SEE YA.

Thank god our club is not as spineless as you seem to think it is.

I have no doubt the sponsor bombshell was released in connection to this. Who was the first to break that story? We need to demand to know if their source came frome within the AFL.

This is a defining moment for this club. We are under attack and the club and us the members need to demand answers.

Trawl through my post history if you wish, I'm not an alarmist or conspiracy theorist but this stinks. McLardy may have to get on the front foot soon, we have to stop the bleeding. The easiest way for the AFL to make us their [censored] is to kill a major revenue stream and that happens two days after Vlad throws Aaron under a bus to save his golden child Misfud.

Buckle up people, I can see this either ending in the death of our great club, total servitude to Vlad or McLardy demanding Vlad's resignation.

Results on field are secondary right now, Neeld needs to bunker down with the players and create an us v the world seige mentality atm. We are at war.

I'll be buying my mother a membership on Tuesday.

Community Engagement Officer - interesting title for a job which can, as it turns out, be used to vilify someone without checking the facts. Previously, this guy Mifsud has tabled a couple of reports to the AFL regarding comments made about indigenous players (17th June, 2010 re: Mal Brown and the unfortunate Matt Rendell). Both times the AFL took it further and acted reasonably appropriately after no doubt checking the facts. But from what I understand in Mark Neelds case, Mifsud didn't get what he wanted, so he "leaked" the rumours to his mate in the media. GT being what he is, published immediately.

Perhaps Mifsud should heed his own words (this from his own presser on 17th June, 2010):

"The most basic and fundamental human right is a person’s identity and any remarks, comments or language that diminishes that sense of identity is indefensible."

Now he's run off to Warnambool to hide .

What a sook .

Meanwhile Aaron is trying to prepare for a game he may not play .

Sack the Maltese Double Cross!

Meanwhile ... Back at HQ ... *detetetete (newsroom sound)

The AFL's Indigenous Affairs Liaison/Special Multicultural Officer/Professional Blabbermouth guy or whatever you want to call him ... STILL refuses to return calls from the MFC or respond to Aaron Davey's request for sit-down talks. Instead he has ... according to Caroline Wilson (http://www.theage.co...0404-1wd8f.html), packed off down to Warnambool, "too distraught" to tackle the issue head on.

Aside from being staggeringly incompetent ... what a coward!

Hmmn,,,,,, "Jason 'Elmer' MisFUD"

Oh Oh,,,

"Vlaaaaaddd",,,,,,, 'Heeelp'...

Episodes like this illustrate the reason I gave up my Gold AFL membership and instead spent the $500 per year on an MFC membership - I want to try and support the AFL as an organisation as little as possible and the MFC as much as possible considering the disrespect & contempt they hold the MFC in on a regular basis.

Caro on 3AW says she is now sitting on the fence.

Says either Mifsud told an untruth or Davey told an untruth.

She has no doubt the alleged 'source' is Davey but doesn't know who to believe.

Believes Mifsud has gone 'home' to ponder his future and may still resign again.

The silence from Misfud is quite deafening isn't it?

Caro on 3AW says she is now sitting on the fence

Says either Mifsud told an untruth or Davey told an untruth

she has no doubt the alleged 'source' is Davey but doesn't know who to believe

believes mifsud has gone 'home' to ponder his future and may still resign again

Don't these irresponsible journalists know the damage they do by making assertions based on nothing and then saying something else, also based on nothing. It is not a matter of 'fair comment' to say X is lying (or implying X is because you say Y is truthful ), it is libelous.

Her only legal Defence might be that she didn't name Davey in the same article where she says Milsud was telling the truth. Until some of these so-called sports journos are sue they will get away with character assail action just to get attention.

Don't these irresponsible journalists know the damage they do by making assertions based on nothing and then saying something else, also based on nothing. It is not a matter of 'fair comment' to say X is lying (or implying X is because you say Y is truthful ), it is libelous.

I thnk Caro knows who told the untruth. I think Neeld knows the untruth. Neither are saying for obvious reasons.

If Mifsud does have any consience he should resign regardless of Vlad's heavy hand. His position is untenable and his handling of the whole matter and Rendell issue has been disgraceful.

I think Caro knows who told the untruth. I think Neeld knows the untruth. Neither are saying for obvious reasons.

If Mifsud does have any conscience he should resign regardless of Vlad's heavy hand. His position is untenable and his handling of the whole matter and Rendell issue has been disgraceful.

she said she had changed her mind twice and was "now on the fence"

why do you think you know better?

she said she had changed her mind twice and was "now on the fence"

why do you think you know better?

She does not have enough evidence to categorically print it without legal issues. But its a simple equation. Either Mifsud is lying or Davey is.

She does not have enough evidence to categorically print it without legal issues. But its a simple equation. Either Mifsud is lying or Davey is.

Of course its a simple equation

If she thinks she knows why would she say she is "now sitting on the fence" - her words

She didn't have to say who if she thinks she knows but can't prove it, but she didn't have to say she was "sitting on the fence"

She said she had spoken to both of them and each time she thought they were truthful and that now she didn't know except that one must be telling an untruth

I still don't know why you know better. I think you are just guessing and you should at least say so.

The silence from Misfud is quite deafening isn't it?

I don't believe he offered his resignation at all, even if they say that he did.

I reckon it's A Dem's Spin again.

Trying to introduce MisFudd to the AFL , but it's backfired in their faces.

I wonder if they've tried to launch him in a Blaze of glory, at others expense, only to have 'Common Sense', see the Light of Day...

If it is, we'll see Misfudd return, Event ually,,,, after the Summer heat has gone & Autumn showers have washed the streets clean again. If he resigns, then I'll believe them, IF he doesn't, I won't...

Two things continue to mystify me:

(1) Misfired has apologised to Neeld, but is totally unrepentant about breaking his source's confidence (whether his "source" is Davey or not), not once but three times, the third time after the first two checked back to the source & didn't go into print, and to someone that he knew wouldn't bother to check with the source. He has no regrets whatsoever for putting so much pressure on an indigenous footballer, with no regard whatsoever for the damage it might do to him. And he's making it worse by refusing mediation, which would be the one way to get the issue resolved from Davey's perspective. Right from the first breach of confidence (to Caro?), before he knew how Davey would react, he seems to have done his utmost to damage Davey, for some reason that I don't understand. Do they have a history of any kind?

(2) Vlad's strange statement at the presser when asked why they were protecting the source - he said something to the effect that the source wasn't getting off scott-free, having "been presented with a series of facts that were then misconstrued and incorrectly relayed to Mifsud. The person is hurting and knows the error of his ways." (quoting from the afl.com.au article about the press conference).

Now, this simply doesn't fit the role that Davey is said to have had. There is no way Davey was "presented (presumably by another party) with facts" which he "misconstrued" and then "relayed" to Mifsud, because Davey wouldn't have needed to be "presented with the facts" by anybody. If anything, Davey might have been the person who did the "presenting of facts" to another party, who then misconstrued them before passing them on. That would fit the construction that Vlad put at the presser, much better than that he believed Davey to be the person who had spoken directly to Mifsud.

And perhaps this "Davey vs Mifsud" fiasco has been cooked up to shield this other party who was between Davey (or maybe another aboriginal Dee) and Mifsud, who "misconstrued" the situation, for whatever reason, when he spoke to Mifsud. I think there's a large piece still missing here. Ian Flack has been mentioned as a possibility, but he's denied it, and the AFL has made a huge effort to protect someone like Flack

Two things continue to mystify me:

(1) Misfired has apologised to Neeld, but is totally unrepentant about breaking his source's confidence (whether his "source" is Davey or not), not once but three times, the third time after the first two checked back to the source & didn't go into print, and to someone that he knew wouldn't bother to check with the source. He has no regrets whatsoever for putting so much pressure on an indigenous footballer, with no regard whatsoever for the damage it might do to him. And he's making it worse by refusing mediation, which would be the one way to get the issue resolved from Davey's perspective. Right from the first breach of confidence (to Caro?), before he knew how Davey would react, he seems to have done his utmost to damage Davey, for some reason that I don't understand. Do they have a history of any kind?

(2) Vlad's strange statement at the presser when asked why they were protecting the source - he said something to the effect that the source wasn't getting off scott-free, having "been presented with a series of facts that were then misconstrued and incorrectly relayed to Mifsud. The person is hurting and knows the error of his ways." (quoting from the afl.com.au article about the press conference).

Now, this simply doesn't fit the role that Davey is said to have had. There is no way Davey was "presented (presumably by another party) with facts" which he "misconstrued" and then "relayed" to Mifsud, because Davey wouldn't have needed to be "presented with the facts" by anybody. If anything, Davey might have been the person who did the "presenting of facts" to another party, who then misconstrued them before passing them on. That would fit the construction that Vlad put at the presser, much better than that he believed Davey to be the person who had spoken directly to Mifsud.

And perhaps this "Davey vs Mifsud" fiasco has been cooked up to shield this other party who was between Davey (or maybe another aboriginal Dee) and Mifsud, who "misconstrued" the situation, for whatever reason, when he spoke to Mifsud. I think there's a large piece still missing here. Ian Flack has been mentioned as a possibility, but he's denied it, and the AFL has made a huge effort to protect someone like Flack

These are the questions I've been asking myself, and this is the conclusion I've reached. Quality post.

Two things continue to mystify me:

(1) Misfired has apologised to Neeld, but is totally unrepentant about breaking his source's confidence (whether his "source" is Davey or not), not once but three times, the third time after the first two checked back to the source & didn't go into print, and to someone that he knew wouldn't bother to check with the source. He has no regrets whatsoever for putting so much pressure on an indigenous footballer, with no regard whatsoever for the damage it might do to him. And he's making it worse by refusing mediation, which would be the one way to get the issue resolved from Davey's perspective. Right from the first breach of confidence (to Caro?), before he knew how Davey would react, he seems to have done his utmost to damage Davey, for some reason that I don't understand. Do they have a history of any kind?

(2) Vlad's strange statement at the presser when asked why they were protecting the source - he said something to the effect that the source wasn't getting off scott-free, having "been presented with a series of facts that were then misconstrued and incorrectly relayed to Mifsud. The person is hurting and knows the error of his ways." (quoting from the afl.com.au article about the press conference).

Now, this simply doesn't fit the role that Davey is said to have had. There is no way Davey was "presented (presumably by another party) with facts" which he "misconstrued" and then "relayed" to Mifsud, because Davey wouldn't have needed to be "presented with the facts" by anybody. If anything, Davey might have been the person who did the "presenting of facts" to another party, who then misconstrued them before passing them on. That would fit the construction that Vlad put at the presser, much better than that he believed Davey to be the person who had spoken directly to Mifsud.

And perhaps this "Davey vs Mifsud" fiasco has been cooked up to shield this other party who was between Davey (or maybe another aboriginal Dee) and Mifsud, who "misconstrued" the situation, for whatever reason, when he spoke to Mifsud. I think there's a large piece still missing here. Ian Flack has been mentioned as a possibility, but he's denied it, and the AFL has made a huge effort to protect someone like Flack

It doesn't add up to me either. I thought it really interesting that AD came in over the top of Mifsud when he was answering a question about being lied to, Mifsud was starting to say it wasn't a lie as such.

As has been mentioned before, how did the jouno's get hold of the rumour 3 weeks ago? Was it Mifsud, someone else from the AFL or another mystery person.

Was Mifsud Caro's source and is that the reason that she was so adamant in the first place that he wasn't the liar, he was repeating what he had been told.

and another thing, why does AD keep calling him Misfud?

Two things continue to mystify me:

(1) Misfired has apologised to Neeld, but is totally unrepentant about breaking his source's confidence (whether his "source" is Davey or not), not once but three times, the third time after the first two checked back to the source & didn't go into print, and to someone that he knew wouldn't bother to check with the source. He has no regrets whatsoever for putting so much pressure on an indigenous footballer, with no regard whatsoever for the damage it might do to him. And he's making it worse by refusing mediation, which would be the one way to get the issue resolved from Davey's perspective. Right from the first breach of confidence (to Caro?), before he knew how Davey would react, he seems to have done his utmost to damage Davey, for some reason that I don't understand. Do they have a history of any kind?

(2) Vlad's strange statement at the presser when asked why they were protecting the source - he said something to the effect that the source wasn't getting off scott-free, having "been presented with a series of facts that were then misconstrued and incorrectly relayed to Mifsud. The person is hurting and knows the error of his ways." (quoting from the afl.com.au article about the press conference).

Now, this simply doesn't fit the role that Davey is said to have had. There is no way Davey was "presented (presumably by another party) with facts" which he "misconstrued" and then "relayed" to Mifsud, because Davey wouldn't have needed to be "presented with the facts" by anybody. If anything, Davey might have been the person who did the "presenting of facts" to another party, who then misconstrued them before passing them on. That would fit the construction that Vlad put at the presser, much better than that he believed Davey to be the person who had spoken directly to Mifsud.

And perhaps this "Davey vs Mifsud" fiasco has been cooked up to shield this other party who was between Davey (or maybe another aboriginal Dee) and Mifsud, who "misconstrued" the situation, for whatever reason, when he spoke to Mifsud. I think there's a large piece still missing here. Ian Flack has been mentioned as a possibility, but he's denied it, and the AFL has made a huge effort to protect someone like Flack

Vague about the source but it does come through Casey that a person involved with MFC last year but has now been moved on, not happy and has been causing a bit of mischief IF you get my meaning

Wonna know

Wonna know

Rioli? Why?

Buddy oath

Franklin, I Betts your Lyon.

The silence from Misfud is quite deafening isn't it?

Public silence, but then who else may he be talking to? Julian Assange?

Public silence, but then who else may he be talking to? Julian Assange?

I'm a bit surprised at the relative silence around here. We've been a bit distracted I know.

If Aaron was presented with the facts and was hurting and knew the error of his ways, why is he sticking by his story and demanding to talk to Mifsud while Mifsud goes underground?

The league boss has levelled very serious allegations at a senior player of our club, allegations that player denies. Did Dimwitriou take everything Mifsud told him as gospel? If Mifsud has invented this call of contrition from Aaron and Vlad has ran with it at the presser, Vlad must resign. If Mifsud has interpreted comments through a third party, attributed them to Aaron and Vlad has run with it at the presser, Vlad must resign.

There's a lot at stake here. That's why I'm very suspicious of the timing of the release of the Polis filth, it just couldn't have been better for the AFL. Distracts the footy media, the fans, especially us and the club. At the same time it kills our revenue and makes us more reliant on AFL money, just when they were losing control of the Davey/Mifsud scandal. These facebook posts have been around for a while but they found their way onto the front page at the perfect moment for Vlad and Mifsud to buy a few days cover.

If Aaron made the comments and is still lying to the club I wouldn't expect to ever see him in red and blue again, but I'll back him over Mifsud and by extention Demetriou because their story stinks right now and so does Mifsud refusing Aaron's calls.

I can only assume the lack of outrage around here is because most believe Mifsud. Most believe that a senior player invented a lie in an attempt to have the new coach sacked because training was too hard. Most would rather that lie was buried and forgotten about because it's all too hard to deal with. The same most that continually bemoan our lack of culture, our lack of fortitude when the going gets tough. Well that starts with trust, trust in each other, trust in the group, trust that you're all pushing in the same direction, that you'll be there for each other and ther club, and that starts here.

If Aaron says he didn't do it then we have to back him 100%. If he is telling the truth and we've hung him out to dry then there is no trust and never will be.

http://www.bigfootynews.com/2012/04/the-slightly-burnt-smell-reeking-from-afl-house/ - my thoughts, just posting them through BFN to get a portfolio going

I suspect that it's a case of Demetriou, with the aid of some friends in the media (who are now painting Mifsud as a saint), deflecting from the issue of an employee of the AFL divulging sensative material to a member of the media. Mifsud should have been sacked on the spot for this, failing which Demetriou should have immediately accepted his resignation.

In any event, Mifsud's position is now that of a lame duck. He's untrustworthy in the context of receiving confidences from the people he's supposed to be serving.

On the matter of what Aaron Davey is alleged to have said, I think it's interesting that Mifsud is dodging Davey.

Meanwhile, Melbourne is still in the competition and the coaches and players have jobs to do so they quite properly are focusing on that and not the media hype.