“I had no hesitation at all in the first two years (of coaching Melbourne) in ensuring the club was well placed for draft picks,” Bailey said in 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.”
Well all knew what those words meant. Except, of course, those in AFL House.
In response to the comments, Anderson said that the league would be concerned should it be presented with evidence of a club deliberately not trying to win in order to gain draft picks – it just doesn’t believe that describes what happened at the Demons.
It’s incredible. Not only because the rest of the footy world does believe that describes what happened, but because all Bailey’s comments led to was a phone call.
No investigation. No penalties. Just a phone call.
Anderson said of that phone conversation: “What he indicated to me is it’s all about development and playing players in different positions and also getting draft picks into the club, when players like Brock McLean and Cameron Bruce et cetera left.”
He added: “It’s quite a difficult one – what some people call tanking … is actually in a lot of ways what you’d expect a team to be able to try to do with a developing list. He (Bailey) was saying it was all in the category of the development, etc – his players were always trying and (there was) never any intent to lose.”
The problem here is that it’s obvious Bailey was doing more than your typical coach in charge of a developing list.
In the same breath as saying he made sure the club was well positioned for draft picks, Bailey said he said he played players out of position. How, exactly, does playing players out of position assist a club with draft picks?
It helps them lose games, or enough games to gain the priority pick.
This isn’t something that takes a phone call to decipher. It’s blindingly obvious.
While my Roar colleague Ben Somerford rightly points out that there are different degrees of so-called “tanking”, Anderson made it clear last week that were a club to be found to have deliberately not tried to win in order to gain draft picks the AFL would take action. If this is the criteria a club has to meet, then Melbourne have certainly met it.
Bailey’s comments last week confirm as much. Never mind that “the players were always trying” (that on its own is not a defence). Never mind that Bailey backtracked when the AFL operations boss was on the other end of the phone (after the press conference, what else did he need to say?).
Melbourne are guilty of the type of behaviour the AFL themselves say they would come down hard on. Yet the AFL are doing nothing about it. Turning a blind eye, if you will.
It makes you wonder what else they have been turning a blind eye to.
Even before last week, there were plenty of reasons to be suspicious of the Demons in 2009. Herald Sun journalist Jon Ralph outlined last week some of the bizarre tactics used in Melbourne’s Round 18 game against Richmond, which included the team’s best midfielder in the backline, a ruckman playing on a small forward, regular forwards dropped and regular defenders going forward.
Then there was the final round game against St Kilda, when James Frawley was taken off Nick Riewoldt for the final quarter despite the Demons still being a good chance of winning.
Adrian Anderson might think that this was the behaviour of any other club with a developing list. But those willing to look beyond convenient excuses will have a vastly different opinion.
The AFL’s credibility has been severely challenged by the events of the past week and its refusal to investigate a matter that to all impartial observers warrants an investigation.
This is the same AFL that suspended Heath Shaw for eight matches for having a bet on teammate Nick Maxwell to kick the first goal. This is the same AFL that says “everyone needs to have total confidence in the integrity of the game”.
Yet under its watch, it appears as though games have been played without reaching their true conclusion. And its response has been one of inaction.
The fans deserve so much better.
Redb
Roar Guru
It is not match fixing, this relates to players placing bets on a result within a match for their personal gain.
Mark Petrakis
Guest
Thanks andy everything is hunky dory at afl land........is that because you guys are at the pointy end?
The Cattery
Roar Guru
Is that an admission that you are mixing up two completely unrelated issues?
Shaun
Guest
Ha ha ha, you got it man. Cattery you are dead right. The game was torn apart because the authorities ignored match fixing. Well done dude.
The Cattery
Roar Guru
Shaun remind me again what happened to cricket in Pakistan.
Shaun
Guest
Kasey, you are 100% spot on. This is match fixing pure and simple. If this was cricket in Pakistan then the likes of Cattery would be screaming from the rooftops....
brendan
Guest
I read that article that was how i was aware of the no of Collingwood rookies.I think we have a serious problem with the game .Its like paying off a home loan it takes forever for sides to rise from the bottom.Unless footy gets back its '' giant killer '' excitement back supporters will lose interest.In American sport the title seams to be shared around more so maybe the lottery draft they have there combats tanking.
The Cattery
Roar Guru
brendan Tenchy wrote a very good article on the roar about a month ago: http://www.theroar.com.au/2011/07/28/collingwoods-recruitingdraft-success/ Showing how many of Collingwood's team are either low draft picks or promotions off the rookie list, plus an excellent father-son taken at no. 38. In one year, they picked up two very good high draft picks (2 and 5): Swan and Pendlebury, who no doubt asisted them in their curent success - but clearly, two aren't going to do it on their own. The other thing is that both Swan and Pendlebury could easily have been taken by another club with a higher pick, if that club had had more nous - as you are intimating - this whole draft thing is a bit hit and miss (part of the reason why it makes it so compelling). I can say that Geelong has never bottomed out in 25 years of drafts, while many that have, have never gone on to taste premiership success. I would simply add: 1. the draft does assist in keeping some equity in the competition - but it's no guarnantee of succes, nor should it ever be that; 2. given the current gap in the top and bottom teams, we need to keep some form of priority pick for the sake of the quality of the competition; and 3. constant speculation about tanking is definitely not healthy for the league, perhaps poor performance must be tested over two seasons before it attracts the benefit of a priority pick - but as we see from point 2, there reaches a stage where the gap is so large, bottom clubs must be given extra picks. One thing is for sure, none of the bottom three clubs are tanking this year - they're just hopeless - that's the point of having the priority picks.
brendan
Guest
Micheal or the catterry why dont one of you write an article estimsting how much the draft costs the game and where most finalists (players) figure in it.Rookie draftees (Mitchell- Hawthorn,Byrnes-Geelong and many Collingwood players) seem as well represented on the gf dais as first round draftees.Sometimes i think the pressure put on early draft picks makes it impossible for them to show there best at Afl level.Maybe incompetent administrations and coaching hide behind the expectations put on junior champions who as often as not move half way across the country to play the game.(classic example Gaff to W/C/E Conca to Richmond).Stkilda had two no one draft picks , a no two draft pick ,a no five draft pick and recruited an ex no 1 pick yet couldn't get there.Carlton have three no ones, a no two pick and recruited the best no three pick ever (Judd) and as yet haven't won a final.I might be wrong but i dont agree the draft results in an evening of the competition.
The Cattery
Roar Guru
To my mind, match fixing is something quite nefarious, involving crime syndicates, betting stings, and the wilful cooperation of one or more of the players (from either side or both sides), officials and coaches, having either been paid off or part of the betting sting. With the various degrees of tanking, at the end of the day, you're talking about a hopeless team on the bottom of the ladder with little to play for in the latter stages of the season - look at my list of results of the last 10 years of the VFL leading up to the present equalisaiton policies, and you will see that the bottom team lost 9 of 10 matches by an average of 10 goals. Having little incentive to win a game of footy is in no way the same as match fixing - nothing like it. Do you know what an aussie rules team looks like when it's playing dead? something more akin to Melbourne's capitulation to Geelong: no chasing, no tackling, no winning of the hard ball, no backing into packs, no gut running - things that are very easily discerned if a team is playing dead. But the bottom team lacking a greater desire to win a game of footy than its opponent at the very end of a season - big deal - you can relate it to Townsville's last half dozen games in the A-League, where the end was certain - very difficult to get up for a game and give 110%.
amazonfan
Roar Guru
Thanks, I truly appreciate that. :D That's a really lovely post.
Kasey
Guest
The Cattery are you for real? deliberately losing a game for the reason of gaining an advantage down the track is 100% Match Fixing in my eyes. How could it not be? Maybe if we started caling it Match Fixing, the suits at AFLHQ would actually do something to protect the integrity of the game..
The Cattery
Roar Guru
To equate the suspicion of tanking with match fixing is one of the more idiotic things we have read on the Roar.
Midfielder
Guest
Match fixing I agree ... one of the funniest things I can recall and it was a few years ago so I have forget who the teams were or the exact reasons... some football folk may remember... OK OK I will get to the story ... two football were playing and for a number of reasons there match was finishing about ten minutes latter than other matches on the last day of the season.. [ for non football folk in most comps the last round normally has all games being played at the same time] When the results from other matches came in ... it was in the best interest of both teams to loose the match ... so each side started to attack its own goal and each side defended the other sides goal... not too sure what happened but at the time it was all over the football news ... But losing a match is match fixing regardless of the reason ...
Michael DiFabrizio
Expert
"In 25 seasons, only one number one draft pick has ever won a premiership – which pretty much puts it all into perspective." Cattery, it's a good point to raise but perhaps a little too simplistic. The big carrot in relation to tanking has been the priority pick, and it's worth noting Hawthorn won a flag with two priority picks in their team (Jarryd Roughead and Xavier Ellis) and Collingwood won with one in their team (Dale Thomas) too. Looking forward, priority picks have given Andrew Walker, Marc Murphy and Matthew Kreuzer to Carlton, and end-of-first-round priority picks have sent Luke Shuey and Jack Darling to West Coast - these are two teams that might land a premiership in coming years.
amazonfan
Roar Guru
I agree that it may be regarded as match fixing, however 'tanking' is not a euphemism. It indicates a specific type of match fixing; where clubs, and/or coaches, deliberately lose for non-gambling related reasons, such as to gain draft picks. That does not mean that it is morally superior to other forms of match fixing, that's a matter of opinion, rather it means that if I told you that X club was accused of tanking, you would know exactly what kind of match fixing I was referring to.
jjoh
Roar Rookie
Is tanking purely an AFL issue because of the draft system, or other sports have it too?
p.Tah
Guest
Nathan, I just meant that the two teams will be battling it out in a foreign state. There may be room for both but it'll be a challenge for TV and press coverage. The most successful will be the one that picks up the fringe supporters.
Kasey
Guest
Can we stop using the euphamism 'tanking' and start calling it for what it really is? Match Fixing. When you intentionally alter the outcome of a sporting event for gain(in this case draft picks..and a good draft can help with signing up members, therefor money) you are match fixing. Pure and simple. For a sport that pushes gambling(and the gamblig industry) as intensely as the AFL does, you'd really think theyd do more than 'make a couple of phone calls' to try to rid the AFL of the taint of perception of match fixing wouldn't you?
The Cattery
Roar Guru
PED and recreational drug issue??? Someone else who doesn't know what he's talking about.