I wonder what kind of lows our club would have sunk to trying to lose to Freo if McMahon had have missed that goal?

Nothing like the lows we will sink to if the AFL rip our draft picks off us.

Don't mean to hate on you King, but we tanked. The moves that were being made from the box were disgraceful and it was embarrassing for the Tigers that we stil almost beat them.

I wonder what kind of lows our club would have sunk to trying to lose to Freo if McMahon had have missed that goal?

I have often wondered what that Freo game would have been like if...

Return home from the alternate universe.

Move to the alternate universe.

Issue a fatwa against the fat one.

Issue a fatwa against the fat one.

The fat one is your friend here.

He has a narrow view of tanking that perhaps we all should have - the positional moves against the Tigers actually worked. Petterd got some clearances, Johnson got some kicks in the backline, and Warnock was...tall in the forwardline.

So we are to be punished because of perceived motives rather than what actually happened?

As you said we won the game before we lost it.

How do you then prove we didn't want to win?

You can't. That is why AD, or The Fat One, takes a narrow 'players trying to lose' approach to tanking and why nothing will happen.

We will still have 3, 4, 13, and 27 when the draft rolls around.

...and Warnock was...tall in the forwardline.

That's a very good description of his skill set rpfc.

The only way to be punished is to have evidence. If someone at the MFC was actually stupid enought to put anything in writing about a startegy to loose games then that person is dead meat and I will hunt them down because that is expressly against the laws of the game, so it's no different to salary cap breaches.

I don't believe this to be the case however, it's simply been a nod and wink as it has been at Hawthron, StKilda, West Coast, Collingwood, Carlton, Richmond .....

a startegy to loose games ... because that is expressly against the laws of the game

I'm very interested to see the specific laws of the game that you're referring to

The AFL have a catch all law call "bringing the game into disrepute".

They can use that in what ever way they wish.

But to answer the thread Title.

Buy a membership in 2013 like I have done for most of the last 50 years.

And spend next summer praying 10 of our ordinary recruits over the last 5 years turn into Brownlow medalists.

The AFL have a catch all law call "bringing the game into disrepute".

They can use that in what ever way they wish.

But to answer the thread Title.

Buy a membership in 2013 like I have done for most of the last 50 years.

And spend next summer praying 10 of our ordinary recruits over the last 5 years turn into Brownlow medalists.

Pretty much with you here old dee red & blue till death

Nothing will happen though IMO to difficult for the AFL

Whatever they tried to prove would be thrown outin court

Anyone giving evidence against a club would be shot down as a disgruntled ex-employee

Their credibility would be smashed in court and all sorts of skeletons would come out of closets

Not worth it and the fat controller would not want the brand damaged

Pretty sure AFL would have explained this to Mclean during their interview

I will chicken wing Adrien Anderson into submission.

Its alot more harder than that. You would have to solid link what was written to what was done. The writing of a couple of sentences by someone in the Club is not of itself damning. It could no more valid that McLeans inept statements

I cant see playing the "bringing the game into disrepute" when it cant be established what we have done or havent done is wrong.

And then they would only be shooting themselves in the foot and opening up a pandoras box for at least 10 other clubs.

It wont happen.

Improve my golf game.

Attend more car shows.

Learn how to swim.

The fat one is your friend here.

He has a narrow view of tanking that perhaps we all should have - the positional moves against the Tigers actually worked. Petterd got some clearances, Johnson got some kicks in the backline, and Warnock was...tall in the forwardline.

So we are to be punished because of perceived motives rather than what actually happened?

As you said we won the game before we lost it.

How do you then prove we didn't want to win?

You can't. That is why AD, or The Fat One, takes a narrow 'players trying to lose' approach to tanking and why nothing will happen.

We will still have 3, 4, 13, and 27 when the draft rolls around.

Some uncommon common sense. Congratulations.

Book myself into the MCC's new Crying Room for all of 2013, 2014, 2015...

Edited August 3, 201213 yr by PaulRB

I'll give away Footy altogether, & get interested in motorsport & golf.

I'm very interested to see the specific laws of the game that you're referring to

Was read out a few days ago on the radio, related directly to determing the outcome of a game, as you would expect given the wagering that is involved in footy.

We won't be found guilty or penalised. The investigation has already been done a year ago. Whatever Brock ads is irrelevant, it's his word against some very smart people that run our club and are affiliated with it.

He's the only one that is going to lose out of this because the only thing that is going to be found out is that he has been played superbly by Sheehan, Roos and Healey.

Bailey won't say anything if he wants to maintain a career in the AFL as well.

Was read out a few days ago on the radio, related directly to determing the outcome of a game, as you would expect given the wagering that is involved in footy.

I had a look through the rules: http://afl.com.au/Portals/0/2012/AM_6967_0112_AFL_laws.pdf

I searched for key words like "outcome", "result", "loss", "lose" and "affect" and found nothing relevant to what you've said. I scanned the contents and couldn't even find a relevant section that might cover this.

I cant see playing the "bringing the game into disrepute" when it cant be established what we have done or havent done is wrong.

And then they would only be shooting themselves in the foot and opening up a pandoras box for at least 10 other clubs.

It wont happen.

Yes, a pandoras box that very much implicates some of the AFL's most cherished love children, Carlton, Collingwood ans West Coast.

Is there a prize for the correct answer?

Place Rhino Richards on suicide watch.

I actually doubt anything will happen

But then again I did think that you know who would stay for the first 6 months of 2011.

No matter which way it goes I hope for only a few things before I shuttle off.

I would like the MFC

- to be a team that wins more games than it loses

- That is not the laughing stock of the league

- To be relevant

- that is hated by other teams / supporters because we take no prisoners.

I do not even care if we never win another flag

Just turn into a good team that gives a reasonable amount of joy

Surely not much to ask for over the next 10 years is it?

Edited August 3, 201213 yr by old dee

Id go by membership on which team will fold first - doggies membership was way below the rest this season.