The AFL’s recent decision on whether the Melbourne Football Club “tanked” to secure draft picks in 2009 has left many confused.
While ruling that the Demons “did not set out to deliberately lose in any matches” in 2009, the AFL still fined the club $500,000 and has suspended then coach Dean Bailey and football operations manager Chris Connolly.
The system that led to the Demons' suspected tanking, which awarded teams that won fewer than four games a priority pick in the subsequent draft, has since been abandoned by the AFL.
But the temptation to tank persists in the current draft system. Put simply, the team that finishes at the bottom of the ladder gets the highest draft picks. In the final few weeks of the season, then, there remains an incentive for poor performing teams to lose to ensure they attain (or maintain) the earliest possible selections in the draft.
There has to be a better way to ensure fans of poor performing teams can guarantee they can watch their team at least try to win at the end of the season. In that spirit, I’ve come up with the following proposal to discourage tanking.
How it works
This system is based on the premise that all clubs commence the season with the aim of playing finals football and maintain that aim for so long as they are a mathematical chance of making the finals.
For the purpose of draft selection, clubs are ranked in the order that they are eliminated from finals contention, regardless of their position on the ladder at the end of the season.
A club is eliminated from finals contention when, at the end of a completed round, the number of games remaining for that club is fewer than the number of wins or draws required to secure the lowest position on the ladder designated for finals qualification.
Where two or more teams fall from finals contention at the end of the same round (irrespective of the number of games won), the team with the best record in head-to-head games played between the clubs throughout the entire home and away season will secure the higher position in the draft.
Rationale
Presuming the original premise holds true, clubs have the incentive to try to win matches while they are still in contention to make the finals.
And the disincentive to win matches (particularly late in the season) is removed even after clubs are eliminated from finals contention. In the situation where the club is the only one eliminated from finals contention at the end of a round, their subsequent win-loss record cannot alter their position in the draft.
The tie-breaking procedure will ensure that where two or more clubs are eliminated from finals contention in the same round, those clubs still have the incentive to win matches against each other in order to improve their head-to-head records while their results against all other teams will have no bearing on their ultimate position in the draft.
So clubs will have no incentive not to win matches in order to improve their draft position. More importantly, no club would ever be perceived to acquire any advantage by “tanking”.
Applying the proposal to the 2012 Season
So how would the last football season have played out under these rules for the bottom three teams?
At the end of round 15, Gold Cost was seven games behind eighth-placed St Kilda with eight games left to play, therefore mathematically still in finals contention.
By the end of round 16, Greater Western Sydney and Gold Coast were seven games behind eighth place with seven games to play. But both clubs were out of finals contention because ninth-placed North Melbourne had the same record as St.Kilda (eight wins to seven losses) and these two clubs were to meet later in the season. Either team winning that match (or even if they drew) would ensure Greater Western Sydney and Gold Coast could not make the final eight.
Because the two teams were eliminated at the completion of the same round, they would then vie for picks one and two in the draft according to their head-to-head record. They had already met in round seven (Greater Western Sydney winning 94 to 67) and were due to meet again in Round 20, where Greater Western Sydney would take a 27-point advantage into the game.
So both teams would have had the incentive to win, but the Gold Coast would have had to win by 28 points or more to earn the superior draft selection.
At the end of Round 17, Melbourne were seven games behind eighth-placed North Melbourne with six games to play, so were eliminated from finals contention. At that point, Melbourne would secure pick three in the draft regardless of any other results before the end of the season.
The table below shows how the picks would have been distributed among the bottom ten teams under the proposed system, as compared to the current system.
Pick
Current
Proposed
Round Secured
1
GWS
Gold Coast
16
2
Gold Coast
GWS
16
3
Melbourne
Melbourne
17
4
Western Bulldogs
Western Bulldogs
18
5
Port Adelaide
Port Adelaide
18
6
Brisbane
Brisbane
20
7
Richmond
Richmond
21
8
Essendon
Carlton
22
9
Carlton
Essendon
22
10
St.Kilda
St.Kilda
22
The finalists secure their order in the draft according to the order they are eliminated from the finals. Teams eliminated in the same week of the finals are ranked in order according to which of the two was ranked lower on the ladder at the end of the home and away season.
The bottom three teams collectively won five games in the final seven rounds without affecting their draft positions. Significantly, despite the fact the Gold Coast defeated Greater Western Sydney in round 20, this proposal would eliminate any suggestion that had Gold Coast lost the game, it might have done so to ensure they finish below GWS to secure an earlier draft pick.
In Round 21, Melbourne went into its game against Greater Western Sydney just one win ahead and, under the current system, may have had a disincentive to win to secure an earlier draft pick. Under this proposal, both clubs had already locked in their respective draft positions and the disincentive, perceived or otherwise, would be removed.
Playing to win
Some may argue tanking does not exist. Others looking at the 2012 example may point out that the final draft positions under the current system do not deviate significantly from that which would be derived from the proposal. But whether it actually occurred in 2012 or not, there is a public perception in some quarters that tanking does exist, and has occurred for a number of years.
My proposal definitively removes incentives, perceived or otherwise, to engage in tanking. It also preserves the integrity of the game.
But most importantly, it ensures that fans of Melbourne, the Gold Coast or Greater Western Sydney, can go to games knowing their teams have nothing to lose by winning.
Nicholas Browne
Teacher
There's a problem here, given the following situation is quite plausible:
1. Two teams are out of contention in Round 17. One, say Gold Coast, is inexperienced but 'up-and-coming'; the other, say St Kilda, is on a downward trajectory.
2. In the remaining six rounds, the improving Gold Coast win five games, including one against the Saints. St Kilda continue on a downward spiral.
3. As a consequence, Gold Coast get a higher draft pick, which hardly seems fair.
Theo Pertsinidis
Theo Pertsinidis is a Friend of The Conversation.
ALP voter
Good idea mate.
Propose it to the AFL.
Though if they are smart they would be monitoring this place for ideas :-)
In recent years I have nothing but respect for the AFL board.
One of my gripes in sport is match fixing. I guess pub talk would say... if only I could be in on the action... the movie Let It Ride is an example.
I can see where an aid that gets a player back to normal level, eg. pharmaceutical, prescription glasses, is acceptable... anything more is not acceptable.
I…
Read moreMat Hardy
Lecturer in Middle East Studies at Deakin University
Does anybody have any evidence to corroborate that having a higher draft pick is linked to improved performance in the following season? Or is the draft just one of those things that has become a hype unto itself, worth having just to say you have it? Surely it is the overall talents of the team, the coaches etc etc over the months of the season that are more important than having one superstar?
I'm willing to be corrected because I have no understanding of AFL or its mechanisms.
Robert Macdonald
University of Melbourne
Mat, yes, I'm close to finishing a PhD on the matter of draft selections and subsequent AFL team performance. Yes, there's a relationship between improved team performance and having earlier selections in the National Draft, but you have to look over the medium term. But also, as you suspected, there's also increasing evidence suggesting those clubs capable of spending more on 'football operations' have more success.
Nick McKenzie
Account Manager
great article. It may not be absolutley perfect as Nick Browne pointed out, however it seems to be the best possible way to minimise 'tanking' ( teams could still tank to get to the no mathematical chance stage, once they were 'virtually' there )...... I also lilke the idea of the two teams who go out the same week having their head to head records counted.
terry lockwood
maths teacher
#1 I am a MelbourneFC supporter
#2 I used to tank when I did footy tipping aiming to get the prize for the worst tipper. (Being the first to 'head south' was an advantage)
#3 I am not convinced any football club employs anyone who could really get their heads around the concepts outline in the article which should serve as protection against tanking. They only just 'get' percentage.
#4 in any discussion of football, the term 'regardless' should be replace with 'irregardless'
Timothy Lynch
Senior Lecturer in Education at Monash University
Noel, I appreciate your efforts at keeping Australian football honest and with good intentions However, I am one of the people who believe that teams just do not tank. Not in the AFL, not in state, metropolitan or country Australian football leagues.
Read moreWithin the AFL, football teams have lists where selection in the Senior team depends on performance and team balance. There are players in Reserve grade chewing at the bit to get their opportunity in the First grade. There is an incredible amount…
Nick McKenzie
Account Manager
Timothy, unfortunately I think you have your head in the sand.... three obvious examples are; Collingwood to get D.Thomas and S.Pendelbury........Carlton to get Kreuzer.........Melbourne to get Skully and Trengrove.........
Read moreWhile I agree in theory with your case against tanking, in reality it doesn't stack up - Collingwood lost it's last 8 or 9 games and then finished 5th next season! There are other ways that you didn't mention, resting players, playing out of postion etc
It doesn't matter how…
Brynn Mathews
logged in via Facebook
As a Carlton fan for almost 50 years and a member for almost 10, I have to agree that tanking happens. I've watched a few end-of-season games in the last 5 years where they're both definitely playing for the wooden spoon...as for last years end-of-season Carlton/Gold Cost Suns game at Gold Coast, either the Blues were playing to lift the Suns up the ladder or they've been "indoors" for far too many games and can't handle a ground with wind and a goal not protected by a grandstand. My friends (all supporters of other teams) that I went with could have been much crueler to me than they were, and I certainly appreciated their compassion.
Ian Jessup
Retrenched Journalist
Nice attempt to avoid tanking but... a team that has a shocking start to the season (perhaps 1-8) then tanks in the middle of the season (to secure the No.1 draft pick before anyone else), then its results improve in the last 6-8 weeks of the season (perhaps under a new coach) and no one is any wiser. I would suggest that playing clumps of players out of position in AFL is akin to the Ryan Tandy penalty goal in the NRL and should attract the attention of the authorities immediately, and all betting (a scourge anyway) suspended on that game.
Robert Macdonald
University of Melbourne
Interesting idea Noel, worthy of discussion to identify potential perverse incentive effects or other potential problems as some commentators here have noted.
George Harley
George Harley is a Friend of The Conversation.
Retired Dogsbody
Thanks Noel,
Interesting premise.
But of course the burning question for all serious football fans is will the Bulldogs win a second premiership before I have to go to the great kennel in the sky?
Regards