What the Demons' Whiteboard Wednesday did not reveal

Dennis Cometti: The AFL's determination to pursue Melbourne over 'tanking' allegations continues like a misguided missile. Right now the strategy seems to be that in the absence of a Plan B it's best simply to try harder on Plan A. It's a plan unlikely to work unless, like the AFL, you happen to be a judicial one-man band! In recent days Melbourne chief executive Cameron Schwab, football manager Chris Connolly and former coach Dean Bailey were all given until the end of the month to give reason to the AFL why they should not be charged. Yet no mention in this murky business of Jim Stynes! HAVE YOUR SAY BELOW. Is it seriously being suggested the legendary Stynes was not a 'hands on' president? I find the inference he was not a party to 'tanking' and that somehow he was duped by his own staff equally insulting to his memory. Regardless, even the concept of 'tanking' is shadowy, and raises questions as to AFL oversight of coaching at all 18 clubs. Often there's a thin line between genius and ridicule (consider something like Shane Ellen's role in the 1997 grand final). The league should take a deep breath before getting involved in a round of finger-pointing that, who knows, could lead all the way to having a black box in the coaches box. But as I've said before the real flaw in all of this can be found in western Sydney. Expansion team GWS 'earned' top pick in last year's national draft. It did so by giving everybody on its list 'a go', by making umpteen changes every week and by selecting far from their most competitive side on a regular basis. You might remember they even came to Perth last season having 'rested' all their experienced players. We watched, and, dare I say, accepted that learning on the job and finding out who can play and who can't has its place in an elite sports competition. But If it does, then surely you can't have one rule for the old (Melbourne) and one rule for the new (GWS). And unfortunately for the AFL it has its fingerprints all over GWS. It is virtually the league's baby! I think the doubts surrounding Melbourne should be used for good. Accept that 'the glass is half dirty', forgive and forget and legislate our way out of this. We need to dismantle a draft system that incentivises losers and guarantees outcomes for consistent losing. At the risk of repeating myself, the AFL need look no further than the National Basketball Association in the United States. Spot on - plus the Kruezer Cup between Carlton & Essendon, Juddy getting to Carlton (even though he'd been saying he wanted to go to Melbourne) and then the Luke Ball draft fiasco. All let through to the keeper. Same here, I reckon.

Precisely Redb - it is a matter that would be best dealt with at a club level. The AFL seem to "now" think they need to be seen to be "doing something" about this issue. Short answer - they don't. It can't and won't be proven. Simple as that. And even if it could be proven, what would it achieve? A deterent? Doubtful - more likely just more loopholes for smart people to explore, or morally inept twits to fall foul of. And if they push this too hard, then a number of other clubs are going to get nervous about the whole question of "draft tampering".Because I'm sure Melbourne will be pointing to other incidents, to justify their actions / defence.

So, what would you have the AFL do to them, Redb? Whack them with a soggy lettuce leaf for a week? Who is really to blame - the AFL, Gary Lyon, the club president? Nothing is going to be proven and nothing would be achieved by penalising a club that is already struggling. Let's just move on!

Half the comp? Big call. I actually doubt very many. Its a bit like the 1980s when they were arguing that one dayers were rigged. There are just too many people involved in rigging something that large so you can only do it consistently in say tennis (Tomic ??). I'd say some clubs probably brought in underdone players to give them a run with the attitude 'if we lose, there is a silver lining' but I doubt many clubs actually executed a full scale plan of attack to drop games. I have no evidence to prove this, so its simply an educated guess.

There is certainly an argument there NeeDeep, and they could draw on the Giants interchange movements/giving everyone a run throughout the season as 'evidence' that clubs in 'development' all do it, but it will be a big stretch. The problem for Melbourne is the same as the Tippett saga; someone/few tied very closely to the club have spit the dummy and let the cat out of the bag*. If the AFL does nothing, they'll look too damn stupid and people of influence like Patrick Smith in the Australian (a rubbish paper I agree) will have a field day. * which brings to question; how many other (so-called) controversial matters at AFL clubs occur every year but escape media attention? I'd say a fare few.

Everyone into footy knows they tanked, however it is also widely believed that half the comp has at some stage. As a supporter the most frustrating thing is it is an AFL rule which has led to this. They need to learn from their mistakes and adopt the lottery system used in the NBA. I want the spoon to mean something again. I dont want anyone to go the footy and end up barracking for the opposition which has been happening for yrs.

Haha good one IAC

You really have to look at this from all the possible angles. Giving a few rookies and fringe players some extra game time towards the end of a season, to get some ideas for the following year and experimenting with some positional changes during a game, equals tanking? Maybe, maybe not! Would it even register on the radar if there wasn’t an AFL sponsored “Priority Pick” involved, as David pointed out? Definitely not! How well has the whole episode assisted the MFC? Where is there priority pick now? Tom Scully @ the Giants, as far as I’m aware. Where did Melbourne finish on the ladder last year? Where will they probably finish this year and most likely, again in 2014? If they are guilty of “tanking”, what can you do to them that they haven’t already done to themselves? Should we take some draft picks of them over the next 2 seasons and consign them to the bottom couple of slots on the ladder for the next decade and more? Who will really benefit from that? Are there more serious matters that the AFL has turned a blind eye to, in the past that we should look at as well? And who is really responsible for all this? Is it the guys in the spotlight – Bailey, Connolly, and Schwab – or are there a few other names that could be tossed up that the AFL really don’t want to see on the table? To me, this is an issue for the fans and members of the Melbourne Football Club to sort out. If they want peanuts running their club and “tanking” – if that’s what they did – then that is up to them. Personally, I’d be wanting to get to the bottom of it and I’d make it publicly known who the morons where and run the whole lot of them out of town. If it’s not “tanking” (which I tend to think is the case, or at least, the verdict as I can’t see enough evidence to support the tanking claim) then they deserve a whack on the nose with a rolled up newspaper. Everyone should then take a deep breath and we can get on with season 2013.

The rules have since been changed on the priority pick. Do Dees fans think it is money well spent to fight this in the courts? It is an honest question. Weren't MFC in debt reduction mode about two years ago? Challenging the findings in higher courts would cost millions and for what purpose? Even if MFC won in court most football fans would think they tanked anyway.

Oh that game !! I always thought it was the one when Jimmy Stynes deliberately ran over the Hawthorn mark to cost them a position in the Grand Final ;-)

Charge us and see how much we fight this rubbish . We will not take this on the chin. The AFL is to blame for this poisoned carrott even being an option to teams. Close the hole on the rules and get on with footy!

Most of the interest is about a game late in 2009 when Melbourne played Richmond. But even though Melbourne were said to have done some suspicious positional changes and rotations during that game, it took a kick after the siren to beat them. If Jordan McMahon had missed that shot, 800 pages of tanking would have been for nothing.