Liberatore tanking talk: Karma Pg26

Kouta · **Posted:** Fri Mar 14, 2008 4:24 pm

Effes wrote:

http://magpies.net/nick/bb/viewtopic.php?p=642196#642196

:lol:

Mostly sensible posts in there :shock:

The way Collingwood fans reacted to the selection of Thomas and Pendlebury ahead of Ellis all but sums up their intellect. :wink:

Donstuie · **Posted:** Fri Mar 14, 2008 4:26 pm

Unless of course he takes his vibe with him

camel · **Posted:** Fri Mar 14, 2008 4:27 pm

woof wrote:

camelboy wrote:

woof wrote:

camelboy wrote:

No draft = No tanking.

It's pretty simple really.

No draft = No hope for some of the 16 clubs soon to be 18.

No hope means no club.

Clubs go missing means less money for TV rights.

Less money means etc. etc. etc.

Salary cap and draft must stay.

Priority pick is the tank carrott and needs to go.

You really can't get more simple than that.

Why is there an incentive to tank? To get the earliest pick possible so a club can select the best kids possible.

Okay, say the priority picks are removed ... you reckon if 15th and 16th are playing off in R22 with the result to determine who gets #1 that there won't be a mention of tanking?

Take away the priority pick and the stakes are a hell of alot lower.
The incentive is massive if you need to lose to get the proirity pick. We were playing for Pick 1 AND 3 not just in R22 but since R12. Take away the priority pick and all we would have been playing for was a choice between Pick 1 OR Pick 2 or 3.

Conversely, take away the priority pick and draft pick #1 increases in value.

That said, I agree, that removing the PP would be a start, but it still won't completely remove the incentive to tank.

frank dardew · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 12:38 pm **Posts:** 7640

He actually is more stupid than I thought by taking this now to the AFL.

Given he couldnt even articulate what he's position was apart from a Feel last night and was being led /manipulated by Hutchy(Hutchy reminds me of a used car salesman - not smart but cunning and smarmy) how is he going to support his position in respect to the AFL .

It may be that he is buying some time by suggesting that he will speak to the AFL and hopes that with the footy being played next week that this swamps the controversy and he wont actually front to discuss with the AFL and everyone will forget about it.

The AFL wont want this controversy to derogate from the opening of the season and Vlad is on record suggesting that this is fanciful about tanking.Moreover none of the coaches (see Danahers comments) want a repeat of the ROOS witch hunt and presidents like Mc Chins and GET JEFFED dont want an inquiry because Carlton ARE NO DIFFERENT to Collingwood or the SUPERTANKER in the poo and wee colours Hawthorn .The AFL will if jibba turns up investigate and find no case to answer

For the sake of a few dollars from Hutchy he has ensured he will never earn any decent money out of AFL football again as an assistant coach .

Hopefully this will fire the boys up even more come thursday

Donstuie · **Posted:** Fri Mar 14, 2008 4:30 pm

Anyone think Ratts is actually going to use this to fire up the boys, or will he try and keep it as business as usual.

I'd be very tempted to get the boys frothing at the mouth over this myself.

TheSwan · **Joined:** Sun Oct 07, 2007 2:37 pm **Posts:** 1932

we have our ideas but we still dont know why Libba is going through with this.

This is something I would love to hear from his own mouth. Last night he said he was saying these things because he was approached and saw himself as being an honest guy.

Now he is the one approaching the AFL. Why?

Pickle · **Posted:** Fri Mar 14, 2008 4:35 pm

I would love to know how they are going to prove what games we should have won with our record!!!

camel · **Posted:** Fri Mar 14, 2008 4:37 pm

Donstuie wrote:

Anyone think Ratts is actually going to use this to fire up the boys, or will he try and keep it as business as usual.

I'd be very tempted to get the boys frothing at the mouth over this myself.

Given that Richmond will be going the tank this year, does it matter?! Round 1 will be a doddle won't it. :lol:

Melvey · **Posted:** Fri Mar 14, 2008 5:06 pm

Mrs Caz wrote:

stumpy legs

they should be broken

Drewgirl · **Joined:** Tue Mar 01, 2005 1:57 pm **Posts:** 4775

I love what Judd said last night. He said, that no-one player is being stupid at the moment so the media has nothing else to talk about.

What is prick drawfs agenda by talking to the AFL ? He has small man syndrome.

Synbad · **Posted:** Fri Mar 14, 2008 5:56 pm

Libba is 'Deep Throat'...

bluebeard · **Posted:** Fri Mar 14, 2008 6:08 pm

Synbad wrote:

Libba is 'Deep Throat'...

That is possibly the funniest thing that you have ever written

Conundrum · **Joined:** Wed Aug 10, 2005 3:23 pm **Posts:** 436

Synbad wrote:

Libba is 'Deep Throat'...

Is he more of a Linda Lovelace type or the secretive FBI Agent William Felt.

Warby · **Posted:** Fri Mar 14, 2008 6:17 pm

There's a few things that are close to Libba's heart.....and the first one's the ground..................(thankyou Ronnie Corbett)

Deano Supremo · **Posted:** Fri Mar 14, 2008 6:32 pm

Pickle wrote:

I would love to know how they are going to prove what games we should have won with our record!!!

I think if an investigation finds we have tanked, then we need to amend all the losses we've had since the draft was introduced to wins, and grant us retrospective premierships.

The courts should also grant compensation for lost sponsorships, memberships, supporter distress etc etc.

Deano Supremo · **Posted:** Fri Mar 14, 2008 6:33 pm

Deano Supremo wrote:

Pickle wrote:

I would love to know how they are going to prove what games we should have won with our record!!!

I think if an investigation finds we have tanked, then we need to amend all the losses we've had since the draft was introduced to wins, and grant us retrospective premierships.

The courts should also grant compensation for lost sponsorships, memberships, supporter distress etc etc.

Of course the first point means Collingwood lose 1990 and Essendon* lose 93 and 2000.

We'd better expand the trophy cabinet quick smart.

Lace Out · **Posted:** Fri Mar 14, 2008 6:42 pm

Like everyone has said he is an A grade Idiot. Bridge burning specialist.

I guess he never got over Santa clause not giving him a growth spurt for Christmas....

He should crawl back up anabel chong too!

Ponkstar · **Posted:** Fri Mar 14, 2008 7:08 pm

Of course the irony of it all is that the very fact that we may or may not have been able to tank comes down to the fact that as a footy team we were absolutely woeful for 4 years previously, with probably the worst midfield in the competition.

And who was our midfield coach during that period?

The fact that Libba thinks we were finally in a position to win a few games after he was effectively relieved of his role at the club speaks volumes actually.

killpies · **Posted:** Fri Mar 14, 2008 7:15 pm

frank dardew wrote:

For the sake of a few dollars from Hutchy he has ensured he will never earn any decent money out of AFL football again as an assistant coach .

QFT. Libba is now the most unemployable ex footballer going around. I hope for his sake he got paid well, it's going to have to last a while.

teagueyubeauty · **Joined:** Sat Oct 14, 2006 11:28 am **Posts:** 6450

The Duke wrote:

I'll bet if Ninethmond had of beaten the saints, we would've beaten Melbourne

Nah, we would have kept picks 1 & 3 and got Judd in the PSD or at least screwed WC into just Kennedy & 20 or just pick 3.

Lets be honest, there was no chance in hell we were going to win that last game.

Liberatore tanking talk: Karma Pg26

Who is online