Demetriou responded by saying: "You know I love Eddie dearly, but when I heard those [comments] I thought he was on something.
"I'm not sure what he meant by that. It doesn't make any sense to me.
"Our interchanges have gone from 30 to 131, and based on all our information and our world-class testing regime … we've seen no players take EPO.
"So I don't know what Eddie was talking about. Maybe he watched Four Corners last night and got a bit excited."
It's no different to running slow in a WRC event so you get a better starting position the next day. Eventually you want to win, but you have to line up all your eggs first, haha.
True, but there's no suggestion of that at this stage. And at least the league has shown a reasonably firm hand when any instances of leaked info has been used for gambling, regardless of how minor or innocent the wager may appear on the surface.
But I'd be quite happy if gambling on AFL was canned altogether.
Hate gambling and thought my mighty code of Rugby Union was immune from this but was crushed when Tom Waterhouse's face appeared on the screen before and during the Wallabies / All Blecks tests this year.
THE AFL has uncovered a secret meeting involving at least 15 members of the Melbourne football department in which coaches were reminded of the importance of forfeiting matches in order to gain early draft picks.
Former Melbourne football boss Chris Connolly addressed the 2009 meeting, which it is believed was code-named ''the vault''.
The term vault relates to where the meeting took place - in the tin shed that runs between the two stands at Melbourne's old training ground at the Junction Oval. It is understood 15 people attended what began as a match committee meeting after the club's round 15 win over Port Adelaide, which was its second win in succession and lifted its tally for the year perilously close to its planned limit of four wins.
Connolly is understood to have urged those at the meeting to ''stay the course'', warning that Melbourne supporters and other stakeholders would come down on it should it fail to secure a prized priority pick, which the club would receive if it won just four games.
The club is now receiving legal advice after at least four witnesses were recalled by the AFL and admitted the club planned to deliberately lose games of football. Among those to have confessed the meeting took place upon being re-interviewed are former coach Dean Bailey and his then assistant Josh Mahoney. The AFL investigation continued today with those witnesses recalled, including Demons' former recruiting manager Barry Prendergast, now at Carlton.
So if a jockey pulls up a horse, he faces a suspension of his racing license, if a football team deliberately loses it's all in the game? Righto.
You didnt answer my question Mr Hyperbole.
If someone fixes a horse race theres only one reason they'd do it.
If club players, officials or those surrounding them were found to have been betting on the outcomes then sure they need to be arseholed, and as with others I'm not exactly keen on there being betting on football games to begin with. However, expecting that a team hasnt "layed down" on occasion is fanciful and that theres some talk of it before hand isnt suprising to me at all.
Even this season I tend to think the Swans did towards the end of this season only playing a 1/4 of decent football then turning off not to be minor premiers and to be better prepared and have a better run into the final with less pressure and attention from the media. We got the flag so u can all eat my c*ck!
Sorry I wasn't clear enough. The allocation of a finite amount of resources to a future season is in an altogether different category to deliberately losing, if for no other reason than for the transparency of the game.
Unless you want AFL to become like WWF or whatever that farcical form of "sport" was with Hulk Hogan and his fellow travellers. At least with that code nobody took it seriously. If that's where you want your sport to head, that's up to you I guess.
F*ck you really kicked it up a notch captain hyperbole.Unless you want AFL to become like WWF or whatever that farcical form of "sport" was with Hulk Hogan and his fellow travellers. At least with that code nobody took it seriously. If that's where you want your sport to head, that's up to you I guess.
Indeed, that is the entire point.
If there were no draft picks on offer no team would want to lose games in order to "win" better draft picks.
Yet, the basic premise of the draft, to be a competition-wide equalisation measure has merit. It's just a shame that the weaknesses of human nature make it so easy to exploit the current system for longer-term benefit.
Melbourne's mistake, it appears, is to have been so overt about their tanking.
Even when I was in mid-ranking rowing crews in high school we'd deliberately lose heats in order to get the better lane for the final. Of course we always knew it wasn't strictly the right thing to do, but when taking a bigger picture view, we always wanted to win the final race.
The solutions required to be implemented by administrators are often quite simple. And yet they continue to ignore them. See Badminton-gate at London 2012.
Also Usain Bolt wasnt the fastest qualifier for the 100m olympic final
WHAT A JOKE, ITS A SCAM, HE SHOULD JOIN THE WWF!
What about all those poor dejected crippled children who paid to get tickets to the heats and didnt see him put in 100% WHERES THE TRANSPARENCY!
In the "write-off" scenario, you would at least hope that your team put in a gutsy performance in difficult circumstances in the hope that they pull something out of the bag. A bit like Alonso overtaking one piloto after another after starting from the back of the grid. That's the very stuff of sporting supremacy.
In the deliberately losing scenario, your team actively intends to get a "bad" result and thereby putting in negative performance.
One positive, one negative. I can't be any clearer.
Massa loses on purpose all the time.
But when said "gutsy" perfomance results in injuries and possible suspensions for going above and beyond when "trying too hard" that could have detrimental effects on preparations for next year, would you put it all on the line knowing you're not making the finals anyways?
No, nobody would, not even you St Sebastian.
Actually I was at the Swans Vs Melbourne game, yes it was obvious they'd laid down, but they had no hope to begin with. Sure they may have "planned" to lose the game, but they sure as f*ck werent going to win it.
Tanking evidence mounting against Melbourne Demons
Former Melbourne player Brock McLean said he cut ties with the Demons because they weren't trying to win games. Picture: Michael Dodge. Herald Sun
RICHMOND hearts sank when Carlton's Brock McLean fluked a match-winning goal with 42 seconds left on the clock on July 28.
But if the kick hurt the Tigers, it has done more damage to his old club Melbourne.
Three nights later, man-of-the-moment McLean dropped a bomb when invited to appear on Fox Footy's On The Couch.
The Demons, he declared, weren't trying to win games in 2009. He said it was why he quit the club. It was an explosive claim that reignited the AFL tanking debate and triggered a fresh investigation. Only this time the evidence against Melbourne is mounting.
The latest allegation surrounds a secret meeting of Melbourne football department staff at the Junction Oval in 2009.
It is said at least three club officials, past and present, have admitted to league investigators that the importance of losing games to secure a priority pick was discussed at that meeting.
Melbourne's loss to Richmond at the MCG a few weeks' after the meeting of football officials has long been hailed as exhibit No.1.
In laughable circumstances, Richmond's Jordan McMahon kicked a goal on the siren to win the match for Tigers. The Round 22 loss to St Kilda, involving several puzzling moves, has also been identified.
In August this year, the Herald Sun detailed accounts of another suspect game - Melbourne's Round 17 loss to Sydney at Manuka Oval.
Demons figures who attended an inner-sanctum dinner the night before the match say a football department boss openly indicated steps had been taken to reduce the prospects of a win.
"We'll be right - we've made eight changes," the official declared. Melbourne had already announced five key changes at team selection.
Then on the eve of the game, two more pulled out with ailments.Seven changes in all - not eight as predicted - and in a forgettable encounter the Swans got home by 18 points.
Even one of Melbourne's club doctors said "Blind Freddy could tell the team wasn't picked for optimal performance" late in the season.
In the Canberra match, Melbourne used its interchange bench 67 times. Its season average was 85. But Andrew Demetriou's reaction to the Herald Sun story was typical for a tanking non-believer.
The AFL boss dismissed the report as "lots of colourful language to try and determine an outcome".
"We don't go by that sort of story. We go by evidence," Demetriou said. "We've got a guy, (AFL investigator) Brett Clothier, who's very capable.
"If he gets to the bottom of something then we will deal with it but at the moment there's no evidence to sustain this allegation of tanking."
As for this:
It's not fvvking rocket science.
So far Melbourne seem to be the only club dumb enough to actively discuss and plan for losing to win. For the other clubs to have benefited as Melbourne has, it would appear they were clever enough to leave the planning to Captain Obvious.
That's the entire point that makes the "sport" at the elite level so shti. Everyone knew there was drug cheating, but they actively chose to ignore it and continued to buy into the fairy tale.
If you think there'll never be doping in professional cycling again then you really are living in la la land.
Last edited by mdt; 11-01-2012 at 02:17 AM.