11 Comments For This Post

1. Geoff Matheson Says:
   July 22nd, 2009 at 2:24 pm

   Sydney will beat Richmond in Round 19. But I’m not so sure they would beat Brisbane at the SCG in Round 22. I’m also a bit unsure as to whether WC will really win another game for the year: I’d suggest they’ll probably beat one of Richmond and North, but probably not both.

   I actually think that at least the sacking of Wallace and Laidley has meant that for both of those teams they have a coach who wants to win games to impress, and a massive contingent of players desperate to prove to whoever coaches their side next year that they are worth keeping around.

   And there is no way that Freo will beat Essendon at Subiaco in Round 21. Essendon will likely still have everything to play for, and Freo very very little bar the draft picks.

   [Reply to Comment]

2. Jermayn Says:
   July 22nd, 2009 at 2:31 pm

   Yes the Essendon loss to Fremantle at Subiaco in round 21 has a few people excited. Think you need to look at Essendon’s games around that period of time (Run Home to the Finals) and they have a game against West Coast at Subi 3 games before & then two tough games against Brisbane & St Kilda.

   For any young team that is already struggling with tired players, two games in 4 weeks in Perth is hard (The Dogs & Geelong struggled). St Kilda & Brisbane play hard & I expect Essendon to simply run out of legs.

   The other questionable results you raised:
   - Brisbane do not play the SCG well
   - Sydney do not travel well
   - & for WCE, I simply think they will accidentally win and screw up the chance to get that priority pick

   Thanks for your comments and what would you say your final ladder would look like?

   [Reply to Comment]

3. Jermayn Says:
   July 23rd, 2009 at 4:07 pm

   In looking at Melbourne’s outs for round 17, I think its fair to say that they are tanking/ resting players…

   OUT: Brock McLean (knee), Mark Jamar (quad), Brad Green (scaphoid), Jack Grimes (back), Russell Robertson

   [Reply to Comment]

4. aussierulesblog Says:
   July 24th, 2009 at 8:39 pm

   It’s interesting to consider what defines tanking and what defines resting. Presumably, tanking refers to doing your best to get the priority pick. However, might you not also consider that, with nothing but pride to play for in the remaining rounds of 2009, getting key players into surgery early to give them the best possibility for an uninterrupted, full-on pre-season is a smart bit of planning for 2010? The blokes you roll out each week may still be doing their best to win — not tanking, but with limited personnel on the park victories are going to be hard to come by. Who’s to say which strategy each team is following?

   Frankly, the whole issue is another bit of hyperventilating hyperbole sustained mainly by media speculation.

   VERY interesting point re #1 picks and flags. Good get!
   aussierulesblog´s last blog ..The timing is in the luck of the draw

   [Reply to Comment]

5. Jermayn Says:
   July 24th, 2009 at 11:56 pm

   So I think its safe to say that Carlton tanked in 2007 but would we also agree that Richmond “tanked” to get Deledio?

   While it is the media that drum up the whole tanking fiasco, I think its safe to say that if the AFL changed the system, it would not be as much of a problem/ story.

   Craig a Kick2Kick writer also made a list of priority picks who have played in a premiership and apart from Ellis & Roughead from Hawthorn, no one else had! I will get him to include that list as I may have missed someone.

   Think it shows that draft picks do NOT equal success. It is not until recent that St Kilda look like playing in a Grand Final and how many first round picks do they have??
   Jermayn´s last blog ..2009 AFL Round Seventeen Tips

   [Reply to Comment]

6. aussierulesblog Says:
   July 25th, 2009 at 1:06 pm

   If you’re implying that Carlton deliberately set out to lose games to obtain priority picks (tanking), then I think the answer is unequivocally in the negative. Same with Richmond.

   I’m not sure there is a system that removes the spectre of “tanking” while there is an equalisation philosophy in place. The teams that do least well under the latter must be assisted in their climb back and early/priority draft picks is the most obvious and logical path of action. BUT, while ever a perceived “reward” is offered to the downtrodden, there will be those who will claim the rules are being bent (because that’s what THEY’D do in the same circumstances).

   Of course the other story with first-round draft picks is Hawthorn. They’d hardly be where they are without those players. Picking the right first-round draft picks can make a VERY big difference.
   aussierulesblog´s last blog ..The timing is in the luck of the draw

   [Reply to Comment]

7. Jermayn Says:
   July 25th, 2009 at 6:29 pm

   I do not want to offend you as I respect your opinion but I think your only fooling yourself when you say that Carlton wanted to win the game against Melbourne back in 2007. Wallace himself has come out to say that he on purpose did not coach to his fullest ability to win the game against St Kilda which meant they got Brad Delidio as a priority pick.

   You may be right that no such system could totally wipe the “tanking” discussion but surely there is a better system than currently.

   And again your right in saying that you still have to develop the first round picks & they turn out as players and not duds (ie: Bradley, & Oakly-Nichols)..
   Jermayn´s last blog ..2009 AFL Round Seventeen Tips

   [Reply to Comment]

8. aussierulesblog Says:
   July 26th, 2009 at 9:58 pm

   Perhaps they didn’t try as hard they might to win certain games, but deliberately setting out to lose a game? That’s a very big call. That would involve instructing the playing group to do more than hold themselves back, to, in effect, lay down. Wallace may not have done all he could as a match scenario coach, but I’d be gobsmacked if the players weren’t trying to win the game out on the field.
   aussierulesblog´s last blog ..The timing is in the luck of the draw

   [Reply to Comment]

   Jermayn Reply:
   July 27th, 2009 at 9:02 am

   Your onto something there AussieRules, yes the players would never try NOT to win a game, you play to win. BUT the coaches and board?? Now that is a different story..

   [Reply to Comment]

9. Geoff Matheson Says:
   July 27th, 2009 at 9:07 am

   Part of the problem with the whole tanking debate is that everyone has a different definition. As a supporter – anything less than 100% effort from everyone involved (coaches, players, etc) could be considered tanking. Hell, it seems we’ve accepted that once you’re out of finals contention you give younger players a game for their development, and in years gone by that’s been discussed as tanking. Meanwhile other people would only consider it a tank if the players were out there to lose.

   [Reply to Comment]

10. aussierulesblog Says:
    July 27th, 2009 at 10:37 am

    Good point Geoff. It’s ALL about definitions, and the media, in my opinion, generally use the ‘definition’ that creates the biggest rukkus!

    My own view is that everyone should be trying to win every game, but once finals are not on the agenda, taking strategic decisions with the next year in mind is quite OK. I’m thinking of early surgery especially.

    If you can get a key player onto the table early and recovered by the time pre-season starts, you’ve got a much better chance of getting a good performance from the player in the following season. Whenever players are asked about their standout performances, they invariably mention an uninterrupted pre-season as a key factor.

    I think a coach setting a team to ‘throw’ a game would very quickly lose the respect of the team and eliminate any moral authority to demand extra efforts. I can’t imagine that it’s a sustainable relationship.

    Given the Tiges’ improved performances under Rawlings, perhaps Wallace crossed that line with the players?

    @ jermayn: The Board don’t run out on the field, but surely their aims must take into account membership sales and sponsorships. Every game lost diminishes the attractiveness of membership and sponsorship for the following year.
    aussierulesblog´s last blog ..The timing is in the luck of the draw

    [Reply to Comment]

11. Jermayn Says:
    July 27th, 2009 at 10:57 am

    Good points Geoff & AussieRules…

    The perfect example of the benefit of getting players in early for surgery would be the Roos in 2007 where they finished 4th after getting their players in surgery before the end of the season and started their pre season 20 odd days after the grand final.

    @Geoff – Yes loosing games does effect membership sales etc but when the Blues got Kruzeur & Judd through the priority picks (through “tanking”), their membership & sponsorships went up.

    Loosing that game had no benefit or negative for that year but the year after it did? How much more marketable is a Judd & Kruzeur than say just Masten/ Morton or a Palmer if they had won that game against Melbourne?

    [Reply to Comment]

Leave a Reply

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail

Click to cancel your reply

Realtime AFL Scores