Caroline Wilson's descent into gutter journalism

[Dee Fan 3,247]

Not if the repetative, tedious posts from Hazy, ADC, Robbie F et al are removed

Skip or ignore, your choice.

[nutbean 8,838]

No....just couldnt see the blue sky for the haze most likely

touche - but a very funny touche

[dees189227 12,394]

The thing is we have people in Dean Bailey's corner and people in the other corner. Now we know that certain players had issue with Schwab and were close to Dean. So any of them could be saying anything because they obviously weren't happy with the club administration.

This secret player said the players were never told to lose. So it wasn't the players that cheated it was the stupid staff. The people must go. Jack Viney doesnt deserve to be taken away. He did nothing wrong. KB did say he wouldn't think the investigation would be finished before the draft so if we are punished it will probably be next year.

[Dee Fan 3,247]

A previous Board member talked about the insurmountable challenge of the debt on this very site.

Were they lying ?

The previous Board would still be talking about how they were going to deal with the $6.5m debt, it would have probably been there by now, and if they could get to 30k members by 2014.

[Face Your Demons 175]

Just watched Jeff Kennet on the News.

Why doesn't he just worry about his own club.

Mans a fool and a tool.

Edited November 1, 2012 by Face Your Demons

[Sir Why You Little 37,053]

Get ready for more.

Us v Them

We are going to get kicked & belted by all.

[beelzebub 23,380]

given the AFL always loved to follow Jeffs advice it may work in our favour !! lol

[Kiss of Death 755]

Just watched Jeff Kennet on the News.

Why doesn't he just worry about his own club.

Mans a fool and a tool.

Missed the news, but read an article online.

How quickly they forget 2004-2005 where Hawthorn did everything but try and win games. A couple of token wins at the end of the year, but always under the required compensation threshold.

[thaipantsman 180]

Missed the news, but read an article online.

How quickly they forget 2004-2005 where Hawthorn did everything but try and win games. A couple of token wins at the end of the year, but always under the required compensation threshold.

True Kiss of Death.

Teams don't go out to lose. Crazy concept. More the case teams don't bust their backsides hard and consistently. It's called taking the foot off the juice. There's a line between winning and losing. IMO teams don't tank or deliberately lose games and this is also the view of Andrew Demitreou.

[mjt 640]

bit harsh mjt.

Melbourne are playing the straight bat well. Don't seem to be reacting to media speculation and will only answer to AFL.

hes a dog mate, im reminded of him everytime i receive a powerbill, he just cant help laying the boots in.

[Scoop Junior 3,476]

Comparing the decision of going for Jon Brown to Mitch Clark is laughable.

McNamee wanted a 27 year old Brown in year one of our rebuild when our list was in an absolutely dire state. Even if we drafted well it would have taken 3-4 years to come good and by then Brown is a battered 30 year old.

Neeld got a 24 year old Clark when the list already has some developing young talent on it. Clark is young enough to still be a key cog if the team can develop over the next few years.

Not to mention Brown was a marquee player who had rejected Collingwood and was never going to leave his beloved Lions.

Clark on the other hand wanted out.

So yes, if Demonland consensus was that McNamee's move for Brown was silly, and that Neeld getting Clark was genius, then I would suggest that that's pretty close to the mark.

[Hazyshadeofgrinter 80]

I've got significant reservations but the immediate key for me is about our best current course of action in relation to the tanking issue.

Aye, two birds with the one stone - if that comes to pass you should buy a Powerball ticket.

Sadly, I can't see them doing this voluntarily either.

[hoopla 418]

honesty is always helpful, in the end.

Not sure how this follows

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.

Agree that this stuff is garbage - especially as many of good things the Stynes Board has done - realigning us with the MCC, getting us to AAMI and setting us up in Casey - were started by the Gardner Board

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.

Aah back on topic - and with a very valid point.

A hasty conclusion means they are set on the MFC - rather than on the tanking issue as a whole - which demands investigation into the behaviour of other clubs

[thaipantsman 180]

hes a dog mate, im reminded of him everytime i receive a powerbill, he just cant help laying the boots in.

sorry mjt....who do you mean? Thought you were talking about CW?

[Hazyshadeofgrinter 80]

So yes, if Demonland consensus was that McNamee's move for Brown was silly, and that Neeld getting Clark was genius, then I would suggest that that's pretty close to the mark.

It doesn't matter either way. I'm not trying to stand up for McNamee here. None of us will know if he ever would have worked out because Stynes couldn't wait to sack him and give his job to his mate.

It's obvious to me that supporters, especially demonlanders, have been reluctant to apply their usual critical standards to the Stynes/Schwab/McLardy group. I think it is pretty obvious to most people who give it genuine thought. It is part of the reason we are where we are and another element in our club's grievous problems with accountability.

Edited November 1, 2012 by Hazyshadeofgrinter

[mjt 640]

sorry mjt....who do you mean? Thought you were talking about CW?

jeff kennett

[Devo 104]

A lot of circumstantial smoke and not much hard evidential fire so far. Once we see some incontrovertible proof that a Melbourne Football Club employee contravened AFL rule 19(a)(5) at some stage in 2009 and the AFL hands down a sanction, we can all start getting hot under the collar. The rule reads as follows and I think it is the crux of the matter:

"A person, being a player, coach or assistant coach, must at all times perform on their merits and must not induce, or encourage, any player, coach or assistant coach not to perform on their merits in any match - or in relation to any aspect of the match, for any reason whatsoever."

Until we get some conclusive proof of this rule being broken, all of this stuff in the papers is hearsay. The hearsay is damaging to the club's reputation, no doubt, but it is still hearsay and the club should be strong enough to survive it. If it's all proven and the hearsay changes to fact, then the club rightfully cops a serious whack and we all move on as best we can.

I also worry about how Caro is getting the source material for her stories. Either club people (past or present) or the investigation is leaking like a sieve, and that's not a good look for either.

[mjt 640]

apparently theres more to come in the HUN tomorrow, robbos got a breaking story.

[DemonWA 3,936]

A lot of circumstantial smoke and not much hard evidential fire so far. Once we see some incontrovertible proof that a Melbourne Football Club employee contravened AFL rule 19(a)(5) at some stage in 2009 and the AFL hands down a sanction, we can all start getting hot under the collar. The rule reads as follows and I think it is the crux of the matter:

"A person, being a player, coach or assistant coach, must at all times perform on their merits and must not induce, or encourage, any player, coach or assistant coach not to perform on their merits in any match - or in relation to any aspect of the match, for any reason whatsoever."

Until we get some conclusive proof of this rule being broken, all of this stuff in the papers is hearsay. The hearsay is damaging to the club's reputation, no doubt, but it is still hearsay and the club should be strong enough to survive it. If it's all proven and the hearsay changes to fact, then the club rightfully cops a serious whack and we all move on as best we can.

I also worry about how Caro is getting the source material for her stories. Either club people (past or present) or the investigation is leaking like a sieve, and that's not a good look for either.

good post mate, i agree regarding the leaky sieve investigation....

What worries me is if the AFL go into damage control and feel obliged to punish us to make the public percieve they are doing all they can to protect the integrity of the game

[rjay 24,999]

apparently theres more to come in the HUN tomorrow, robbos got a breaking story.

No show without punch!

[BIG JIM 508]

People should remember. Caro's work is only reporting on the matter. If there is real dirt it is to be revealed in the yet uncompleted AFL investigations. They have said they will not be providing a running commentary. Interesting that McLardy, CS and CC are still quiet. They know they are in trouble and their ears must be burning at what the witnesses have said. I doubt we will see any legal actions despite the posturing of some here. It will be a civil matter where balance of probability will decide the outcome and not hard evidence. Plenty of witnesses will sink them. Plus all out dirty laundry sight unseen will be hung out to dry for all to see.

I think you should be looking at the reality of the situation rather than mindlessly vituperating all over the place.

This may end up being a stalemate which would be the ideal outcome for us but will make CS, CC and maybe McLardy's positions untenable. I think the AFL would be happy with this. If they go so will the story.

Positively. Best thing to happen to this club in years. The stench of tanking will fade and we will be rid of these incompetents.

I don't think this club can move forward until they have gone. The bitterness and divisions they have caused are cancerous. This can not be swept under the carpet anymore.

The anger shown towards Wilson is understandable but misdirected. She is a vulture picking over our carcass, but it is not her fault we are in this situation.

Members of the club's admin have openly discussed their desire to tank in meetings with 10+ people (and it wasn't just the one meeting either by the way). Wilson may not have the full story and she may or may not have solid evidence but I don't think anyone is seriously suggesting that she is wrong.

YOU GUYS MAKE ME FEEL SICK.

YOUR AGENDA IS CLEAR TO ALL DEMONS FANS

[Pennant St Dee 13,251]

YOU GUYS MAKE ME FEEL SICK.

YOUR AGENDA IS CLEAR TO ALL DEMONS FANS

Yes pretty clear Jim most of us nt getting involved with the battle of the boards and just want this other matter sorted before we move on and deal with other issues

Agenda is one thing but these two make me Sick they are dogs of the highest order!

and by the way I care about the players and supporters so no agenda from me

[biggestred 5,108]

we won 32.5 games out of 132 over 6 years, including 16.5 in 2010 + 11.

if we take those two years out, we won 16 games in 4 years - 07, 08, 09 and 12.

had we won 1 more game, we wouldnt have got a priority pick.

someone tell me how that is fair, considering how RUBBISH we have been.

if the club has had to turn around at some point and say, "dont win another game or we wont get out of this hole", id consider it doing the right thing - especially when those are the rules in place.

ps these stats make me want to vomit.

[Sir Why You Little 37,053]

Mark Fine sticking up for us.

One in All in...

[cowboy_from_hell 2,390]

apparently theres more to come in the HUN tomorrow, robbos got a breaking story.

Yeah, remember last time he started to advertise the HUN's breaking story and it turned out to be a anonymous source who said he had heard someone else had heard that we have dropped players to lose. I think it was supposedly at a Canberra function. That story was the worst article I have ever seen and it was made worse by robbo banging on the day before on 360 that the HUN had huge news. Pffft. HUN=Knobs.