AFL Tanking Debate

The snooze button came off when sacked Melbourne coach, Dean Bailey, held a press conference on Monday.

"I had no hesitation at all in the first two years of ensuring this club was well placed for draft picks," Bailey said.

"I was asked to do the best thing by the Melbourne Football Club, and I did it."


To the majority of AFL fans, this came as a sensible comment. An admission of a commonplace practice - tanking. Finally, talk from a coach untarnished by AFL-realpolitik.


An assistant coach, Tony Liberatore, had previously spoken of his clear belief that Carlton tanked in 2007. This was duly downplayed & denied - rehashed as bitterness at leaving the club the year after. Snooze button on.


The VFL draft came into full force in 1986. A toned down version was present from 1981. The contentious priority pick rule was introduced in 1993.

I vividly recall barracking against Hawthorn in 2004 (4 wins) & 2005 (5 wins). It was an empty feeling being at the MCG. Numbing. 2005 was exceptionally pointless. One less win would have offered the daft priority pick.


If incentive is to be accepted as the major motivation in many fields - it behooves the denier to enter into dreary semantics in order to side-track the conversation. There is no other recourse. This would be a fair summation of the official debate to this point.


It has taken 30 years to overcome stubborn, head in the sand denial. 25 years if one wishes to be finicky, in a reprisal of said behaviour. This may be an optimistic statement in itself. An AFL 'investigation' has 'uncovered' that players were utilised "out of their position as part of their development" and "they allowed senior players to leave the club and get draft picks in return". This is a pathetic re-mapping of Dean Bailey's comments. To expect more would be folly. 


The reasons for the AFL body refusing to acknowledge such an obvious reality are clear. The sports betting market. Protecting their ar$es, and the money made from the percentage of funds they legally skim from every bet made.


The Solution :


Firstly, get rid of the priority pick altogether. It is moronic for the AFL not to concede this point. It was ill-thought and has well outlived any usefulness it may have offered.


This should be done in 2 or 3 years time. Announced at this season's end.


Second, a draft lottery is only a partial solution. In an intentionally compromised system, it is a reasonable step. Unlike the NBA, do not offer the lowest finisher a greater chance of pick #1. Offer the bottom 4 or 6 an equal chance ie 25% or 17%


This will fix most of the problems. Tanking would still exist when a team was concerned about finishing fifth or seventh last.


Third, remove all betting on teams that are in tank contests. This should be forced on the AFL. Suddenly, they would then jump to fix the problem. (Haha, again incentive being the main motivator)


Lastly - do not place the blame at the feet of clubs/club administrators/club coaches. Accept that stupid rules produce stupid outcomes.




Aug 13 2011


Andrew Demetriou again denies the existence of tanking. Proposes life bans. What an absolute joke. This guy is made to look a fool on certain issues. Here's a very simple idea : Stop treating the fans of AFL as idiots. That would go a long way..... sigh




The Royal Wedding - What it says about us

The Royal Wedding is upon us. Admittedly, a 'nice' event - the public union of two charismatic people, Prince William & Kate Middleton. Bigger than the wedding itself, is what the wedding signifies.



The clamour of attention the wedding is receiving is massive. We have seen umpteen reports in London of the lead-up. Hilariously, regular news is being reported from over there. Much like a fake background that often lies behind weather reporters. All in all, the stampede is a desired one. Eclipsing all other events. It is feeding the public taste for miniscule information regarding the wedding. A bit sad, really.

Suggestions have been made that the fascination is equal to a 'big-time' celebrity. Compare the response to the 'Coming of Oprah' to Australian shores. It is hard to disagree. Either way, it does make the country look second-rate. Indeed, the US appears equally fixated.

A republic. Seems further away in Australia than ever, indeed in Britain also. This is a glorious distraction that panders to the romantic tastes of many. Papering over the obvious problem of having an outmoded head of state.

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it". A difficult line to argue against as a dismissal of the republican idea. The Queen 
has little influence, if any, on contemporary politics. It is indeed the symbolism that many have problems with.

The succession of the throne. Prince Charles as the next king. Another attempt at a republic seems unquestionable with Elizabeth still on the throne.

His son, Prince William has vastly greater public appeal. Being reared in far less of the stiff-necked royal life than his father was. In addition, obvious public sympathy over the death of his mother, Princess Diana.

The 'royal plot' would perhaps be to pass straight from Elizabeth to William. Charles may have agreed to this directly. His marriage to Camilla Parker Bowles, a (shock-horror) divorcee, has precedent in making one unfit for Kingship. Edward VIII was forced to abdicate for such a 'crime'.

The public will adore the new Royal Couple, especially as King & Queen. Kiss goodbye for another generation, at least, to a republican push. Many will be pleased with this outcome.


The competition between femininity & feminism. There seems to be one clear winner here. The obsession with the wedding reveals much. Kate was famously urged to get a 'real job' in the long lead-up to the wedding. Quite understandably, the job of being a future princess was seen to be much larger. It surely eclipses many trivial pursuits.

The 'duty' of the princess is now clear. Although they have been in a relationship for a long time, the wedding means one thing to many. Time for breeding duties. 'An heir & a spare' is the primary goal.

Coverage of Kate has focused primarily on her sense of style & fashion. On how good she looks. It is hard to escape the belief this is foremost amongst considerations. Judging by Princess Diana & the coverage seen so far of Kate, it is indeed. Gossip magazines demand so - they are a vital feedback mechanism in keeping the royals relevant.

In conclusion, the Royal Wedding is a big tick for the status quo. Forget outmoded dreams of advancement, they are but pipe-dreams. What you see is what you get. It is in one way refreshing to have this confirmed, as dreary as the consequences may be.

Chris Judd on the Football Media

Can a footballer also be a thinker? This is a dishonest question, as the answer is clearly yes. It is admittedly on rare display. Again, it begs another question. Why put questions to a footballer that are greater than football? 
Here is why:


 "..it's good for the game to have football spread out so (the media) don't feel the pressure from Tuesday to Thursday to write dribble."

"The football public sometimes gets confused about what it is we do, and if you spread out the games, there is more time to spend talking about football and it reminds the public what the game is about." Chris Judd

The football media's job is to cover football. We all know this can only be the case on or near the weekend. Being immediately close to game time.

Look at 2011 and its pre-season. The lack of meaningful games to cover gives rise to gutter journalism & dribble. The months leading up to the begining of the season can be considered one colossal, mid-week belly scratch. Very little to be achieved, and even less is offered by the football media as a whole. This is a common trait between AFL & Rugby League coverage. Worldwide, the trend is identical.


The rise of 'investigative journalism', a by-word for sensationalist filth, naturally fills the gap with its lewd stench. Emanating from this pit of keyboard despair, each year the body count gets higher. The stories more far-fetched. The material ever more ghastly.

The 'St Kilda Schoolgirl' (Kim Duthie) story exemplifies all of the above traits. It has been ongoing for a year now. It shows no sign of disappearing into the horizon. The only time it does retreat into the background - when the damn football is bounced.

The notion of reporting trash as fact has been covered in past articles. This is a power that a third party of (considered) repute can easily exercise. Recklessly.

What is missing? In the case of football - the spectre of an imminent game. It is that simple. Its absence will cause events to spiral out of control. Please spare us. Bounce the football at more regular intervals. Parasites may only be cleansed with a regular bathing. Lest they grab a foothold.

A similar question (as asked to Chris Judd) would be fascinating put forth to Nick Riewoldt. The unfortunate captain of the St Kilda Football Club. A lamb to the slaughter. A retreat into cliche is the expected, and forced result of the barrage Nick Riewoldt has sustained. He may never utter another word about anything off-field. Even on-field happenings will be avoided in substance. It is the price to be paid for inferior coverage. Self-inflicted by the smattering of narcissistic football journalists.

It has been an absolute misery of a lead up to the football season. The worst on record. End the pain now. We beg of you.

--------

In all likelihood, football played 5 or 6 days per week will be difficult to function. It is important not to take Chris Judd's message as literal. The void in between the weekend does need to be filled with on-field matters. Possibilities include delaying the post-match conference of the last weekend/Monday game to the next day. Pushing forward a Friday pre-match conference to Thursday etc. Perhaps the banning of questions related to non-football matters during these events as well.

All efforts need to be made to keep the content on topic. The men are mere mortals who play a sport. That is all. Other matters are irrelevant and pervasive. In a sense, the football body has to parent the media coverage in addition to its other concerns. Basic acknowledgement of this would be a huge step forward.

The problem with off-season coverage is a huge headache. I scratch my head here. It can be said that tackling the mid-week content issue may provide solutions applicable to the off-season (to some extent) also.

----------

3rd Aug 2011

A 4-day football weekend is the best solution. A few have been scheduled this year, and they work the best.

In saying that, since the football season actually started - the coverage has been excellent. ie minimal concentration on junk issues not to do with the on-field performance.

Donate crypto to Igroki

LTC M85Q9RxzRZcDjYk8U72rnqhHyCVG3yZVdz

XRP rPvKH3CoiKnne5wAYphhsWgqAEMf1tRAE7?dt=5407

Big Deal