yeah, the crux of the matter is getting enough evidence to prove it, and like you i think they will cover it over, unless they happen to turn up enough damning evidence they risk having their own lack of integrity exposed.
The problem is that much of what is just smart list management. IE rsting senior player that are carrying injuries or putting them in for surgery once your season is shot is labelled as tanking, but it doesnt mean that losing is the reason for doing it. It happened before the draft system was in place. Even noe we have a lot of people saying that our players carrying injuries should be pastured for next year. They are not wanting this because they want us to lose, but because they see it as the best long term action as far as managing these players.
The libba one is interesting. He said that at the end of the season Carlton played players that were not up to AFL standard.
Perhaps he is right, it was a deliberate ploy to lose.
One the other hand, for one, that is just his personal asessment of the players and you only have to read through the forums to see that there can be many different views of players.
Nor is it a silly proposal that once your season is gone to give players in the firing line a shot to see if they can show anything that warrants another year on the list.
It's basically hard to prove either way in most cases, yet people want to see every possible tanking situation as just that, even though there are other legitimate possibilities.
(it reminds me of those who try to tell you the moon landing was faked. They cant give any evidence that it actually was, just tell you how it possibly was, so because it was possible,therefore it must have been)
BTW, the AFL should interview Malthouse and ask what he meant with his comments on Melbourne when he was asked about the task facing Neeld. It was pretty obvious that his relationship with Neeld allowed him an insight into what was going on at melbourne
