What does "tanking" really mean?

Question

Is it really losing games deliberately to secure better draft picks?

Or is it experimenting with players and positions to set up for next year and not being to concerned with the result but still expecting 100% effort ?

I can live with experimenting but surely NO team would deliberately throw a game

Answer 1

It is purposely losing to secure a player eg. chris judd.

It is not, i repeat NOT, letting players go in early to have surgery and a better recovery because the team isn't going to make the finals.

Answer 2

its playing to loose

Answer 3

Everyone hassles Carlton out for tanking, yet there is no proof or any way of proving that they did. Even if it looked blatantly obvious.

If they didn't, then great. If they did, then judging by where they are on the ladder at the moment, it was the smart thing to do. They've exploited a loophole in the current draft system that certain other clubs should have done years ago.

If that annoys you, then boo hoo. Blame the people who make the rules.

AND. If that's the case, then Carlton should be, without a doubt, the most hated club in the comp and NOT Collingwood!

So there!

Answer 4

Wasnt there talk on the TV about the Swans in the pre season?

Roosy telling them to go forward and NOT kick a goal

- so they would be out of the NAB cup and could focus on Round 1 without the "bother" of the NAB, or risking key players?

Whats that if its not tanking?

Answer 5

I agree with you 100%

If tanking is playing a team of young kids, then yes it is real.

If tanking is telling your players to go out & lose, then it is a myth. No club would do that.

Answer 6

I don't think teams go out there with a mentality that they are to lose. Clubs play the younger kids when there is not much hope left in the season and I think that leads to losing games, simply because the team full of young kids is not good enough to win. I don't think the clubs set up a deliberate game plan that will lose them games.

Answer 7

losing games on purpose to get draft picks

Answer 8

Tanking is when the "club" does not want to win games so in order to gain early favourable draft picks.

If a team finishes last, they get first draft pick. If they win four games or less they get a priority draft pick - that means they can have another draft pick after all teams have had their once choice in order of where they finished on the ladder. So in actual fact, they get an extra pick.

The clubs generally arrange this "tanking" by having players finish playing before the season is over to have operations to injuries that would normally be left till the end of the season. The clubs also rest players with "injuries". In actual fact they put on the field a team, comprising of plenty of youngsters, who try their guts out to win - but lose because they had been so outgunned by the oppositions playing strength & experience.

Answer 9

No mate, I think that teams will do anything to rebuild, like the CHEATERS (Carlton). I don't think that any teams this year (apart from Port) are tanking, I think that some of them are just genuinely bad!

Answer 10

Tanking is when you purposely lose games to gain draft picks. For example, hypothetically Richmond was 16th on 2 wins and Collingwood were 15th on 4 wins in the last round of the season. Now to gain priority picks in the draft you cannot win more than 4 games. Richmond were then a certainty for priority pick win or lose, but if Collingwood won, they would not move up a spot, not advance or anything, just 5 wins and miss out of priority picks. Collingwood may then let Richmond win, so if Richmond won they would not move above Collingwood and Collingwood wouldn't move down and Collingwood would keep their priority picks.

Answer 11

In football terms it means that when you go out and "go through the motions" instead of giving it your all. It is also dropping experienced players to play kids

Answer 12

There are clubs who have "tanked" - gone out specifically to lose - to secure draft picks. The administration at one Melbourne based club looked pretty obvious in their attempts, and were wiped out in the media for doing so. It doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the players or coach, most of whom would rather eat an opponent's boots than throw a game.

It isn't a smart move - you may get the most brilliant school boy player in the draft, only to find he doesn't have the temperament, the ability to keep learning or the strong physiology needed to make it in top level football. Or you may choose a recycled player, only to find he doesn't make the move to your club with all his ability intact.

Some clubs are certainly experimenting with inexperienced players. I think my Bombers would love to have the chance, but our player list is down to about 63% because of injuries. Melbourne is trying out all their Imps(baby demons)and of course they are not turning on premiership level football.I don't think the WCE will tank, as what they need is not Eaglets but experienced personnel!

Which leaves a couple of clubs in a position to "tank" if they wish..they will be watched by all in the next three games!

Answer 13

Well, I'm a Blues supporter and I kinda think that no, we wouldn't be where we are today if not for throwing a game or two, we wouldn't have Murphy, Gibbs or Kreuzer. QED