Caroline Wilson's descent into gutter journalism

[Dee Fan 3,247]

Criticise the current board based on evidence of gross incompetence: Bastard who hates the club

Criticise a board from four years ago on the basis of a trek: Hero who loves the club

Again, the tanking mess we find ourselves in has nothing to do with what did or didn't happen four years ago.

So you can't find fault in what I said, once again so you, once again, revert to deflection.

You raised the issue, not me, so where did I go wrong?

[Sir Why You Little 37,049]

Trouble with this garbage on here about the Gardner board v the Stynes board is it is hijacking what should be a serious debate about where the club stands now and what it should be doing going forward. The Gardner board in the end was a failure so lets not try and point score (my board is better than yours) now at a time when the club is in trouble.

When we have the debate many here have backed Schwab for his financial management of the club and I understand the points being made, my view is different on this and it is that he is a divisive figure like it or not and we would be much better placed without him. Yes there are white ants, people with agendas, payback or whatever but it's doing us no good having someone who draws this to the club. In any organisation numbering more than one there is alway politics at play and disaffected people but you don't have this sort of thing drawn to someone like Cook or more particularly Swan or Robson who must have created some enemies switching clubs (big clubs) mid stream.

I also have a big problem with a failed rebuild and don't trust we have the right people at the top to go through it again. This current tanking issue only backs that up for me.

We should have made the moves to be rid of both Bailey and Schwab/Connelly at the same time, cleared the slate and moved on. This is my only issue with the current board, they should have held firm with their initial decision to not renew Schwabs contract and they got spooked.

Now we face another disruptive season.

both boards failed ultimately which is why we are in the sh!t right now.

I pretty much agree with all you say above.

Edited November 1, 2012 by why you little

[beelzebub 23,380]

Theres a term I believe for the predicament we find ourselves in.

its call 'entrapment'

[Dee Fan 3,247]

Trouble with this garbage on here about the Gardner board v the Stynes board is it is hijacking what should be a serious debate about where the club stands now and what it should be doing going forward. The Gardner board in the end was a failure so lets not try and point score (my board is better than yours) now at a time when the club is in trouble.

When we have the debate many here have backed Schwab for his financial management of the club and I understand the points being made, my view is different on this and it is that he is a divisive figure like it or not and we would be much better placed without him. Yes there are white ants, people with agendas, payback or whatever but it's doing us no good having someone who draws this to the club. In any organisation numbering more than one there is alway politics at play and disaffected people but you don't have this sort of thing drawn to someone like Cook or more particularly Swan or Robson who must have created some enemies switching clubs (big clubs) mid stream.

I also have a big problem with a failed rebuild and don't trust we have the right people at the top to go through it again. This current tanking issue only backs that up for me.

We should have made the moves to be rid of both Bailey and Schwab/Connelly at the same time, cleared the slate and moved on. This is my only issue with the current board, they should have held firm with their initial decision to not renew Schwabs contract and they got spooked.

Now we face another disruptive season.

There is a perception that Schwab is a [censored] but the majority that think he is have never met him, the image he has is created by those that were in power and dislike him. Perhaps we should have Rangey create a Poll with two questions the first do you think he is a [censored] and the second have you ever met him.

My issue with the two former board members that are posting on here is to do with their idiotic idea that we will come out of this stronger, we may not come out of it at all. Any information that is fed to the media or the AFL is doing irreparable damage to the club and it hasd to stop.

.

[Lucifers Hero 39,945]

Theres a term I believe for the predicament we find ourselves in.

its call 'entrapment'

Try Dee-p Sh!!

[beelzebub 23,380]

Try Dee-p Sh!!

well thats the composition of the mess but we are only there because of enticement..

[Redleg 40,950]

Should the AFL be investigated for wasting $2miilion of footy money on Folau? $1million per year for 1 AFL season and 1 VFL season.

Please people don't say he earned it in publicity. What about the bad publicity now that he has failed and is leaving? Described in the press as a total failure.

Also lets not forget Sheeds comments at the end of the season that he would be a great AFL player. Gee.

[Sir Why You Little 37,049]

Should the AFL be investigated for wasting $2miilion of footy money on Folau? $1million per year for 1 AFL season and 1 VFL season.

Please people don't say he earned it in publicity. What about the bad publicity now that he has failed and is leaving? Described in the press as a total failure.

Also lets not forget Sheeds comments at the end of the season that he would be a great AFL player. Gee.

one F$&@k up at a time Mr. Leg!!

[olisik 4,060]

So according to Caro Wilson, players hyping each other up at 3/4 time to try win the game is tanking....oooookaaay then...

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

[nutbean 8,838]

My best indicator as to what sort of trouble we are in and the determination of the AFL to do something is all to do with timing.

November 22nd is draft day - if the AFL wind up their investigation in the next week and give the MFC 7 days to explain leaving the AFL a couple of days to hand down the penalties BEFOREdraft day then I believe this indicates that the AFL are going to go us hard and we are in deep do-do. It will tell me that the AFL think it has enough to convince the football public/media etc that it has the MFC cold and they can also differentiate between solid evidence they have against the MFC as opposed to the very subjective and untested/unsubstantiated information they have on the likes of Carlton. (I am not convinced that people from other clubs would not sing like canaries if the blow torch was applied as well)

Compare this to the issue dragging on until after draft day - the immediate sting and high emotion charged action of losing immediate draft picks has gone. I believe that if it drags after the draft date the please explain will come and then we will have 3 months of argie bargie followed by a revision of the draft process, maybe a couple of resignations at the MFC.

Edited November 1, 2012 by nutbean

[beelzebub 23,380]

There is a perception that Schwab is a [censored] but the majority that think he is have never met him, the image he has is created by those that were in power and dislike him. Perhaps we should have Rangey create a Poll with two questions the first do you think he is a [censored] and the second have you ever met him.

My issue with the two former board members that are posting on here is to do with their idiotic idea that we will come out of this stronger, we may not come out of it at all. Any information that is fed to the media or the AFL is doing irreparable damage to the club and it hasd to stop.

.

in his absence I'll oblige !! lol I did revise the questions a bit though..

[Hazyshadeofgrinter 80]

Trouble with this garbage on here about the Gardner board v the Stynes board is it is hijacking what should be a serious debate about where the club stands now and what it should be doing going forward.

=/=

The Gardner board in the end was a failure so lets not try and point score (my board is better than yours) now at a time when the club is in trouble.

[Sir Why You Little 37,049]

My best indicator as to what sort of trouble we are in and the determination of the AFL to do something is all to do with timing.

November 22nd is draft day - if the AFL wind up their investigation in the next week and give the MFC 7 days to explain leaving the AFL a couple of days to hand down the penalties BEFOREdraft day then I believe this indicates that the AFL are going to go us hard and we are in deep do-do. It will tell me that the AFL think it has enough to convince the football public/media etc that it has the MFC cold and they can also differentiate between solid evidence they have against the MFC as opposed to the very subjective and untested/unsubstantiated information they have on the likes of Carlton. (I am not convinced that people from other clubs would not sing like canaries if the blow torch was applied as well)

Compare this to the issue dragging on until after draft day - the immediate sting and high emotion charged action of losing immediate draft picks has gone. I believe that if it drags after the draft date the please explain will come and then we will have 3 months of argie bargie followed by a revision of the draft process, maybe a couple of resignations at the MFC.

legal advice to the MFC should get us past november.

Next year is going to be long.

The thick skin will survive.

[Hazyshadeofgrinter 80]

So you can't find fault in what I said, once again so you, once again, revert to deflection.

You raised the issue, not me, so where did I go wrong?

What you were saying made no sense and has no relevance to this issue. To suggest that Gardner would be envious of the record of the current administration is really too much. Even if I just take your one isolated point about debt reduction, Garnder managed to improve the financial position of the club without the generous tv rights and stadium deals that Stynes/Schwab have enjoyed, and without resorting to unsustainable donation drives. Hardly an indictment.

I don't think I'll be indulging your tripe any longer.

Edited November 1, 2012 by Hazyshadeofgrinter

[daisycutter 29,617]

Should the AFL be investigated for wasting $2miilion of footy money on Folau? $1million per year for 1 AFL season and 1 VFL season.

Please people don't say he earned it in publicity. What about the bad publicity now that he has failed and is leaving? Described in the press as a total failure.

Also lets not forget Sheeds comments at the end of the season that he would be a great AFL player. Gee.

A minor point (only another $1M)

$6M over 4 years is $1.5M making $3M so far (+ any severance payments)

[dee-luded 2,959]

There is a perception that Schwab is a [censored] but the majority that think he is have never met him, the image he has is created by those that were in power and dislike him. Perhaps we should have Rangey create a Poll with two questions the first do you think he is a [censored] and the second have you ever met him.

My issue with the two former board members that are posting on here is to do with their idiotic idea that we will come out of this stronger, we may not come out of it at all. Any information that is fed to the media or the AFL is doing irreparable damage to the club and it hasd to stop.

.

He's a nice bloke.

[Hannibal 5,814]

In my view, the best chance we have of preventing our club from being completely crippled is for the guilty parties to go to the AFL, offer their resignations and try to figure out a way to contain the damage. Justice will need to have been seen to have been served and, even if it is only for symbolic reasons, heads will have to roll before our club will be able to move past this. Unfortunately, the egos involved make this unlikely in my estimation. Schwab has never been able to put the club's interests before his own and he is obsessed with his legacy. I have no doubt that his preference would be to waste club resources by becoming embroiled in legal action designed to preserve his personal reputation regardless of the cost to the club. The consequences of this would be dire.

Your priorities have always been:

1st. your online image

2nd. Stynes/Schwab

3rd. the MFC.

In the event that the MFC are found to have no case to answer due to insufficient, or contradictory evidence then I assume you'll never show your face round these parts again ? I accept that that's remote, but it would be a nice surprise.

Your proposition is absurd and with that kind of judgment it's little wonder that either you, or your relative made no headway as Board members. The club has to bunker down and deny deny deny.

[Hazyshadeofgrinter 80]

Popular view of who should be blamed for the current MFC crisis:

Wilson

Demetriou

McLean

Denham

Faceless men

Bailey

Gardner

Me

The boogie

Popular view of who should not be blamed for the current MFC crisis:

The guys who have been running the show for the last 4 years

Sunshine

Moolight

Good times

Edited November 1, 2012 by Hazyshadeofgrinter

[loges 6,767]

If you were a real MFC supporter (like me) you would care more about what the people in charge are doing to our club, and less about trying to smear the legacy of a guy who left four yeas ago.

If you are a real supporter its time you realised that pushing this divisiveness will do nothing to help the current situation & its about time you realised it. And if you're one of the former board members mentioned , feeding stories to the press or AFL then you are a disgrace

[Hazyshadeofgrinter 80]

In the event that the MFC are found to have no case to answer due to insufficient, or contradictory evidence then I assume you'll never show your face round these parts again ? I accept that that's remote, but it would be a nice surprise.

Your proposition is absurd and with that kind of judgment it's little wonder that either you, or your relative made no headway as Board members. The club has to bunker down and deny deny deny.

It's not going away mate.

[jnrmac 20,104]

To me the whole issue requires no more discussion than this:

The whole point of the draft system, including priority picks, was/is to give a boost to the clubs that are struggling the most. We won 10 games in 3 years and we received ONE priotiry pick. West Coast, Carlton, Richmond, St.Kilda, Collingwood, Bulldogs and Hawthorn have ALL spent time at the bottom over the last decade or so and as a result they all received 'draft assistance'. Between 2004 and 2007, 7 priority picks were given out, Carlton and Hawthorn receiving TWO each. How could anyone possibly pick Melbourne, out of this group of 8 clubs (most of whom have been far more successful than the MFC in recent years) as the 'odd-ones-out' and try to mount a case that they have received some sort of unfair advantage?

What he said.

[Hazyshadeofgrinter 80]

If you are a real supporter its time you realised that pushing this divisiveness will do nothing to help the current situation & its about time you realised it. And if you're one of the former board members mentioned , feeding stories to the press or AFL then you are a disgrace

How am I pushing divisiveness? I just want what is best for the club. I don't care if it is different to what is best for Schwab, the Board or anyone else involved in the tanking - they only have themselves to blame.

[rjay 24,950]

=/=

Funny thing I think both boards have a lot to answer for, I'm interested in how we fix this going forward for no other reason than I want the club to be a success.

[daisycutter 29,617]

How am I pushing divisiveness? I just want what is best for the club. I don't care if it is different to what is best for Schwab, the Board or anyone else involved in the tanking - they only have themselves to blame.

someone get me a bucket...............

[loges 6,767]

How am I pushing divisiveness? I just want what is best for the club. I don't care if it is different to what is best for Schwab, the Board or anyone else involved in the tanking - they only have themselves to blame.

Not pushing divisiveness Really??