth policy that you know will cost you games in the short term then every team has tanked, and it was happening well before the draft even came in. poo, that means we were tanking in dimmas first two years. Remember Harwicks comment about "we know we will get a good draft pick and we have to nail it".?
-
As much as I like to see Melbourne coming under scrutiny (the sight of their supporters cheering when Jordan McMahon kicked that winning goal was sickening) why isn't a spotlight being shone on Carlton, and what they did to secure Kreuzer?
-
As much as I like to see Melbourne coming under scrutiny (the sight of their supporters cheering when Jordan McMahon kicked that winning goal was sickening) why isn't a spotlight being shone on Carlton, and what they did to secure Kreuzer?
Haven't looked to see where it's written, but according to the news on MMM this morning Carlton may be investigated next.
-
As much as I like to see Melbourne coming under scrutiny (the sight of their supporters cheering when Jordan McMahon kicked that winning goal was sickening) why isn't a spotlight being shone on Carlton, and what they did to secure Kreuzer?
Haven't looked to see where it's written, but according to the news on MMM this morning Carlton may be investigated next.
Great! I hope they throw the book at the filthy cheating bastards!!
-
cant remember a game where our ruckman was on a small forward or our best FF was sitting on the pine with a minute to go
this is about match day tactics and Cheats and our friendly skiers are going to be found out and rightly so
we managed our players as best we could so they were right for pre season.
Come match day we always wanted to win, we were too stupid to do it. They didn't.
ppfft Richmond tanking. haha if there was such a thing as reverse tanking we would be guilty as charged.
**RR dont worry about the cheats their time is coming just enjoy watching the Mt Buller tossers get a royal hiding
-
Reckon we were tanking against Gold Coast up in Cairns this year when we had Cotchin on the bench for that final 2 minutes...
Well at least I wish we were tanking. :-[
-
What about the late team changes in that game - Maric, Griffiths, etc
Dont be ridiculous - it was just a stupid selection and coaching that cost us that game.
I cannot wait until Carlton gets investigated again - what happened to Fev comments to Mal Michael?
-
As much as I like to see Melbourne coming under scrutiny (the sight of their supporters cheering when Jordan McMahon kicked that winning goal was sickening) why isn't a spotlight being shone on Carlton, and what they did to secure Kreuzer?
Haven't looked to see where it's written, but according to the news on MMM this morning Carlton may be investigated next.
Should add Collingwood in there as well. They tanked to get the pre-first round priority pick that gave them two picks in the top 5 of the 2005 draft that landed them both Thomas and Pendelbery.
-
What about the late team changes in that game - Maric, Griffiths, etc
Dont be ridiculous - it was just a stupid selection and coaching that cost us that game.
I was joking. ;D
-
As much as I like to see Melbourne coming under scrutiny (the sight of their supporters cheering when Jordan McMahon kicked that winning goal was sickening) why isn't a spotlight being shone on Carlton, and what they did to secure Kreuzer?
Haven't looked to see where it's written, but according to the news on MMM this morning Carlton may be investigated next.
Should add Collingwood in there as well. They tanked to get the pre-first round priority pick that gave them two picks in the top 5 of the 2005 draft that landed them both Thomas and Pendelbery.
what did they do to tank?
-
As much as I like to see Melbourne coming under scrutiny (the sight of their supporters cheering when Jordan McMahon kicked that winning goal was sickening) why isn't a spotlight being shone on Carlton, and what they did to secure Kreuzer?
Haven't looked to see where it's written, but according to the news on MMM this morning Carlton may be investigated next.
Should add Collingwood in there as well. They tanked to get the pre-first round priority pick that gave them two picks in the top 5 of the 2005 draft that landed them both Thomas and Pendelbery.
Want those teams looked at then rightly or wrongly they will look at us as well. Rd 22 -v-
St Kilda in what was it 2007? We were up at 3qtr time and ended up losing our prize was some kid called Cotchin :rollin
-
As much as I like to see Melbourne coming under scrutiny (the sight of their supporters cheering when Jordan McMahon kicked that winning goal was sickening) why isn't a spotlight being shone on Carlton, and what they did to secure Kreuzer?
Haven't looked to see where it's written, but according to the news on MMM this morning Carlton may be investigated next.
Should add Collingwood in there as well. They tanked to get the pre-first round priority pick that gave them two picks in the top 5 of the 2005 draft that landed them both Thomas and Pendelbery.
Want those teams looked at then rightly or wrongly they will look at us as well. Rd 22 -v-
St Kilda in what was it 2007? We were up at 3qtr time and ended up losing our prize was some kid called Cotchin :rollin
Nah we didn't tank. Remember I gave Craig Cameron some stick about us not tanking at one of the fan forums :lol.
-
As much as I like to see Melbourne coming under scrutiny (the sight of their supporters cheering when Jordan McMahon kicked that winning goal was sickening) why isn't a spotlight being shone on Carlton, and what they did to secure Kreuzer?
Haven't looked to see where it's written, but according to the news on MMM this morning Carlton may be investigated next.
Should add Collingwood in there as well. They tanked to get the pre-first round priority pick that gave them two picks in the top 5 of the 2005 draft that landed them both Thomas and Pendelbery.
Want those teams looked at then rightly or wrongly they will look at us as well. Rd 22 -v-
St Kilda in what was it 2007? We were up at 3qtr time and ended up losing our prize was some kid called Cotchin :rollin
wow what a controversy WP
we were up by less than a kick as were the Pies against Nought in that game for Thomas/Pendlebury, or perhaps more.
What Dees/cheats did was blatant cheating. Proof well your seeing it now with people coming out, along with the laughbale positional o changes of fev to the bench in the last and ruckman being pushed back into the last line
Im sure there were more examples. I also cant remember former coaches/players coming out and declaring as such from Tigers/Pies.
ooh and another thing we won the second last game of the 2007 season. That's tanking is it?
Tigers and Wallett wouldnt know how to tank. If we had to tank we would lose.
-
As much as I like to see Melbourne coming under scrutiny (the sight of their supporters cheering when Jordan McMahon kicked that winning goal was sickening) why isn't a spotlight being shone on Carlton, and what they did to secure Kreuzer?
Haven't looked to see where it's written, but according to the news on MMM this morning Carlton may be investigated next.
Should add Collingwood in there as well. They tanked to get the pre-first round priority pick that gave them two picks in the top 5 of the 2005 draft that landed them both Thomas and Pendelbery.
Want those teams looked at then rightly or wrongly they will look at us as well. Rd 22 -v-
St Kilda in what was it 2007? We were up at 3qtr time and ended up losing our prize was some kid called Cotchin :rollin
wow what a controversy WP
we were up by less than a kick as were the Pies against Nought in that game for Thomas/Pendlebury, or perhaps more.
What Dees/cheats did was blatant cheating. Proof well your seeing it now with people coming out, along with the laughbale positional o changes of fev to the bench in the last and ruckman being pushed back into the last line
Im sure there were more examples. I also cant remember former coaches/players coming out and declaring as such from Tigers/Pies.
ooh and another thing we won the second last game of the 2007 season. That's tanking is it?
Tigers and Wallett wouldnt know how to tank. If we had to tank we would lose.
Chill daniel I agree with you
But they media are saying that if the AFL widen their investigation then they will look at all clubs. First Carlton, the the Pies and then the Tigers were thrown in the mix as well
Lets not forget Wallace has already admitted he made no moves in the last qtr of that game and he felt compromised be sue he knew what was at stake ;D
-
SEN saying Melbourne could lose their first and second round picks if the AFL comes down hard on them. That would put Jack Viney in a predicament. Would any punishment make Melbourne lose their father-son selection? Also the club which bid for him to force Melbourne to use their 2nd round pick on him (I can't remember which club it was? Gold Coast?), would they be forced to use their 2nd round pick on him or would Viney be put on the open draft market. Good news if he is on the open market as not only would we move up the draft order by one if Melbourne lose pick 4 but another club ahead of us may grab him so effectively two of the kids, who would be taken with the current draft order, would still be available at our pick 9.
-
if this current trend of unforeseeable fortune continues, we could finally be running into a change of luck
-
As much as I like to see Melbourne coming under scrutiny (the sight of their supporters cheering when Jordan McMahon kicked that winning goal was sickening) why isn't a spotlight being shone on Carlton, and what they did to secure Kreuzer?
Haven't looked to see where it's written, but according to the news on MMM this morning Carlton may be investigated next.
Should add Collingwood in there as well. They tanked to get the pre-first round priority pick that gave them two picks in the top 5 of the 2005 draft that landed them both Thomas and Pendelbery.
Want those teams looked at then rightly or wrongly they will look at us as well. Rd 22 -v-
St Kilda in what was it 2007? We were up at 3qtr time and ended up losing our prize was some kid called Cotchin :rollin
wow what a controversy WP
we were up by less than a kick as were the Pies against Nought in that game for Thomas/Pendlebury, or perhaps more.
What Dees/cheats did was blatant cheating. Proof well your seeing it now with people coming out, along with the laughbale positional o changes of fev to the bench in the last and ruckman being pushed back into the last line
Im sure there were more examples. I also cant remember former coaches/players coming out and declaring as such from Tigers/Pies.
ooh and another thing we won the second last game of the 2007 season. That's tanking is it?
Tigers and Wallett wouldnt know how to tank. If we had to tank we would lose.
Chill daniel I agree with you
But they media are saying that if the AFL widen their investigation then they will look at all clubs. First Carlton, the the Pies and then the Tigers were thrown in the mix as well
Lets not forget Wallace has already admitted he made no moves in the last qtr of that game and he felt compromised be sue he knew what was at stake ;D
The other three clubs' situations were different to ours as they gained priority (extra early) picks from their actions and those actions were across multiple games across the second half of a season as opposed to just the final game of the year.
-
As much as I like to see Melbourne coming under scrutiny (the sight of their supporters cheering when Jordan McMahon kicked that winning goal was sickening) why isn't a spotlight being shone on Carlton, and what they did to secure Kreuzer?
Haven't looked to see where it's written, but according to the news on MMM this morning Carlton may be investigated next.
Should add Collingwood in there as well. They tanked to get the pre-first round priority pick that gave them two picks in the top 5 of the 2005 draft that landed them both Thomas and Pendelbery.
what did they do to tank?
In 2005 you could win up to 5 games and still receive a pre-first round priority pick. The Pies had won 5 games by round 14 so they put key players in cotton wool and subsequently lost their remaining 8 games including giving up a 4 goal lead late in the last quarter against North at Docklands. At the time everyone knew what they were doing. The following year they made the finals with 14 wins.
-
As much as I like to see Melbourne coming under scrutiny (the sight of their supporters cheering when Jordan McMahon kicked that winning goal was sickening) why isn't a spotlight being shone on Carlton, and what they did to secure Kreuzer?
Haven't looked to see where it's written, but according to the news on MMM this morning Carlton may be investigated next.
Should add Collingwood in there as well. They tanked to get the pre-first round priority pick that gave them two picks in the top 5 of the 2005 draft that landed them both Thomas and Pendelbery.
Want those teams looked at then rightly or wrongly they will look at us as well. Rd 22 -v-
St Kilda in what was it 2007? We were up at 3qtr time and ended up losing our prize was some kid called Cotchin :rollin
Nah we didn't tank. Remember I gave Craig Cameron some stick about us not tanking at one of the fan forums :lol.
Yep heard it first hand MT. ;D
-
Pies in that game against Nought in 2005 were about 4 goals up with 5-6 mins to go and lost by a kick. I think Saverio and Drew Petrie kicked the goals.
Hardly tanking losing a tight one all day to losing a game you had in the bag for 114 of the 120 mins as the PIes and Blues have done in the past.
Whilst we're at it maybe the AFL should look at Carlton v Collingwood Essendon v Carlton and Melbourne v Carlton late in 2007 also. :help
-
As much as I like to see Melbourne coming under scrutiny (the sight of their supporters cheering when Jordan McMahon kicked that winning goal was sickening) why isn't a spotlight being shone on Carlton, and what they did to secure Kreuzer?
Haven't looked to see where it's written, but according to the news on MMM this morning Carlton may be investigated next.
Should add Collingwood in there as well. They tanked to get the pre-first round priority pick that gave them two picks in the top 5 of the 2005 draft that landed them both Thomas and Pendelbery.
what did they do to tank?
In 2005 you could win up to 5 games and still receive a pre-first round priority pick. The Pies had won 5 games by round 14 so they put key players in cotton wool and subsequently lost their remaining 8 games including giving up a 4 goal lead late in the last quarter against North at Docklands. At the time everyone knew what they were doing. The following year they made the finals with 14 wins.
who were the players they put in cotton wool? Were they injured?
-
As much as I like to see Melbourne coming under scrutiny (the sight of their supporters cheering when Jordan McMahon kicked that winning goal was sickening) why isn't a spotlight being shone on Carlton, and what they did to secure Kreuzer?
Haven't looked to see where it's written, but according to the news on MMM this morning Carlton may be investigated next.
Should add Collingwood in there as well. They tanked to get the pre-first round priority pick that gave them two picks in the top 5 of the 2005 draft that landed them both Thomas and Pendelbery.
what did they do to tank?
In 2005 you could win up to 5 games and still receive a pre-first round priority pick. The Pies had won 5 games by round 14 so they put key players in cotton wool and subsequently lost their remaining 8 games including giving up a 4 goal lead late in the last quarter against North at Docklands. At the time everyone knew what they were doing. The following year they made the finals with 14 wins.
who were the players they put in cotton wool? Were they injured?
Depends on how 'injuries' is defined. Were they carrying 'niggles' that all footballers are carrying by the second half of seasons - then yes they were injured; on the other hand were they that incapacitated that if the Pies had been in the finals race they still would've missed games - then no most weren't that injured. No doubt the excuse would've been labelled "player management". They wanted these players to have their post-season ops early so they were right to go when 2006 preseason training started. It all paid off as they got both Thomas and Pendelbury in the top 5 of the 2005 draft and the Pies played finals in 2006.
They put in cotton wool the likes of regulars Didak, Tarrant, Johnson, R.Shaw plus a couple of ordinary names now but that year had played every game up to round 15 like a Cameron Cloke. In their place they played young guys like Harry O and Heath Shaw late in the season to give them AFL match experience (which eventually paid off in 2010). Their one big loss due to legitimate injury was Anthony Rocca who went down in the first month of 2005 and missed the whole season. Bucks was the one exception as captain coming back from multiple hammies from memory. They needed to get games into him to test if he was over the hamstring issues. The Pies practically wrote-off the season by the second half of the year and so they made doing what's best for 2006 and beyond the priority rather than trying to win meaningless games at the end of 2005 which would've cost them a pre-first round priority pick.
-
If thats tanking then clubs were doing it before the draft even came in. Going by that theory there is no such thing as smart player management, just tanking.
Gee, even now we have people questioning why they continue to play players carrying injuries even when the season is shot, yet if we dont play them we would be tanking?
No different to us playing every kid on the list in 2010, knowing that it would decrease our chances of winning and publicly stating we would get a good draft pick, but a world of difference to Melbourne setting out with one objective, to lose games to gain draft picks
-
Playing younger players for pure development reasons because you have the youngest list in the comp. as we did in 2010 or sending senior players for ops because the injury is significantly hampering their performance (ie. Vickery with his shoulder this year) is player management. Simulating these things because your club's main intention is to try and stay at or below a certain number of wins limit that earns your club an early priority pick is called tanking.
I'm not saying the Pies weren't smart doing what they did in 2005 as the AFL's draft system, especially back then with the pre-first round priority picks for just one bad season, rewarded such actions handsomely. They have a flag thanks to getting both Thomas and Pendelbury. However let's call a spade a spade. Just like Carlton in 2007, it wasn't hard to see what the Pies were up to in 2005 and that 4 goal cave-in late to North was very similar to the game Carlton threw away late in the last quarter ironically against the Pies in 2007.
The draft system rewarded such exploitive behaviour by clubs and encouraged other clubs to copy such behaviour having seen other clubs benefit for the exploitation of the priority pick system. IMO Melbourne went down the path they did because they lost out to Carlton in the Kruezer Cup. Carlton gained Kreuzer and Judd out of it while the Dees ended up with Cale Morton. The problem for Melbourne is they let everyone know about it as it was a directive from high up at the club all the way down and they weren't subtle about implementing what they wanted to do. Rather than their tanking occurring in the last 8 or so rounds of one season which can be construed as 'player management', they had planned a 2-3 year tank as the rules had changed by 2009 and you needed two poor seasons in a row to gain a pre-first round priority pick. Once they cut Bailey who felt he was only following orders and then Scully taking flight because he didn't like what was going on, the cat got out of the bag. The AFL have always taken a hard line against systematic breaches by clubs over a lengthy period. Adelaide is finding that out now as well but for different reasons to Melbourne (ie. Tippett contract affair).
IMO the following clubs "tanked"
2005 Collingwood
2007 Carlton
2009 Melbourne
2010 West Coast
Also the Hawks game against us late in 2005 where they lost after being 7 goals up on us at half-time (Pettifer got the winning goal in the last minute) was a handy loss for them as they remained on 5 wins and kept hold of their priority pick. I still remember Hawk fans celebrating a loss just as Dee fans did after that 2009 game.
-
Jobs on line: Dees warned
Caroline Wilson
The Age
November 2, 2012
A SENIOR Melbourne football official is said to have evoked the image of a disappointed and cancer-stricken Jim Stynes to impress on coach Dean Bailey how he felt about the Demons' 11-point victory over Port Adelaide in 2009.
The AFL's investigation into the Melbourne tanking affair has also been given evidence against chief executive Cameron Schwab, who, with football boss Chris Connolly, expressed his concern to Bailey after the round-15 victory.
Investigators have been told that Connolly later warned a large group of football staff they would be sacked if Melbourne kept winning.
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/jobs-on-line-dees-warned-20121101-28mx2.html#ixzz2AzCc1uOu
Former Melbourne coach Dean Bailey told players to accept new ‘strategy'
Michael Warner
From: Herald Sun
November 01, 2012 11:00PM
A MELBOURNE player has broken his silence to reveal coach Dean Bailey called a player meeting to signal a sudden change in tactics midway through the 2009 season.
The player yesterday told the Herald Sun - on the condition of anonymity - that Bailey demanded no one ask questions about unusual positional changes in the second half of the season.
He said it was the moment the club set on the course to deliberately lose games to secure draft picks.
"It was at the Junction Oval. All the players got spoken to as a group," the player said.
"He (Bailey) took us in and said this is what we're going to do going forward for the rest of the year. This is the position we are at.
"He said: 'Look, you blokes are going to get played out of position. We want to see what roles you guys can play because now in today's game you need to play a number of roles and we are building a list to go forward'.
"'We need you guys to be able to do this, so don't be shocked or ask questions why -- because I'm telling you why right now'."
The player said the meeting took place in a portable shed at the Junction Oval known as "the vault".
The same room is alleged to have hosted another meeting of football department staff uncovered in the AFL tanking investigation.
He is the third Melbourne player, including original whistleblower Brock McLean, to speak up about the tanking tactics.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/dean-bailey-told-players-to-accept-new-strategy/story-e6frf9io-1226508732765
-
Playing younger players for pure development reasons because you have the youngest list in the comp. as we did in 2010 or sending senior players for ops because the injury is significantly hampering their performance (ie. Vickery with his shoulder this year) is player management. Simulating these things because your club's main intention is to try and stay at or below a certain number of wins limit that earns your club an early priority pick is called tanking.
I'm not saying the Pies weren't smart doing what they did in 2005 as the AFL's draft system, especially back then with the pre-first round priority picks for just one bad season, rewarded such actions handsomely. They have a flag thanks to getting both Thomas and Pendelbury. However let's call a spade a spade. Just like Carlton in 2007, it wasn't hard to see what the Pies were up to in 2005 and that 4 goal cave-in late to North was very similar to the game Carlton threw away late in the last quarter ironically against the Pies in 2007.
The draft system rewarded such exploitive behaviour by clubs and encouraged other clubs to copy such behaviour having seen other clubs benefit for the exploitation of the priority pick system. IMO Melbourne went down the path they did because they lost out to Carlton in the Kruezer Cup. Carlton gained Kreuzer and Judd out of it while the Dees ended up with Cale Morton. The problem for Melbourne is they let everyone know about it as it was a directive from high up at the club all the way down and they weren't subtle about implementing what they wanted to do. Rather than their tanking occurring in the last 8 or so rounds of one season which can be construed as 'player management', they had planned a 2-3 year tank as the rules had changed by 2009 and you needed two poor seasons in a row to gain a pre-first round priority pick. Once they cut Bailey who felt he was only following orders and then Scully taking flight because he didn't like what was going on, the cat got out of the bag. The AFL have always taken a hard line against systematic breaches by clubs over a lengthy period. Adelaide is finding that out now as well but for different reasons to Melbourne (ie. Tippett contract affair).
IMO the following clubs "tanked"
2005 Collingwood
2007 Carlton
2009 Melbourne
2010 West Coast
Also the Hawks game against us late in 2005 where they lost after being 7 goals up on us at half-time (Pettifer got the winning goal in the last minute) was a handy loss for them as they remained on 5 wins and kept hold of their priority pick. I still remember Hawk fans celebrating a loss just as Dee fans did after that 2009 game.
No doubt there is a fine line between player managmenet and outright tanking. But to say that you could convince a number of players 8 weeks out from the end of the season that they would not be playing for the rest of the year when they were not really injured, and not have at least some of them crack the poos is a bit far fetched. Players just want to play footy and none worth their salt would be happy to sit on the sidelines for any period of time unless they were actually injured.
As for west cosat, they had a lot of injuries during 2010. If you compare them to us in 2012, it shows that a developing side doesn't need too many injuries to drop right away.
and then a side that has performed poorly all year throws away a half time lead? well they must be tanking. because they have shown all year they have the ability and mental aptitude to win games of football.
Shadows in every corner isnt there?
I also love the way that if the fans look at the bright side of a loss then that is proof the team was tanking.
Seriously, if the clubs in question sued OER for making such allegations about them, do you think you could even go close to providing enough evidence in a court of law to substantiate your claims?
-
Demons: shock & awful
Caroline Wilson
The Age
November 3, 2012
MELBOURNE president Don McLardy smarted for much of his club's abysmal 2012 football season over a tabloid headline trumpeted early in the year describing the Demons as ''pathetic and disgusting''.
Privately shattered at the awful truth that Melbourne was being forced to rebuild its list from scratch - again, punch-drunk from the misfortune that seemed to be hitting the club at every turn and lamenting the dreadful lack of fight onfield; McLardy still believed those words ''pathetic and disgusting'' were unforgivable.
If only his football life and its associated problems were so simple now. Melbourne in 2012 played some dreadfully uncompetitive football and in those first weeks, which stretched to months, was generally thrashed week in and week out. Still ''pathetic and disgusting'' did seem slightly harsh at the time.
Not any more. In the context of what has emerged in recent weeks in the form of evidence being put forward and corroborated by a number of witnesses, ''pathetic and disgusting'' sums it up pretty well.
McLardy issued a plea on his club's website on Friday for ''natural justice'' as the mounting weight of damning evidence that the club fixed matches continued to emerge in all its shocking detail. A picture is being painted for the AFL's investigative team of dark threats, amateurish tactics and blatant match manipulation. The indication is still that Melbourne will fight this, but it looks shocking for all concerned.
The AFL is praying that Jim Stynes - and McLardy and the board it strangely continues to extol - can be kept at a decent arm's length from the fall-out. But even if Stynes' legacy is spared because we might never truly know how much he knew, the game must cast aside concerns about legacies and images and football myths and concentrate on repairing the collateral damage.
Melbourne will be harshly punished. Cameron Schwab and Chris Connolly will be finished at the club. But football lives, young men who played no real active part in the treacherous football facade which took place at the club in 2009 were ruined or at the very least tarnished by their association with it.
It is nonsense to suggest the AFL must carry the can for Melbourne because it created a system which encouraged tanking. That is rot. The AFL was not complicit in this. At best it was naive and at worst the commission and its chief executive incompetent in failing to see what was being unveiled in front of them.
The AFL introduced the priority pick to help improve struggling clubs. Like the four-man interchange, it was well-intended but created issues it did not foresee. Finally it removed it because football boss Adrian Anderson and a team of academics demonstrated to the commission the advantage was generally too great for those teams that earned one, with some obvious exceptions: when clubs were too hopeless to pick the right players or develop them professionally or create an environment that retained them.
The commission agreed the day it scrapped the pick that it also created a bad perception that teams were tanking. This column's view is that the chairman, Mike Fitzpatrick, did not believe clubs plotted to lose. He seems to have been proven wrong. As we said, the AFL was probably incompetent but that should not save Melbourne.
Like Ross Oakley and his team when Nicky Winmar lifted his St Kilda jumper and two years later Michael Long spoke up about being racially taunted on Anzac Day, the current administration was far too slow to act on what it is now acting upon. But it never encouraged it and truly seems shocked at what it has learnt in recent times.
What the AFL, in fact, should feel sick about now is those players who aspired to its code, who walked into a football club believing in sportsmanship and playing to win and giving their all for victory. It is not surprising in hindsight that it has been a player who has lifted the lid on a secret Melbourne believed it could keep in the vault.
The Demons and their more rabid supporters keep banging on about the fact that everyone was doing it. No other club seems to have done it quite like this, though, and if Carlton is guilty then the current mood of the AFL indicates that club, too, will be forensically examined and punished.
Putting players in for surgery once a season is lost is not match-fixing because everyone associated with the game knows the playing field they are watching, backing or barracking upon. Even losing heart in one final game for an earlier pick seems more forgivable than systematic planning, career-ending threats and a plan which seems to have dragged on for weeks leading into months. To think that a player having on-field success was prevented from having more. No wonder Melbourne's misery continued to curse the club.
What Melbourne did in manipulating results was disgusting. The result of the fix was pathetic. To think that so many reputations could be destroyed and so many playing careers hurt all for one ambitious young footballer who began looking for a way out of the place after only one year.
If what some former players and coaches say is true, then the tanking was only the half of it. But to put in the fix for Tom Scully and not to create a training and development laboratory for all similarly-talented young men to improve and retain them is just so glaringly short-sighted. All those early draft picks gone. All those disillusioned once-proud Demons. What a sorry story.
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/demons-shock--awful-20121102-28ppz.html#ixzz2B5lIKkuv
-
Former Melbourne sponsor says senior Demons offical boasted about securing top two draft picks
Michael Warner
From: Herald Sun
November 03, 2012
A MELBOURNE Football Club official boasted openly about tanking, a former Demons sponsor has revealed.
A company representative who was at a meeting of big sponsors told the Herald Sun the official left him in no doubt Melbourne deliberately lost games so it could secure Tom Scully and Jack Trengove in the 2009 national draft.
"It was an off-the-cuff remark regarding the No.1 draft pick. He said words to the effect of: 'We made sure that happened'. He had a smile on his face at the time," the representative said.
"I mean everyone knew that it (tanking) happened, but I was just surprised that he actually came out and said it. He was trying to relay that they made sure they got the No.1 draft pick and the priority pick.
"Even though it was plainly obvious to everyone, you still don't expect to hear it being said."
The sponsor is the latest club figure to come forward and reveal details of Melbourne's alleged tanking strategy during the 2009 season.
Three players have now spoken out about the contentious "list management" tactics at the centre of an AFL investigation.
It is believed the league probe has uncovered significant evidence to suggest the club has a case to answer.
But the club's defence will centre around the pure definition of "tanking" compared to acceptable list management.
Melbourne president Don McLardy yesterday expressed concern over the impact of the investigation on the current group of players and coaches.
Amid a host damning revelations, he also pleaded for the club be treated fairly.
Full article here: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/more-news/former-melbourne-sponsor-says-senior-demons-offical-boasted-about-securing-top-two-draft-picks/story-e6frf9jf-1226509485103
-
This para of Caro's article sums it up perfectly:-
What Melbourne did in manipulating results was disgusting. The result of the fix was pathetic. To think that so many reputations could be destroyed and so many playing careers hurt all for one ambitious young footballer who began looking for a way out of the place after only one year.
-
Nov 19 is Dee-Day for the tanking investigation.
THE CLOCK is ticking on the AFL investigation into tanking being completed before the AFL Commission's next scheduled meeting on November 19.
While a decision could be still be made that affects Melbourne in this year's AFL National Draft, to be held three days later on November 22 - coincidentally 10 years to the day since sanctions were imposed on Carlton for salary cap breaches - it is more likely as each day passes that any ruling will come into effect after the draft is held on the Gold Coast.
https://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/150722/default.aspx
-
I cant see the league banning Melbourne from the draft this year, it will create too many dramas in terms of numbers on the list and TPPs. They may take away early picks though, leaving them only with 2nd or 3rd round picks.
As one of the journos said, there is a certain irony in that any draft related sanctions that are effective will ultimately result in more early draft picks for Melbourne down the track.
We may yet see criminal charges laid against individuals, which is what bookmakers would be pushing for. After all we are talking about match fixing in a sport which can legally be bet on, which is a crime.
-
Playing younger players for pure development reasons because you have the youngest list in the comp. as we did in 2010 or sending senior players for ops because the injury is significantly hampering their performance (ie. Vickery with his shoulder this year) is player management. Simulating these things because your club's main intention is to try and stay at or below a certain number of wins limit that earns your club an early priority pick is called tanking.
I'm not saying the Pies weren't smart doing what they did in 2005 as the AFL's draft system, especially back then with the pre-first round priority picks for just one bad season, rewarded such actions handsomely. They have a flag thanks to getting both Thomas and Pendelbury. However let's call a spade a spade. Just like Carlton in 2007, it wasn't hard to see what the Pies were up to in 2005 and that 4 goal cave-in late to North was very similar to the game Carlton threw away late in the last quarter ironically against the Pies in 2007.
The draft system rewarded such exploitive behaviour by clubs and encouraged other clubs to copy such behaviour having seen other clubs benefit for the exploitation of the priority pick system. IMO Melbourne went down the path they did because they lost out to Carlton in the Kruezer Cup. Carlton gained Kreuzer and Judd out of it while the Dees ended up with Cale Morton. The problem for Melbourne is they let everyone know about it as it was a directive from high up at the club all the way down and they weren't subtle about implementing what they wanted to do. Rather than their tanking occurring in the last 8 or so rounds of one season which can be construed as 'player management', they had planned a 2-3 year tank as the rules had changed by 2009 and you needed two poor seasons in a row to gain a pre-first round priority pick. Once they cut Bailey who felt he was only following orders and then Scully taking flight because he didn't like what was going on, the cat got out of the bag. The AFL have always taken a hard line against systematic breaches by clubs over a lengthy period. Adelaide is finding that out now as well but for different reasons to Melbourne (ie. Tippett contract affair).
IMO the following clubs "tanked"
2005 Collingwood
2007 Carlton
2009 Melbourne
2010 West Coast
Also the Hawks game against us late in 2005 where they lost after being 7 goals up on us at half-time (Pettifer got the winning goal in the last minute) was a handy loss for them as they remained on 5 wins and kept hold of their priority pick. I still remember Hawk fans celebrating a loss just as Dee fans did after that 2009 game.
No doubt there is a fine line between player managmenet and outright tanking. But to say that you could convince a number of players 8 weeks out from the end of the season that they would not be playing for the rest of the year when they were not really injured, and not have at least some of them crack the poos is a bit far fetched. Players just want to play footy and none worth their salt would be happy to sit on the sidelines for any period of time unless they were actually injured.
As for west cosat, they had a lot of injuries during 2010. If you compare them to us in 2012, it shows that a developing side doesn't need too many injuries to drop right away.
and then a side that has performed poorly all year throws away a half time lead? well they must be tanking. because they have shown all year they have the ability and mental aptitude to win games of football.
Shadows in every corner isnt there?
I also love the way that if the fans look at the bright side of a loss then that is proof the team was tanking.
Seriously, if the clubs in question sued OER for making such allegations about them, do you think you could even go close to providing enough evidence in a court of law to substantiate your claims?
Do I have undeniable proof that would convict clubs in court al? No I don't but that answer would also apply to Melbourne.
I'm also not accusing players of deliberately losing or feigning injuries so they missed games. I'm talking about coaches and match committees at clubs (and in some cases with the permission of those at Board level (Melbourne being one of them) so the coach despite a wooden spoon wouldn't be sacked), choosing teams and making positional changes within games each week to make sure their side didn't win so they could gain a priority pick. Melbourne only got caught out because they didn't hide what they were doing and their plan to tank was initiated prior to the season starting rather than halfway through as the other clubs did when their season was shot.
I'm not the only one who believes Collingwood tanked to get Thomas and Pendelbury ...
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/expert-opinion/did-collingwood-tank-its-way-to-a-flag/story-fncqi979-1226440468746
-
Dean Bailey tells the AFL he didn't order players to lose
Jon Ralph
From: Herald Sun
November 06, 2012
FORMER Melbourne coach Dean Bailey is arguing he is innocent of tanking claims, despite being in the "vault" when football operations manager Chris Connolly reinforced the need to play for draft picks.
The AFL is unveiling its investigative arsenal as it builds its case, warning some Melbourne assistant coaches of severe sanctions if they refuse to be interviewed or are not honest in testimony.
Some Demons officials have been told the AFL can impose life coaching bans, though interviews are not conducted under oath.
Others have been re-interviewed and told that their testimony is inconsistent with those who believe there is evidence of tanking.
While Connolly is under the most heat, Bailey is said to be comfortable with the fact he never instructed coaches or players to deliberately lose games.
He is one of several Melbourne figures who remembers Connolly making his controversial aside in a portable shed at the Junction Oval, dubbed The Vault, after the Port Adelaide win in Round 15, 2009.
While that meeting has been painted as the start of an orchestrated campaign to lose games, the context of that discussion is at the heart of the tanking investigation.
Some, including Bailey, believe the Connolly statement urging the coaching staff not to maximise their high draft picks was a 30-second aside in a lengthy match committee meeting.
They dispute it was a specific meeting held as a call-to-arms to the football department.
Others have accused Connolly of saying words to the effect of, "Make this happen, or you'll all get sacked".
Whether the AFL believes the more generous interpretation, or declares the Connolly statement as evidence of tanking, is the crux of the investigation.
The Herald Sun has reported Bailey, now an Adelaide assistant coach, told the players in mid-2009 some would be played in radically different positions.
Melbourne faces "severe" penalties if found guilty, but will likely have seven days to reply to any AFL findings.
That means Melbourne has a good chance of retaining its No.4 selection and the No.27 pick it needs to secure father-son selection Jack Viney in the November 22 national draft because the investigation will be ongoing.
The AFL Commission meets on November 19.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/more-news/dean-bailey-tells-the-afl-he-didnt-order-players-to-lose/story-e6frf9jf-1226511021945
-
Filthy pack of inbreeders
AFL needs to ban this club
-
Just merge them with Kangaroos and ship them to Tasmania.
-
Just merge them with Kangaroos and ship them to Tasmania.
stuff off we want our own team not Fritzy's Demons
-
MELBOURNE legend Ron Barassi says the AFL must turn its tanking investigation to other clubs if the Demons are found guilty of deliberately underperforming.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/tanking-probe-must-go-beyond-demons-says-ron-barassi/story-e6frf7jo-1226514305211
-
I would strip them of there first two picks in this years draft!
Be great to see Melbourne and Adelaide punished for this!
Teach them a lesson. Carlton are lucky not to be investigated!
-
Melbourne escapes penalties ahead of next week's draft
Jon Ralph, Michael Warner
From: Herald Sun
November 12, 2012 7:14PM
MELBOURNE has officially dodged a draft bullet and will keep its prized picks in next week's national draft on the Gold Coast.
But Adelaide was last night smacked with a raft of charges over the Kurt Tippett salary cap scandal, and will be hauled before the AFL Commission on Monday.
The besieged Crows could be banned from participating in the next four AFL drafts, with chief executive Steven Trigg and forward Tippett slapped with individual charges alongside former football manager John Reid.
The league's probe into Melbourne's tanking saga is not complete, which means the Demons will not be stripped of critical high selections in next Thursday's national draft.
The Herald Sun understands the Demons were relieved to learn in recent days their picks would remain unscathed because the probe is still weeks from completion.
The league's integrity officers were still speaking with relevant Demons staff even as recently as yesterday.
It means the Demons keep the cherished fourth overall pick in the draft - likely to be hard nut Ollie Wines - as well as father-son selection Jack Viney, already nominated at selection 27.
Melbourne still faces unprecedented penalties but but even if it was charged this week it would need seven days to reply to the AFL's probe, not enough time to strip the club of picks.
There is a growing feeling the league may target individuals guilty of orchestrating the "tanking" that took place, which could see heavy penalty for staffers but less focus on draft sanctions.
The loss of picks this year would have gutted the club given it is in a rebuilding mode, with Wines the perfect building block for coach Mark Neeld and Viney the son of head recruiter Todd Viney.
The Crows have thrown open their books, and after fully cooperating with the league investigation are in effect pleading for mercy from the AFL.
Adelaide coach Brenton Sanderson last week admitting to the Herald Sun the Crows expected to be hit hard with sanctions for the next two national drafts.
Adelaide has acknowledged the charges and said it hoped its frank admissions and history of total adherence to the salary cap and AFL rules would be taken into account by the league.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/more-news/melbourne-escapes-penalties-ahead-of-next-weeks-draft/story-e6frf9jf-1226515379853
Edit: added link
-
well what a surprise dees will be spared no penalty re: this years draft
Fair chance they will cop jack.
AFL weak pricks
-
well what a surprise dees will be spared no penalty re: this years draft
Fair chance they will cop jack.
AFL weak pricks
It won't surprise me if the AFL goes soft on the Dees. The AFL will want to avoid opening a Pandora's box by then needing to investigate other clubs over tanking such as Libba's claims about his time at Carlton.
-
if the afl had taken away draft picks before the investigation had finished and withouy giving Melbourne adequate time to respond to the findings then they would have left themselves open to legal action.
I would prefer to see action taken against individuals than the club anyway.
-
if the afl had taken away draft picks before the investigation had finished and withouy giving Melbourne adequate time to respond to the findings then they would have left themselves open to legal action.
I would prefer to see action taken against individuals than the club anyway.
did you adopt that thinking when the cheats were raped of draft picks or when the Kruzer cup was in full swing. :shh
Sure you were saying individuals should've been punished not the club
-
actually i was out beyond buttphuck and didnt know it was happening.
when i found out later i didnt give it another thought.
anyways, even if i did, what is wrong with changing your opinion if you think something may be better? do you advocate dogmatic stupidity?
take away draft picks and you could ultimately give the club more early draft picks.
if only the club is punished, blokes are more likely to take the risk, as they may personally get very little retribution, particularly if they are no longer at the club when the poo hits the fan.
punish the blokes responsible and people are more likely to think about the consequences before going down the path.
Besides, i thought you were an advocate of tanking?
-
actually i was out beyond buttstuff and didnt know it was happening.
when i found out later i didnt give it another thought.
anyways, even if i did, what is wrong with changing your opinion if you think something may be better? do you advocate dogmatic stupidity?
take away draft picks and you could ultimately give the club more early draft picks.
if only the club is punished, blokes are more likely to take the risk, as they may personally get very little retribution, particularly if they are no longer at the club when the poo hits the fan.
punish the blokes responsible and people are more likely to think about the consequences before going down the path.
Besides, i thought you were an advocate of tanking?
Blues got more draft picks directly after their punishment and what have they done with them? Russel, Walker. rubbish.
mate the club needs to be punished to set an example to the rest of the league, Carlton like.
Yes bloody oath i did want mclovin to miss that shot against the Demons. Maybe if it was someone else shooting for goal i wouldnt have cared so much but that bloke should never have been at the club to begin with.
Tanking days are over, and the facts are the RFC dont tank, i really believe that, and even if they did or wanted to they would reverse tank and actually win.
Just my take
-
yet the example set upon carlton didnt stop melbourne did it?
Now, if the individuals involved were banned from all activities associated with football clubs at all levels, or even spent time in jail (football is a game that can be gambled on, so it is theoretically possible) then that may be more of a disincentive.
-
far out the AFL is soft on this backwater club
-
far out the AFL is soft on this backwater club
It's more pity than anything else, it's a shambles of a club that recruits power players as Morton and watts
-
far out the AFL is soft on this backwater club
AFL trying to avoid a can of worms. If they punish Melbourne then the media will turn its focus to what Carlton did when Ratten first took over from Pagan. The AFL created the draft rules that rewarded early draft priority picks for tanking to finish low on the ladder with just 4-5 wins while other poor onfield clubs that tried to win as many games as possible lost out as they were pushed further down the draft order. Then the AFL were in denial tanking even existed until what was going on behind the scenes in this Melbourne saga became public knowledge.
-
One question....Was Jordan McMahon at the meeting in "The Vault"? in 2009 ;D
-
gone all quiet with this, i personally think not much will come of it.
considering they went soft with the Crows, the same will happen to this mob.
-
i dont think the individuals that got suspended would reckon they went soft
-
Speaking of the Dees, a Norf and Demon supporter was just having a go at me for the Tigers rookie list drafting. :rollin
The Dees supporter is a little delusional...
Me: They're only back up players, with luck injury wise, none will get a game.
Him: Ya can only pray! Waste of time, better off blooding in kids for future. Will just go around in circles and end up 9th for next 10 years. :rollin
Me: You got to have a balance. Look where having just kids on the list got Melbourne. You're rebuilding again after only a couple of years and Neeld is desperately trying to get some experience in.
Him: Yer but our kids are guns and we in a position to grab a few big names as well as still pick up viney and hogan. We've played system to perfection :lol, last to top! Not 9th to 9th. :rollin
Me: You could be already fighting for top spot if you had of drafted properly.
Him: All part of the master plan! :lol
He's 100% serious too!! :lol
-
Speaking of the Dees, a Norf and Demon supporter was just having a go at me for the Tigers rookie list drafting. :rollin
The Dees supporter is a little delusional...
Me: They're only back up players, with luck injury wise, none will get a game.
Him: Ya can only pray! Waste of time, better off blooding in kids for future. Will just go around in circles and end up 9th for next 10 years. :rollin
Me: You got to have a balance. Look where having just kids on the list got Melbourne. You're rebuilding again after only a couple of years and Neeld is desperately trying to get some experience in.
Him: Yer but our kids are guns and we in a position to grab a few big names as well as still pick up viney and hogan. We've played system to perfection :lol, last to top! Not 9th to 9th. :rollin
Me: You could be already fighting for top spot if you had of drafted properly.
Him: All part of the master plan! :lol
He's 100% serious too!! :lol
Cook, Jurrah, Pettard
Cale Morton, and Jordie Gysberts
:whistle
-
Speaking of the Dees, a Norf and Demon supporter was just having a go at me for the Tigers rookie list drafting. :rollin
The Dees supporter is a little delusional...
Me: They're only back up players, with luck injury wise, none will get a game.
Him: Ya can only pray! Waste of time, better off blooding in kids for future. Will just go around in circles and end up 9th for next 10 years. :rollin
Me: You got to have a balance. Look where having just kids on the list got Melbourne. You're rebuilding again after only a couple of years and Neeld is desperately trying to get some experience in.
Him: Yer but our kids are guns and we in a position to grab a few big names as well as still pick up viney and hogan. We've played system to perfection :lol, last to top! Not 9th to 9th. :rollin
Me: You could be already fighting for top spot if you had of drafted properly.
Him: All part of the master plan! :lol
He's 100% serious too!! :lol
1. What big names?
2. When did we last finish 9th?
3. We didn't buy any of our potatoes, and most are expendable on a rookie list
4. What Bents said.
-
THE AFL has all but finalised its five-month investigation into alleged match tanking at Melbourne, with the club to be provided with all findings before the Christmas break.
The probe, into practices employed during Dean Bailey’s tenure as coach, is believed to have found adversely against former football manager Chris Connolly.
No official sanctions have been determined, as that will be a matter for the AFL commission.
The Demons will be given at least three weeks to review and respond to the AFL findings ...
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2012-12-19/tank-verdict-looms-for-dees
-
Throw the kitchen sink at that half way house of a footy club. :lol :rollin :lol
-
The AFL may target individuals such as Connolly with fines but I bet Melbourne as a club get off ::). The AFL won't want to open a can of worms for themselves as they laid down all the freebie priority picks for to clubs finishing with less than 5 wins. Btw Bailey's solicitor the other day was trying to claim his client was only coaching normally in the second half of 2009 :wallywink :nope.
-
Demons to set battle lines
Jon Pierik
The Age
December 23, 2012
LAWYERS acting on behalf of the Melbourne Football Club have confirmed they have received evidence in the tanking claims lodged against the club.
The lawyers will use the holiday period to dissect the document delivered by the AFL late on Friday, with a response expected to be lodged by the end of January.
It is understood the Demons will fight the case and believe tanking is a complex issue with no specific definition.
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/demons-to-set-battle-lines-20121222-2bsqk.html#ixzz2FogQmMXR
-
Tank probe: Dozen witness statements could cook careers in Melbourne investigation
Jay Clark
From: Herald Sun
January 04, 2013
FIGURES connected to the Melbourne tanking investigation have been told up to a dozen people have "rolled over" about how the club has managed past lists.
The statements potentially incriminate Demons administrators amid growing fears the club and individuals could face serious league sanctions.
The Herald Sun can reveal some of the interviewees were subsequently told as many as 12 people had provided the AFL's investigators with potentially incriminating details about the club's intent throughout the second half of the 2009 campaign.
The AFL has stated it expects to make a decision on any charges by the end of the month.
If guilty, Melbourne could be stripped of draft picks or fined.
But there is a growing belief the AFL would prefer to penalise individuals for wrongdoing.
The AFL investigation has centred on comments made in a Demons football department meeting run by football operations manager Chris Connolly, allegedly reminding staff about the importance of the extra draft pick.
It is also believed it has inquired about knowledge of a follow-up meeting between former coach Dean Bailey and chief executive Cameron Schwab at Schwab's house.
Unusual tactical moves in the Dees' losses to Sydney (Round 17) and Richmond (Round 18) have been the subject of intense speculation.
It is believed up to 20 people were interviewed by AFL investigators Brett Clothier and Abraham Haddad, including Bailey, Schwab, Connolly, ex-captain James McDonald and current football manager Josh Mahoney.
Others included Scott West, Kelly O'Donnell, Sean Wellman, Mark Williams and ex-recruiting boss Barry Prendergast.
http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/tank-probe-dozen-witness-statements-could-cook-careers/story-fnelctok-1226547335584
-
But there is a growing belief the AFL would prefer to penalise individuals for wrongdoing.
:whistle :whistle :whistle
Assholes
-
punishing individuals is the way to go.
why should the individuals responsible get off just because they dont work at the club any more?
why should current administrators/coaches cop the whack for stuff that went down if they were not at the club at the time?
there does still need to be sanctions against the club, but it is the individuals responsible that need to feel the brunt of the penalties.
-
Dees' charges revealed
Jon Pierik
The Age
January 8, 2013
LAWYERS representing the Melbourne Football Club and former coach Dean Bailey are dissecting a whopping 800 pages of evidence, and all but vowing to take the AFL to court if found guilty of allegations of tanking.
The Demons board, chief executive Cameron Schwab, Chris Connolly – the former football manager still working at the club – and Bailey, must show reason by the end of the month to interim AFL football operations manager Gillon McLachlan as to why they should not be charged.
The detailed and explosive documents fill two folders and were handed to all parties on the eve of Christmas.
As tension between those facing sanctions and the AFL increases, it has emerged that Bailey is facing three allegations: bringing the game into disrepute, tampering with the national draft, and not coaching to his utmost in 2009.
Schwab and Connolly are facing charges of bringing the game into disrepute and tampering with the draft.
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/dees-charges-revealed-20130107-2ccw7.html#ixzz2HJY02t8
-
Like Cuzzy, you cannot challenge 'bringing the game into disrepute'
It's off to Guantanamo for these chaps
-
FORMER St Kilda coach Grant Thomas says tanking charges against Melbourne will blow up in the AFL's face if they end up in court.
Thomas, a vocal critic of league headquarters and CEO Andrew Demetriou, says the AFL is complicit in any rule breaking because it provided an incentive for clubs to lose.
Former Melbourne coach Dean Bailey and officials Cameron Schwab and Chris Connolly are believed to face charges including draft tampering and bringing the game into disrepute.
The AFL's tanking investigation centres on the 2009 season, when the Demons lost six of their last seven matches to finish the season on four wins and qualify for a priority draft pick.
"AFL is putting themselves into a corner with tanking saga that will eventually expose their own behavior & test their strategies legally," Thomas tweeted today.
"Any decent senior counsel would be able to rip the AFL apart in a witness box. Honorable Andy won't want to get in the box - GUARANTEED!"
Thomas said players always tried to win but officials could make decisions to reduce their chances.
He said it was impossible to prove the real motivation behind selection decisions and calls from the coach's box on game day. But he had little doubt tanking was real.
"If comp manager provides incentive for losing what do u expect? Players try but club realise greater reward is extra draft pick than 5th win."
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/tanking-charges-against-the-melbourne-football-club-out-in-the-open/story-e6frf7jo-1226549291328
-
The 3 minutes that mattered
Jon Pierik
The Age
January 9, 2013
AFL investigators have focused on the final three minutes of Melbourne's after-the-siren loss to Richmond in 2009 and have even questioned whether players deliberately fumbled the ball as part of an explosive probe into tanking.
Documents, as part of an 800- page report, distributed to lawyers of the Melbourne Football Club, confirm serious questions have been raised about the coaching of Dean Bailey in round 18 and the club's interchange rotations through the season.
Suspicions over the Demons' motives were raised through a number of positional moves in a game in which Richmond's Jordan McMahon marked on the final siren and booted the winning goal.
The decision by the Demons to send lumbering ruckman Paul Johnson to full-back on small forward Nathan Brown has been a focus of questioning, as revealed in the documents. Brown has said previously he was surprised to have been manned by Johnson.
The report, which fills two folders, also investigates the round-17 loss to Sydney at Manuka Oval, when the Demons made eight pre-match changes, and the round-22 loss to St Kilda, which ensured the Demons of the coveted top two picks in the national draft.
"They are the games that just keep on coming up, especially the Richmond one," a source close to the Demons said.
"The last two or three minutes of that Richmond game is what they [investigators] really centre on."
The Demons took the lead with three minutes remaining, with the ball trapped in the Tigers' forward line in the final seconds until McMahon marked alone at centre half-forward and slotted through the winning goal.
It is understood those interviewed have denied claims the players fumbled on purpose in the final minutes.
Lawyers for all parties on the Melbourne side maintain that the AFL, led by its investigators Brett Clothier and Abraham Haddad, cannot prove anything in this regard and have vowed to fight any charges.
The documents also question the Demons' interchange rotations. There are suggestions the Demons had a high number of rotations in their four wins for the season, but cut numbers in other games.
Under then AFL draft rules, the Demons would get picks one and two following two successive seasons of managing no more than 16 premiership points.
The Demons averaged 85 rotations a game in 2009, although this was as high as 93 up to round 15 – the day they beat Port Adelaide for their third win of the year and jeopardised hopes of a priority pick. The AFL average for rotations was 92.
The Demons had 82 rotations in their round-four win over the Tigers, 98 in round 14 in a win over West Coast, and 94 a week later in the win over the Power.
In the contentious loss to the Tigers three weeks later, the number of rotations would plummet to 47, the fewest by any team that season, with 49 against North Melbourne the next week.
However, investigators have queried why they would then have 99 interchanges in a win over Fremantle in round 20 at the MCG. This was by far their biggest number after round 15. The Demons had only 56 rotations in the round-21 loss to Carlton, a match in which it is believed club fitness and medical staff have been questioned about certain events, including the game-ending injuries of defender Matthew Whelan and forward Ricky Petterd.
It is the round-18 loss to the Tigers that has dominated questioning, for there were several moves, later branded experimental, that added to suggestions the Demons did not want to win. These included premier midfielder James McDonald being sent to the back line, key defenders James Frawley and Matthew Warnock spending most of the afternoon up forward, and regular forward Brad Miller used as a midfielder. Forwards Colin Sylvia and Russell Robertson were left in the VFL. Brock McLean, who sparked the investigation, did not play.
The Demons have until the end of the month to respond to the claims.
Bailey is facing three allegations: bringing the game into disrepute, tampering with the national draft, and not coaching to his utmost in 2009.
Chief executive Cameron Schwab and former football manager Chris Connolly are facing charges of bringing the game into disrepute and tampering with the draft.
As per AFL Regulation 19 (A5), tanking is defined as "a person, being a player, coach or assistant coach, must at all times perform on their merits and must not induce, or encourage, any player, coach or assistant coach not to perform on their merits in any match – or in relation to any aspect for the match, for any reason whatsoever".
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/the-3-minutes-that-mattered-20130108-2cev1.html#ixzz2HP5fm500
-
Jordy really should be involved with our push into India
-
1, Does anyone think that Melbourne will be disciplined???
2, Is it a "bluff" for Melbourne saying "we will take on the AFL if we are charged."???
3, This was four years ago now and punishing Melbourne now would just be unfair considering other clubs (Carlton, St Kilda, West Coast) have showed signs of "tanking".
4, I think the only three things Melbourne has is that for one, they are Melbourne. Two they are financially sign in trouble from reports, and three in 2010 they did not make a huge improvement ladder position wise. They could use West Coast in 2010 and say "they tanked" by putting players in "cotton wool" early, playing certain players in different positions. The following year they made the finals. "Yes", Dean Cox and Daniel Kerr didn't play most of the season.
I personally believe that if you are going to punish or discipline a club for an action, it must be done THEN and THERE!
Introduce the "Bottom 10 Lottery System". Make the event a big event similar to the NBA Draft!
With trading, that should be done 2 weeks after the Grand Final and have the "Lottery" a week after the Grand Final so it gives teams a chance to organise and plan for the trading period.
My proposed "Lottery System";
18th - 20 balls
17th - 18 balls
16th - 16 balls
15th - 14 balls
14th - 12 balls
13th - 10 balls
12th - 8 balls
11th - 6 balls
10th - 4 balls
9th - 2 balls
Show the teams and their "balls" being put into the bowel and begin selecting a ball from pick 18 to first pick to make it more exciting!
Only select the first round picks from Pick 18 to Pick 1.
So there will be 110 balls in total and only 18 balls will be selected.
If you breakdown the chances of each club it would be fair.
18th team - 20/110 = 18%
17th team - 18/110 = 16%
etc ... and that is for only drawing out one ball!
Obviously the issue would be, "what happens if a club has been draw out 2,3 or 4 times in a row? Do they get four consecutive picks?" That is the problem with this system. What do you do???
-
Ch 7 news tonight and last night claiming further evidence of alleged tanking by Melbourne. The Dees played 3 ruckmen against Carlton in 2009 and made only 56 rotations (similar to what they did against us). Then against Port Adelaide in a game they won, allegedly players were admonished by a high ranking official after the game for winning.
-
WTF would ch7 know
They can't even get players names right in their own broadcast
Duds
-
A Melbourne supporter's view of their tanking saga ....
List management: is there a more slippery, more subjective concept in Aussie rules?
How do you ''manage your list'' to maximise your chances of losing a game? You could drop seven of your best players. Fremantle did that in 2010, going down to Hawthorn but guaranteeing themselves a home final.
You could send a raft of your best players off for season-ending surgery. Collingwood did that in 2005, losing the last eight games but gaining Scott Pendlebury and Dale Thomas.
You could deliberately pick young players. Kevin Sheedy did that in 1993 and won a premiership.
You could play players out of their normal positions. West Coast did that in 2010 and picked up Jack Darling with its priority pick, miraculously rocketing up the ladder the following year. (John Worsfold describes this juggling act as ''a development tool''; he obviously develops his tools extremely well, having led his team from a flag in 2006 to a priority pick in 2010 and a tilt at yet another flag in 2011.)
You could sit in the coach's box and ''do nothing'' while your team goes down in a vital game, as Terry Wallace has admitted doing to snare Trent Cotchin.
You could do most of the above, as Carlton - according to Libba and Fev - appears to have done.
Read more here: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/spat-over-tanking-bedevils-dees-20130111-2clhj.html
Since when is a round 22 game between 9th and 15th when neither could make the finals called as a "vital" game :huh3
-
Since when is a round 22 game between 9th and 15th when neither could make the finals called as a "vital" game :huh3
Well it was a vital game for us
Think it was vital at the time that we got Cotchin
;D
:rollin
-
Since when is a round 22 game between 9th and 15th when neither could make the finals called as a "vital" game :huh3
Well it was a vital game for us
Think it was vital at the time that we got Cotchin
;D
:rollin
just so i understand this right.
If we won that game we wouldve ended up with Kruzer, arguably the best talent in that draft, most likely.
A loss and Cotch was on the cards.
I dont think Leather face knows what his on about, he played to win. He is that thick in the head even if he wanted to lose he wouldn't know how and we would win.
-
Since when is a round 22 game between 9th and 15th when neither could make the finals called as a "vital" game :huh3
Well it was a vital game for us
Think it was vital at the time that we got Cotchin
;D
:rollin
Just look at it now. Cotch is better than Kruez.
I want to shake Graham Polak's hand. The one that touched the ball first.
Proves Walla$$ is talking faeces again.
-
What's wrong with this picture?
(http://i49.tinypic.com/4uc4qw.gif)
I have numbered each of the unmarked Tiger players in perfect position for a shot at goal prior to McMahon taking the mark. Look at all the Demons around the contest and yet the ball gets out????
Come on...There certainly was a different smell in poo town that day.
-
Betstar's Alan Eskander says the AFL's draft system is flawed and needs to change
Jay Clark
From: Herald Sun
January 15, 2013 11:30PM
A LEADING bookmaker has called on the AFL to adopt a draft lottery system to stamp out tanking.
Betstar's Alan Eskander says the league must follow the lead of basketball and ice hockey in the United States and abandon rules which give last placed clubs the prized first draft choice.
Melbourne officials Cameron Schwab and Chris Connolly and former coach Dean Bailey are facing life bans from the game over allegations the Demons set out to lose games in 2009.
But Eskander said the league is partly responsible for the Dees' crisis, given the massive carrot it dangled in front of clubs to finish last and qualify for an extra priority draft pick.
Eskander said it was time to integrate a draft system whereby clubs which miss finals enter a lottery to determine the draft order.
"The AFL put a lot of weight on what goes on in US sport, they do a lot of scouting missions and they follow a really strong precedent," Eskander said.
"If they came out next week and said we were going to adopt a model of US sport and go down a lottery path, I would embrace that.
"It has been fair and equitable and over a long period of time and testing in the US has shown there isn't any issues in relation to tanking.
"It is shown that it is motivating teams appropriately, rather than motivating them to lose in order to get picks."
The NBA draft lottery is a huge television event, drawing almost three million viewers last year to watch the allocation of draft picks.
The lottery is weighted so the team with the worst record has the best chance of obtaining higher draft picks.
The NBA process involves drawing ping pong balls and factors in thousands of possible combinations.
Eskander said the AFL was right to abolish the priority draft pick last year but said the system still needed improvement.
"The AFL has basically said the worse you are the more benefits you are going to get," Eskander said.
"At some stage they need to put their hand up as well and say 'we've contributed to this debacle, because the system we had in place was flawed'.
"It was fundamentally flawed in its motivations and how it motivated teams to perform.
"I have some sympathy for Melbourne because the AFL has played its part in this whole debacle."
Melbourne must respond to the AFL's 1000-page tanking investigation by January 29.
Eskander was pleased the AFL was investigating the matter seriously after playing down tanking allegations in the past.
"I was very alarmed and quite flabbergasted with the AFL's approach up until now, where they've just buried their head in the stand and said 'I don't know what you are talking about, tanking doesn't go on'," he said.
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/afl/betstars-alan-eskander-says-the-afls-draft-system-is-flawed-and-needs-to-change/story-e6frecm3-1226554594731
-
Melbourne would be stoked this little doozy is flying under the radar :shh
-
Melbourne would be stoked this little doozy is flying under the radar :shh
they would be doing this I reckon
:woohoo :woohoo
-
MELBOURNE faces the prospect of losing $5 million a year in poke r-machine revenue if the club is found guilty by the AFL of "tanking" allegations.
An adverse finding into the claims, the subject of an exhaustive AFL investigation, could also force the resignation of senior staff.
The Victorian Commission for Gambling and Liquor Regulation has the power to withdraw licences to operate electronic gaming machines and force the removal of key officials if it finds an organisation has acted inappropriately.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/more-news/tank-threat-to-melbournes-pokies-revenue/story-e6frf9jf-1226572049721
-
They just mentioned on the nab cup football coverage that fines have been handed down.
They'll update later
-
They just mentioned on the nab cup football coverage that fines have been handed down.
They'll update later
Its not official. They was just talking about a article Caro wrote which stats the fines and suspensions thats been handed done to melbourne.
-
They just mentioned on the nab cup football coverage that fines have been handed down.
They'll update later
Its not official. They was just talking about a article Caro wrote which stats the fines and suspensions thats been handed done to melbourne.
Article is on the age website.
MELBOURNE appears to have escaped draft penalties but faces a fine of $500,000 as the AFL investigation into tanking sparked by Brock McLean moved on Friday into the final stages of resolution.
Fairfax Media understands that Chris Connolly, the former football operations boss who in 2009 allegedly threatened staff with their jobs should the team win more than four games that season, will prove the only current Melbourne official suspended as a result of the six-month investigation.
The move to punish those involved in the strategy of 2009 marks the first time in the game's history that the AFL has acted in this fashion to stamp out potential tampering with match results
Dean Bailey, the senior coach in 2009, faces a short suspension from coaching of three months but even that penalty could involve some weeks suspended pending any future breach.
Melbourne chief executive Cameron Schwab has escaped any individual penalty. Schwab and Connolly last month were asked to show why they should not be charged on the two counts of bringing the game into disrepute and tampering with the draft.
Advertisement
Melbourne has continued to deny it deliberately lost games of football in 2009 and engaged former Federal Court judge Ray Finkelstein to lead its defence. The club has privately vowed to fight any charges in court but could now accept its fate following weeks of negotiations with the AFL's acting football boss Gillon McLachlan.
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/no-draft-penalties-likely-for-melbourne-20130215-2eia4.html#ixzz2KxRDKl7F
-
weak as p!$$
-
hahahahahahahahaha
thank god the drug debate is taken out of their hands because they are just a disgraceful organization.
-
shameful decision, just disgraceful.
-
Busted tanking for picks, don't get pick penalties
Makes sense :huh
Joke of an administration
-
Incentive for the better off teams to tank in future as their window closes, now the precedent of not losing points or draft picks has been set. Just get out the cheque book.
Weak as pee >:(
-
So what it comes down to is the AFL has basically fined itself
The hand Melb a fine but they give Melb a handout every year
All makes sense
-
AFL boss Andrew Demetriou has warned any coach found to have deliberately tanked games would be banished from football for life.
He would never work in football again. There would be an investigation into the club and there would be severe sanctions
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/life-bans-for-coaches-found-tanking-andrew-demetriou/story-e6frf9io-1226114285107
What's changed little wog man?
What a joke.
The little dung ball should give it away now, he doesn't have a shred of credibility.
-
From twitter just before:
"A decision around the @melbournefc tanking investigation is imminent, AFL.com.au understands:"
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-02-18/melbourne-tanking-investigation-nears-end
-
MELBOURNE remained hopeful on Monday night of diluting its expected $500,000 fine as a result of the AFL's six-month investigation into whether it deliberately lost games in 2009.
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/dees-push-to-have-fine-halved-20130218-2enhp.html#ixzz2LFhQfhLI
-
Dean Bailey and Chris Connolly will be forced to serve full term of bans for their roles in Melbourne tanking saga
Mark Robinson and Michael Warner
From: Herald Sun
February 19, 2013
FORMER Melbourne coach Dean Bailey and his football lieutenant Chris Connolly will be forced to serve the full term of bans for tanking.
The Herald Sun last night confirmed the AFL had rejected a bid to have part of their sentences suspended.
Bailey and Connolly will each be barred from working in the AFL for several months. The pair will become the face of tanking with Melbourne chief executive Cameron Schwab appearing to have escaped sanction in the seven-month probe.
The AFL Commission considered a report on the investigation into Melbourne's 2009 season at a meeting yesterday. Melbourne will be fined about $500,000 - but has been spared the loss of draft picks or premiership points.
Despite Melbourne's protests, it is believed the AFL have found the Demons were guilty of deliberately manipulating results.
Bailey, who is an assistant coach at Adelaide, has refused to comment since the investigation began.
He was sacked midway through 2011 and said at his final press conference: "I was asked to do the best thing by the Melbourne Football Club and I did it. I put players in different positions."
Bailey did not explain who asked him.
The AFL tanking investigation, led by chief integrity officer Brett Clothier, involved dozens of interviews with past and present Demons officials.
At the centre of the investigation was Melbourne's selection and game-day strategy during the contentious 2009 season.
Club insiders have claimed Bailey was under fierce internal pressure to lose games.
It was also alleged several club figures held a secret meeting in 2009 to plot their tanking strategy.
Connolly became a central figure after it was reported he reminded football officials about the importance of losing matches to improve the club's draft position.
He no longer works in Melbourne's football department but is employed by the club in marketing.
Matches scrutinised by the AFL included Melbourne's Round 17 loss to Sydney at Manuka Oval and the after-the-siren Round 18 loss to Richmond.
http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/dean-bailey-and-chris-connolly-will-be-forced-to-serve-full-term-of-bans-for-their-roles-in-melbourne-tanking-saga/story-fnelctok-1226580702476
-
What a surprise the AFL went soft on Melbourne ::). No doubt the Dees deliberately tanked but it's a bit hard for the AFL to throw the book at a club for tanking when the AFL created a draft system that was rewarding losing and being exploited by other clubs and not just by the Demons.
-
How can they not lose a first round draft pick? That's what they cheated to get. Unbelievable, just unbelievable.
-
Softer than Jack Watts.
-
THE AFL has called a press conference for 2pm (AEDT) regarding the ongoing Melbourne FC investigation from the 2009 season.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-02-19/tanking-inquiry-results-to-be-revealed
-
MELBOURNE has been found not guilty of tanking after a forensic seven-month investigation by the AFL.
But key individuals - then-coach Dean Bailey and then-football manager Chris Connolly - have been found guilty of conduct unbecoming, stemming from comments made by Connolly.
The pair will be suspended for a period by the AFL.
An AFL press conference - with Gillon McLachlan and Andrew Demetriou in attendance - is scheduled for 2pm AEDT [ed. coming up now]
It's understood the Demons will be fined $500,000 for being the employers of Connolly and Bailey, which will be paid by the club in instalments.
The Demons will not lose any draft picks because the AFL will announce that the club was found not guilty of the serious charge of conduct prejudical to the draft.
In other words, not guilty of deliberately losing matches at the end of the 2009 season.
Rule 17.1 states in part that “conduct prejudicial to the draft means conduct which has the purpose or has or is likely to have the effect of hindering, prejudicing, interfering with or preventing the natural operation of the draft.
AFL Regulations 19 (A5) says: “A person, being a player, a coach or an assistant coach, must at all times perform on their merits and must not induce, or encourage, any player, coach or assistant coach not to perform on their merits in any match – or in relation to any aspect of the match, for any reason whatsoever”.
No action will be taken against chief executive Cameron Schwab.
More than 50 past and present club staff were interviewed by the AFL and club documents and computers were examined.
In the end, AFL investigators found no evidence to that the club tanked.
It's accepted that clubs can experiment with player positioning on the field.
It's understood a contentious move in the Melbourne-Richmond game in Round 18 of 2009, where Melbourne ruckman Paul Johnson found himself on Richmond's small forward Nathan Brown, has been determined as a brief match-up and not, as has been suggested, a deliberate coaching move.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/more-news/melbourne-fc-found-not-guilty-of-tanking-but-bailey-and-connolly-cop-suspensions/story-e6frf9jf-1226580877741
Melbourne will hold a press conference at 3.30pm this arvo.
-
Gillon McLachlan at the AFL press conference:
* No directive from Melbourne's board to lose games. No evidence of Schwab and the Board being aware of what was happening.
* Melbourne didn't set out to lose games in 2009.
* Connolly (poor comments in a meeting) and Bailey's actions were prejudicial to the interests of the AFL. Both have now shown remorse. Bailey told the AFL he felt pressured around selections and positions of players in response to that meeting but there's no evidence of him deliberately making moves to lose games.
* Connolly suspended until Feb 2014; Bailey suspended for first 16 rounds of 2013.
* Melbourne FC must accept ultimate responsibility for the actions of individuals they employed and are fined $500,000. 3rd largest find in AFL history reflecting the seriousness of the issue.
-
Gillon was eventually pushed into saying that Connelly had admitted to making comments to the Football Department to secure a Priority Pick. Bailey felt pressured by these comments to take certain actions to achieve that. What was the end result? Yep, Melbourne secured a Priority Pick. Is that tanking? Apparently not.
Weak as pee. In the words of the immortal Tony Harrison, this is an outrage!
-
MELBOURNE president Don McLardy has accepted the AFL's sanctions handed down to the club after an investigation in to its on-field performance in 2009.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-02-19/mclardy-accepting-of-afl-penalty
-
So, Melbourne get smacked on the wrist with a wet noodle and Carlton aren't even looked at. Typical gutless AFL. The only real karma to come from all this from Melbourne's perspective at least was that the bloke they tanked for (Sculley) walked out on the club for a big wad of cash anyway.
-
Unbelievable.
-
Softer than Jack Watts.
That's pretty soft
-
what many have believed is now official, the AFL is a joke of an organistaion!
-
Thomo has been telling us that for many years. What a poo year for him to quit the media
-
Thomo has been telling us that for many years. What a poo year for him to quit the media
He's got his own media channel now - twitter. Good laugh.
-
Thomo has been telling us that for many years. What a poo year for him to quit the media
He's got his own media channel now - twitter. Good laugh.
I read his tweets each night for inspiration before I hit the sack. Honourable Andy and Eveready Adrian
-
Gillon was eventually pushed into saying that Connelly had admitted to making comments to the Football Department to secure a Priority Pick. Bailey felt pressured by these comments to take certain actions to achieve that. What was the end result? Yep, Melbourne secured a Priority Pick. Is that tanking? Apparently not.
Weak as pee. In the words of the immortal Tony Harrison, this is an outrage!
Agree
Still can't help but feel the AFL are very mindful of protecting certain parts of the past when it comes to the Melb footy club.