Yes indeed it would flush them out and I hope when it does they are never allowed to set foot in the Melbourne Football Club; ever. These moral crusaders pretend that it's all in the best interests of the club but we know it's about payback and position.

Their names will come out and hopefully they will never again be able to have any say in the future of the club, ever.

There are some nasty, bitter and twisted individuals potting the club right now.

Court will not necessarily flush out the sources. I actually think it more likely the source would be protected. The High Court have affirmed this protection. Though, lower courts have held that a source may be uncovered if necessary in the interests of justice. I'm not sure that would be the case here.

Regardless, I doubt the MFC would want this to continue any longer than it needed to and I would hope that the MFC would know better than to take on a media company. I wouldn't want The Age offside in a town dominated by just two newspapers.

This is an old episode.

While the themes of what happened may give some the vapours I stand by the actions we took and are adamant that we didn't ask players to lay down and everything else is fair game.

Unless it leads to the club being publicly labels as "tankers" and cheats, and subject to an AFL integrity investigation, possible sanctions etc...

To me thats where the actions we took were flawed, have damaged the club, and are yet to be explained to the rank and file as to how we might avoid a repeat in the future...

You may well be right about her agenda, issues with CS etc... and boo to her for that.

However, there is an ongoing AFL investigation into tanking at Melbourne, which CW did not instigate (thank Brock for that). Given the AFL investigation has dragged on without updates from the AFL she (being in the media) is rightfully asking questions, probing , speculating.

But she's only progressed this far through

1. the MFC running a loose ship in 2009, and

2. the MFC, as a result, being under investigation by the AFL.

I don't think we should blame the mirror if we don't like what we see, irrespective of how distorted the mirror is in this case.

We need to learn and improve from this episode, and turning our focus on CW (no matter the extent to which she may deserve it) only distracts from the core business of improving our club.

This affair could and should have been conducted behind closed doors by the AFL allowing all parties to sort the matter out and all to save face, but her Exposure of the matter has blown it up to the point that there will have to be penalties and we will pay for it. The AFL know that there are other clubs involved and they will now have to broaden it to, at least, include Carlton and if it becomes too widespread it will then be an issue for the State Government in respect to betting etc.

She is being fed information by the disgruntled that exist at Melbourne, and have forever, and they are more interested in payback than the existance of the club.

She is doing someone else's bidding make no mistake about that.

I think this will develop into much more than just an investigation into Melbourne.

It be be an ongoing enquiry into several clubs and the whole so called Tanking agenda.

This could drag on another 12 months.

In the end I feel no one will be penalised, as the practice was common,and no hard evidence of teams being told to lose will eventuate.

i agree it should have been investigated after the Kruzer Cup game.

WHERE BETTING ON THAT GAME WAS SUSPENDED DURING THE PREVIOUS WEEK.

PaulRB - in what world is it the role of a journalist to 'speculate?'

Patrick Smith, Caro and many others writes opinion pieces . If you don't like them don't read them.

Do you seriously believe that either of those accusations are inaccurate? Does anyone?

In my view the tanking was ok, the incompetence of the tanking is the worst part.

That is an interesting spin to put on it.

Let's examine the facts, we were in no trouble until Bailey said something at his exit. That was examined by the AFL and cleared. No incompetence at this point.

Next Brock, the boy who wants to give aids to a fellow twitterer's mum, appears on the Sheahan show. Doesn't say we tanked, but the biggest AFL investigation is begun on his say so alone. Incompetent, not yet, as nothing proved.

Eddie comes out and says we did what everyone else did. Is he or Collingwood incompetent?

Libba says Blues tanked. Fev agrees in his book and reiterates it today and even says the players didn't try anymore. He then challenges the AFL, by saying they haven't even spoken to him about it. Is Carlton incompetent?

the AFL basically gives the practice the green light. Are they incompetent? They then fail to investigate other blatant and admitted instances. Are they more incompetent?

Only one club has won a match that would have given them a priority pick and they did it in two different years. Guess who they were? Yes us, now that is really incompetent. How far back has that put us without Nic Nat and Cotchin who we would have had for losing the Kreuzer Cup. The whole bloody administration should resign for that. Oh that's right they have gone, but are still agitating after leaving the club $5million in debt.

Let's discuss incompetence.

I guess I see two fronts in this issue:

The first is the MFC's Public fight on "tanking" - is our fight to avoid sanctions from the investigation, our fight to not be punished alone for what many clubs have done. CW is wrong in honing in only on Melb, applying retrospective logic to events to craft a story (i.e. player revolt at half time...etc). But I'm less worried about this ending badly for us, especially now the Heraldsun has highlighted the actions of Carlton doing exactly the same thing in 2007 and people like Eddie coming out saying we'd have been idiots to do otherwise...

It is the second issue that concerns me more. The internal cultural issues within the MFC and whether we are building a culture as a club that will take us to a flag.

This year we've seen a purge of 15 players, over the past couple of years most of our playing leadership group from 2009 has gone. We've all seen the need and applauded Neeld for this change.

In addition, since 2009 most of the football department has been turned over, coach replaced, Chris Connelly marginalised, etc...

However, we don't seem to have publicly touched on or addressed the role the executive and board have had in the culture issues at Melbourne.

As a relative outsider to the inner sanctum at Melb I don't know who or what or why we have ended up being on the rack for alleged tanking. I don't know who or what or why we've been a basket case as a football team for the last 5 years. But if we've turned over the players, the FD, the coach, then the surely an honest look at the exec and board is warranted? And if CW's persecution of the MFC is the catalyst we need to do this, then bring it on.

That's a bit like going through a speed camera and thinking, it's all ok because the car behind me was speeding too and they won't book the both of us.

Guess what; they will.

She is being fed information by the disgruntled that exist at Melbourne

Ok, so how did the disgruntled get that information and who's fault is that?

From wht Wilson gathered it was a Match Committee meeting after the Port Adelaide game.

The meeting was intended, in the original article, to be the smoking gun as she more than implied it was 'codenamed' and 'secret.'

This isn't journalism by the way, PaulRB. It's unfair extrapolation and we should be exploring legal action against The Age. I don't think we will but we should have a think about it.

In an ideal world Journos would only tell the truth from a perspective of univeral knowing and we could trust everything they write. I don't live in that world, in my world Journos are time poor, under resourced lackies competing for eyeballs with every semi-plausable piece of info or rumour that crosses their desk. Being aware of the world I live leads me to take their writings with a grain of salt.

That said, If the MFC were a well run organisation with integrity then we could get on your high horse and take others to task for stretching the truth.

Unfortunately we have a sordid history on the integrity front including breaches of the salary cap, losing games to improve draft picks...

Funny how people defend their clubs lack of integrity by highlighting the lack of it in others.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/we-tried-to-stop-tanking-20121031-28kea.html

If you listen to the playback at the start of the article, she comes very close to calling Jim Stynes a liar.

She also goes on about hypertheticals and what MAY happen. Shes such a [censored] and I want to punch her in the face.

Im ready to riot.

That's a bit like going through a speed camera and thinking, it's all ok because the car behind me was speeding too and they won't book the both of us.

Guess what; they will.

I don't mind being booked as long as we both are.

The more being booked the lower the fine.

Paul et all. I think we have to step back a tad in order to see the real "nature' of what is going on. A group, whether a coherent association of like-twisted-minds or a more fluid band of nigglers , have set to wrest control of the MFC into what they consider their rightful hands.. Some silly maniacal types must have delusions of import , that they re the chosen ones to lead this team back to its glorious position. ergo..its EGO

What this band of fools does is enlist any mercenary or hack who has a beef to grind and can be useful to their cause as allies.. The cause being their idea of the re-establishment of the MFC ( in their image ) and the method being the destabilising of the existent board and the removal of any impediments to the "new Board"

Who must go ? it would seem Schwab, Mclardy and anyone supporting them.

The events , current and prior are the arsenal for the terrorists. The events of 186 ,debt ,sackings, etc. the 'tanking' , the various crises weve tumbled through and the regurgitation of any and all are the grenades.

Whomever is behind this understands full well there will be collateral damage, that the club may take a whack , but in their mind(s) its all for the greater good.

To some this will seem mightily contrived ; oh no, a conspiracy.!! how loony.

But is it. Since time immemorial there's always been one wishing to covert another's.. Some who cant or wont wants to deprive or thwart those who can and will.

Ive been pondering why so much seems directed at the MFC. Logic suggests and directs me to someone with a motive and the capacity to enlist others.

The motive ? Unlikely the removal of the club, more likely a time honoured prize of control and all its trinklets.

This all seems to point back within the club. There are indeed a Judas or two.

Excellent post and it sums it all up.

I will make a point of not supporting any previous Board member at any furure election should the current Board be dismissed as I believe they will have their grubby fingerprints all over this. If Gardiner is re elected in any capacity I will quit the club and never go to a game again; that would be my tipping point.

That is an interesting spin to put on it.

Let's examine the facts, we were in no trouble until Bailey said something at his exit. That was examined by the AFL and cleared. No incompetence at this point.

Next Brock, the boy who wants to give aids to a fellow twitterer's mum, appears on the Sheahan show. Doesn't say we tanked, but the biggest AFL investigation is begun on his say so alone. Incompetent, not yet, as nothing proved.

Eddie comes out and says we did what everyone else did. Is he or Collingwood incompetent?

Libba says Blues tanked. Fev agrees in his book and reiterates it today and even says the players didn't try anymore. He then challenges the AFL, by saying they haven't even spoken to him about it. Is Carlton incompetent?

the AFL basically gives the practice the green light. Are they incompetent? They then fail to investigate other blatant and admitted instances. Are they more incompetent?

Only one club has won a match that would have given them a priority pick and they did it in two different years. Guess who they were? Yes us, now that is really incompetent. How far back has that put us without Nic Nat and Cotchin who we would have had for losing the Kreauzer Cup. The whole bloody administration should resign for that. Oh that's right they have gone, but are still agitating after leaving the club $5million in debt.

Let's discuss incompetence.

Not sure what the previous Board have to do with anything, do you have an agenda or something?

We were in trouble from the moment we entrusted our completely clueless admin with the professional running of our football club. If they haven't been incompetent, why are we in this situation?

The AFL investigation to date has not been incompetent because they never wanted to uncover evidence of tanking to being with. I suppose you could say that the AFL is incompetent now that it is all coming out but it seems we made it impossible for them to keep things under wraps, despite their co-operation. The AFL's biggest mistake was trusting our admin to not be complete amateurs. It doesn't really matter for them though because they can always act shocked and betrayed and sacrifice the MFC to prevent the heat reaching AFL headquarters.

The penny is dropping for the vault participants that they can't rely on each other to act professionally enough to keep things under wraps, tell a consistent story and maintain plausible deniability. The smarter ones would have known this as soon as Connolly opened his mouth in a room full of people. The penny is also dropping for the AFL that they can't trust the competence of our admin either.

Ok, so how did the disgruntled get that information and who's fault is that?

I would have thought that you would have the answer to that.

I don't mind being booked as long as we both are.

The more being booked the lower the fine.

No the more that are booked, the more revenue the Government raises.

A few more points.

Whilst it is almost certain there was a conspiracy to tank, it is uncertain whether we did actually tank given some remarks attributed to unnamed players. It is stated they tried to defy the directive to tank in the infamous Richmond game. Being a poor side, winning was likely improbable anyway. As they are the representatives of the club on the field and they did try to win then theoretically no tanking actually took place. Different story for the coaches and those responsible for giving the orders though. The coaches were responsible for the moves and tactics though under pressure to follow orders from upstairs. But an argument could be made that they receive leniency or clemmancy for providing evidence to identify those who hatched the tanking conspiracy. If conspiracy to tank can be proved then those individuals should be sacked or resign. The players on behalf of the club never tanked so we the club as an entity should not be punished.

I was always under the impression that Australians detested "dobbing" . Well we clearly have employed some detestable people, who are clearly disgruntled former employees, headed by Brock.

I hope Carlton are next in the gun and can than Brock for his contribution.

Not sure what the previous Board have to do with anything, do you have an agenda or something?

We were in trouble from the moment we entrusted our completely clueless admin with the professional running of our football club. If they haven't been incompetent, why are we in this situation?

The AFL investigation to date has not been incompetent because they never wanted to uncover evidence of tanking to being with. I suppose you could say that the AFL is incompetent now that it is all coming out but it seems we made it impossible for them to keep things under wraps, despite their co-operation. The AFL's biggest mistake was trusting our admin to not be complete amateurs. It doesn't really matter for them though because they can always act shocked and betrayed and sacrifice the MFC to prevent the heat reaching AFL headquarters.

The penny is dropping for the vault participants that they can't rely on each other to act professionally enough to keep things under wraps, tell a consistent story and maintain plausible deniability. The smarter ones would have known this as soon as Connolly opened his mouth in a room full of people. The penny is also dropping for the AFL that they can't trust the competence of our admin either.

Remind me again, who were the CEO's that were appointed by Gardiner? How competent were they?

If Gardiner is re elected in any capacity I will quit the club and never go to a game again; that would be my tipping point.

Cant see how anybody in their right mind would want him back, the thought makes me feel ill

Excellent post and it sums it all up.

I will make a point of not supporting any previous Board member at any furure election should the current Board be dismissed as I believe they will have their grubby fingerprints all over this. If Gardiner is re elected in any capacity I will quit the club and never go to a game again; that would be my tipping point.

Such a die hard supporter you must be.

You sound ridiculous. Of course the number of people you discuss highly sensitive and potentially damaging information with is critical. You would have fit in well in the vault.

It certainly appears they certainly discussed it too widely but it's simplistic to say they should have kept it on a standard commercial-in-confidence need to know basis. A football club is not a normal corporate environment - there's a lot more media and public scrutiny and transparency of activities. If only the Board, the CEO, the Football Manager and the Coach were in on the strategy it would have been very hard to manage in FD meetings and on gameday in the coaches box.

Coach: "Take Jones off and put Spencer in the square with Jamar". There's going to be a schism somewhere - good luck managing your relationship with your assistant coaches.

It was a difficult to manage strategy.

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.

'Openly discussed'? Do you know what 'open' means? It certainly doesn't mean a meeting behind closed doors.

Then you say that no one thinks she's wrong. Of course people think she's wrong. She has evidence only of a meeting taking place, where supposedly priority picks were discussed. That is all she has. Nothing else. She's putting two and two together and deciding that we must therefore have decided to tank, and then tanked.

She doesn't have the full story, she doesn't have any solid evidence, so she should stop making blunt statements implying she knows we deliberately lost games or deliberately tanked, and just provide the facts.

Patrick Smith, Caro and many others writes opinion pieces . If you don't like them don't read them.

This isn't an opinion piece.

Such a die hard supporter you must be.

I nearly fell off my chair laughing when I read this, coming from you it's more a compliment than an insult. Still waiting for an answer to my question, you and your running mate refuse to resopond to that, don't you.

If conspiracy to tank can be proved then those individuals should be sacked or resign.

That is not an offence under the Rule. You can conspire all you like, it is the act of tanking that constitutes the offence.

Here is an interesting question for the viewers Can you tank a game that you can't win? In other words does it have to be proved that you could have won and that you deliberately didn't, for the charge to be found proved.

If for example you played Hawthorn and they were red hot and at full strength and we had a few bad injuries and no form and knew we had no chance. Is developing players or experimenting and not doing your best tanking when you know you have no hope? If the answer is yes, every club has tanked.

This isn't an opinion piece.

Effin oath, it wasn't.

And the fact that the lines have so blurred that jnrmac didn't see that is distressing to say the least.

Journalism is a dying concept. Replaced in its stead is steaming conjecture and supposition.