no problem - the AFL may be stupid but they're not stupid (?). They would get legal advice and the first question would be - if we do X Y and Z to the MFC and they legally challenge what will the outcome in all probability be. Again, another reason why I think this will go nowhere.

yes you could well be right. But the tanking issue must be killed stone dead or the competition is at risk.

Edited October 30, 201212 yr by why you little

Hey Stuie just because another person doesn't agree wholeheartedly with your view of a topic does not mean they "lack understanding" or are "confused", they just see it from a different perspective to you.

I'm not saying it because we disagree, especially seeing we agree on certain parts, but WYL is just kind of rambling in different directions with his argument and contradicting himself, hence the use of the word "confused".

Carro is an AFL investigator in disguise.

Have a look at her current stories.

Melbourne Tanking

Adelaide Salary Cap breeches

North Melbourne concussion testing.

Tomorrow it will be lack of sanctions by the Tigers for Aaron Edwards getting P@ssed in public.

Edited October 30, 201212 yr by Chippy

Here's a direct link to the MP3 file.

thanks

First time Ive heard him being clear, concise and logical.

Very straight forward rationale put forward.

I still reckon theyve had to pull that off air as it cant be good for the Awful ..lol

it's merely a word.

The action took place.

Profound poetry. LOL

Neither Schwab nor Mclardy should be at the club now. Connolly should walk as well. This club is still run by amateurs at the top.

If MFC are found guilty of any offence, the blowtorch should be on the ones you mention.

But the tanking issue must be killed stone dead or the competition is at risk.

They removed the automatic priority pick.

I'm not saying it because we disagree, especially seeing we agree on certain parts, but WYL is just kind of rambling in different directions with his argument and contradicting himself, hence the use of the word "confused".

what am i confused about Stuie??

One is the AFL the other is a court of law.

Both are very different.

In a competitive business such as the AFL, it is the singling out of us as the only club under investigation that stinks, given the numerous example of other clubs having done the same things we've been accused of.

Don't know if that can be used as part of a legal challenge but I'd certainly want the MFC screaming it loud and clear if the AFL hammer us.

If MFC is santioned for tanking then Brock McLean is implicit or he would have at that very time quit the club due to his personal beliefs on the tanking issue. Hang on, he didn't whinge about it till some time down the track ??????? Very sour stuff by him I say!

There are AFL laws that forbid any interferance with the result of any AFL official game! So our club allegedly, has been foolish in it's responsibilty. "IF" this is the case it is another pathetic decision taken at that time by those in charge. Any of those who were involved should be sacked, banned and shamed. Make your bed, lay down in it!

Deal with it everyone.......... and lets get on with copping our whack and trying to create a better all round environment for the whole club.

What we need is honesty, professionalism and aggression on and off the field! There is still a way to go............unfortunately.

I wouldn't be so flippant about the potential "whack". It could bring this club to its knees. For good.

strategies to gain priority picks. Quite straightforward.

You are not going to deny that are rp?

Which strategies?

And I am not denying them, are you talking about:

Season ending surgeries/rehab?

Removal of older players for younger players?

Experiementation with player positions?

What is so heinous to you?

And if you are saying that we should not be punished (a change from what you said a few months ago) then why should those in charge be judged for things that the club should not be punished over?

For PaulRB - this is why wyl is confused. He thinks;

Tanking is bad.

We did it.

Can't prove it.

Should not get punished for it.

Club leaders should go because of it.

^^ Confused.

Intricate does not equal confused.

I agree with his propositions as you have listed them.

yes you could well be right. But the tanking issue must be killed stone dead or the competition is at risk.

The priority pick is gone so we are half the way there - I am tipping that somewhere down the track the AFL will say we cannot find conclusive proof of tanking, only proof of teams list managing, experimenting and looking to the next season - but to remove this an issue in the future wewill do A,B and C ( a lottery as per the NFL ?).

What we have there is a dead parrot.

Which strategies?

And I am not denying them, are you talking about:

Season ending surgeries/rehab?

Removal of older players for younger players?

Experiementation with player positions?

What is so heinous to you?

And if you are saying that we should not be punished (a change from what you said a few months ago) then why should those in charge be judged for things that the club should not be punished over?

For PaulRB - this is why wyl is confused. He thinks;

Tanking is bad.

We did it.

Can't prove it.

Should not get punished for it.

Club leaders should go because of it.

^^ Confused.

hahaha!! Stop talking to yourself rp?

"Nothing to see here, you can all go home"

The priority pick is gone so we are half the way there - I am tipping that somewhere down the track the AFL will say we cannot find conclusive proof of tanking, only proof of teams list managing, experimenting and looking to the next season - but to remove this an issue in the future wewill do A,B and C ( a lottery as per the NFL ?).

What we have there is a dead parrot.

i would have agreed a couple of months ago. But this has dragged on way too long. Something has got to give.

I would hope the MFC are going into battle with top brass silks. Otherwise our survival could be in jeopardy.

Losing draft picks will be a bullet to the heart.

Edited October 30, 201212 yr by why you little

I'd like to see the AFL ensure every team plays every other team by Rd 17 and the ladder order then is used to set the draft order. Then Rounds 18-23 can be played out by each club as their situation dictates, without the accusation of tanking being superimposed.

hahaha!! Stop talking to yourself rp?

"Nothing to see here, you can all go home"

How about you answer rpfc's question.

How about you answer rpfc's question.

i already have. He doesn't like it.

CONTEXT PEOPLE CONTEXT!

The only reason why this investigation was initiated was because of Brock McLean's answer to why did he leave Melbourne. Blind Freddie would be able to see that he was merely avoinding the honest answer which was - money.

Instead he chose a high ground approach but came off as a hypocrite because the dipstick went to a club who broke their salary cap and tanked for Kreuzer - my my what fickle morals.

This is coming from a bloke who tweeted to a reporter that the reporter's mum gave him Aids...

i would have agreed a couple of months ago. But this has dragged on way too long. Something has got to give.

I would hope the MFC are going into battle with top brass silks. Otherwise our survival could be in jeopardy.

Losing draft picks will be a bullet to the heart.

All you need to do is follow it through to its logical conclusion to understand that UNLESS there is CATEGORICAL proof this cant go anywhere. Follow it through to its logical conclusion.

What constitutes bringing the game into disrepute?

A) Melbourne throwing a couple of games OR

B) the AFL allowing two start up clubs to enter the league with less than a handful of players over the age of 22, under-perform to the point most football fans have little interest in watching over 50 games over the past two seasons. OR

C) the AFL constructing a series of rules that put a 19 year old in a position where he has to lie to the club president and in public for 12 months before moving interstate to become one of the top 5 players in the competition when he's not currently in the best 100 players. OR

D) the AFL continuing to provide a "draw" that provides huge advantages for some teams over others to maximise profit and prioritze financial reward over fairness and equity.

Edited October 30, 201212 yr by Goodvibes

i already have. He doesn't like it.

No you haven't. All you have said is that my head is 'in the sand.'

What strategies can be considered tanking, but not be prosecutable, but still be so heinous those in charge should be 'cleansed'?

Which strategies?

All you need to do is follow it through to its logical conclusion to understand that UNLESS there is CATEGORICAL proof this cant go anywhere. Follow it through to its logical conclusion.

yes agreed. But the AFL is often very illogical as it must also protect its broadcast deals and betting agency contracts.

It walks a mighty fine line.

I'd like to see the AFL ensure every team plays every other team by Rd 17 and the ladder order then is used to set the draft order. Then Rounds 18-23 can be played out by each club as their situation dictates, without the accusation of tanking being superimposed.

Actually you provide an argument whereby the AFL itself can be accused of draft tampering as its lopsided and biased fixture provides for an uneven attempt at true competition. Would or should they reinvent the level playing field then teams' position come end of season might well be different and as such result in a different draft order.

Ultimately the AFL must carry the baby for all eventualities as its created and promoted the distortions.

The DNA for any invention or experimentation by any club was in reality the creation of the AFL's meddling and mischievious antics at game control.

Intricate does not equal confused.

I agree with his propositions as you have listed them.

So you agree with wyl that what we did was so terrible that those in charge so go but not so terrible that we should be punished?!

That is some threading of the needle...

All you need to do is follow it through to its logical conclusion to understand that UNLESS there is CATEGORICAL proof this cant go anywhere. Follow it through to its logical conclusion.

current path: