OVER the past week there has been a lot of media regarding Tony Liberatore’s claims of tanking. Whether Carlton did or didn’t or whether any club has or hasn’t, I'm struggling to understand what the big deal is.

As a player, I can guarantee that players do everything they can to win. Even if it may hurt them in the long run by not getting a priority pick. Scrub the word completely because players never have and never will play to lose a game. It is not tanking – it is planning.

If a club cannot make the finals, why wouldn’t they start planning for the next year? If they put one, two or 10 players in for operations to ensure they can make a quicker recovery for the start of the pre-season, I would think they are making the best decision for the benefit of the club.

My coach at Collingwood Mick Malthouse has a saying, “Anyone can have ninth place. But if you want eighth, you have a hell of a fight on your hands.”

All I see is benefit for a club with five games to play who can’t make the finals, if they take the ‘planning’ type mentality.

No.1; Players who need operations are ready to start pre-season earlier than they otherwise would have been.

No. 2; A club can play some younger players who they are not sure on to see if they’re up to AFL standard. This can help them make tough decisions on the futures of different players, which can be life-changing for those who are shown the door. On the other hand, throw a young bloke in the deep end and give them a job to do and they may just grab their chance with both hands, turning around decisions that may have already been made on their future.

There are a couple of points I do not agree with, however. If a player deserves to be selected for a game but is dropped in favour for a kid, that’s not on. Earning a spot in the 22 is a tough job, and if someone has genuinely earned that spot, they must be given it.

Let’s say a club has decided to prepare for the next year. They have a fringe player playing seniors as his form has been good enough to hold his spot. There is doubt over whether he will still be there the next year, and blooding a younger player has been thrown up as an option.

I would be supportive of a player being blooded only if he was replacing an injured player, or one whose form was not up to scratch. This fringe player may also be playing for his future – not just at his club, but for the opportunity to continue his career with another.

I think everyone is starting to lean toward a change in our draft system too. Take out the priority picks, but give the teams down the bottom of the table more chance of getting the best picks.

The best suggestion I have heard is the lottery-type draft. The bottom four teams are drawn out of a hat, making up the selections one-four. From last year, this would mean the Tigers, Blues, Demons and Dogs would be up for one of the four picks.

In the groups of four, let’s say the order had been drawn Tigers, Blues, Demons, Dogs. The Tigers get one, Blues two, Demons three, Dogs four. When it is time for the same group to go again, it is changed to benefit the others, with the Tigers getting the later selection in their group of four.

On top of this, the thousands of hours and dollars clubs are spending on researching potential draftees is protected by the fact no-one gets a draft pick hand out, making it all even.

Forget tanking because players all play to win, but planning for the next season will always go on, and so it should.

I’m sure every supporter would agree with their club trying to move on from a poor season, ensuring they have the best possible chance of making a mends the next year. They may also get to see the teams’ next star who may have been lost to the game otherwise.