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?

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 =-.

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 =-.

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 =-.

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 =-.

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 =-.

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