Bailey denied anything of the sort last time he was questioned.

Why would he change his mind now?

Given that no testimony will be under oath he will play a straight bat.

Starting to get the feeling that the terms of reference for the investigation are implicitly 'keep going until you find something'.

But the actual case for an organised rorting of the system, outsde the spirit of usual 'we're cooked, next year's preseason starts now' routine, seems to be getting weaker and weaker.

I really do hope this blows up in Caroline Wilson's face, I'd hate to see such excessive aggression be rewarded, especially in a media figure.

The only thing recently that has been black and white in all of this, is the crap in the newspapers and the denials from Bailey and Junior. The Richmond bloke kicked one out of his clacker from 50 metres in time on. FMD and yet we have been largely savaged in isolation by the media for how long now?

Tell me our brand and supporter base hasn't been hammered by this rubbery,destructive,discrimintory and myopic pursuit.

Caroline Wilson, Dwayne Russell, Neil Mitchell, Jeff Kennett, ............... morons and potential future sponsors of the MFC.

Moe then likely after a poor half of the season, it was most likely raised that it was shot and we might as well aim for draft pics as whats the point of a few pointless wins.

And yet we still won three more games in the second half than the first.

Does anyone remember that tackle Trengove put on Dangerfield? He was given 3 weeks for it, even with the best lawyer QC and 25 seperate still shots, showing how it was actually where Dangerfields legs were positioned during the tackle which resulted in his head hitting the turf, not necessarily the tackle itself that was at fault.

Even with substantial evidence on our side eg. Kick after the siren. WE WILL GET DONE FOR THIS AND GET DONE HARD. WE ALWAYS DO!

Most importantly is that the process drags past the national draft , which it will, then we can cop it on the shoulder.

My prediction is that we get fined, someone gets the sack and we loose 2 draft picks.

Lots of people talking up Bailey here after he appears to be supporting the club. Could it be that he sees a lifetime ban in the future for himself and is trying to cover his own backside?

Lots of people talking up Bailey here after he appears to be supporting the club. Could it be that he sees a lifetime ban in the future for himself and is trying to cover his own backside?

A more simple explanation could be that he's telling the truth.

There is no doubt Bailey would have been offered some sort of AFL (big brother style) immunity if he implicated Schwab and Connolly. Systematic tanking just didnt happen. But the Kangaroo court that is the AFL will probably still find us guilty of something. I just cant see Caroline Wilson being so wrong ........ well I can but I cant see the AFL spoonfeeding her sensationalist fodder if they didnt want her to use it.

Edited November 5, 201212 yr by Alf Stewart

there clutching at straws by the sounds of it, he was the man in charge of the coaches box, most of this witch hunt will hinge on what he says.

Does anyone remember that tackle Trengove put on Dangerfield? He was given 3 weeks for it, even with the best lawyer QC and 25 seperate still shots, showing how it was actually where Dangerfields legs were positioned during the tackle which resulted in his head hitting the turf, not necessarily the tackle itself that was at fault.

That was in an AFL run tribunal not a court of law...

There is no doubt Bailey would have been offered some sort of AFL (big brother style) immunity if he implicated Schwab and Connolly. Systematic tanking just didnt happen. But the Kangaroo court that is the AFL will probably still find us guilty of something. I just cant see Caroline Wilson being so wrong ........ well I can but I cant see the AFL spoonfeeding her sensationalist fodder if they didnt want her to use it.

She was wrong with Davey

There is no doubt Bailey would have been offered some sort of AFL (big brother style) immunity if he implicated Schwab and Connolly. Systematic tanking just didnt happen. But the Kangaroo court that is the AFL will probably still find us guilty of something. I just cant see Caroline Wilson being so wrong ........ well I can but I cant see the AFL spoonfeeding her sensationalist fodder if they didnt want her to use it.

Pretty much where I'm at, I'd love to believe I'm wrong and get involved in the hype but we're getting done and so will other clubs.

There is no doubt Bailey would have been offered some sort of AFL (big brother style) immunity if he implicated Schwab and Connolly. Systematic tanking just didnt happen. But the Kangaroo court that is the AFL will probably still find us guilty of something. I just cant see Caroline Wilson being so wrong ........ well I can but I cant see the AFL spoonfeeding her sensationalist fodder if they didnt want her to use it.

Why would Bailey be offered immunity?

If the players didn't tank then the accusation is that the coach tanked

Its either the players+coach or the coach so I can't see how the coach could be offered immunity

Following orders from above would be a pretty poor excuse and not worthy of immunity

Besides AD has said any coach guilty of tanking will never coach again

If anyone was offered immunity it would be a smaller fish

I wrote this elsewhere but it's equally appropriate here.

The entire investigation appears to be unravelling day by day with these revelations of Gestapo tactics used to frighten witnesses into changing their stories. My experience is that its rare for everyone who attended a meeting 3½ years ago to have identical impressions and versions of what went on at those meetings. I wonder if the UN interrogator hasn't considered the possibilty that the ones who provided the "vault" scenario of threats about their jobs are the wrong accounts embellished perhaps because they are being told by disgruntled ex employees who have it in for the club?

The original "vault" stories spoke of the so-called dismissal threats as the major focus of the meeting. Now we learn that it was just an aside, a small part of a larger meeting making it even more plausible that it was all a part of Connolly being facetious - that's the man's sense of humour.

In any event, after reading this latest story I'm convinced that no witness should go into a meeting with an interrogator who conducts investigations using these tactics without a lawyer in tow. Notwithstanding that, the interrogation is probably tainted already and these revelations and the leaks emanating apparently from the AFL have made the entire investigation problematic.

Now that we know that there were no directions from the coach to the players to lose games and that is supported by his captain and I would hazard a guess by other statements from actual players then one would think it would be nigh impossible to prove actual tanking took place....

I wonder if the AFL will find that some individuals have encouraged or attempted to conspire to bring the game into disrepute be it deliberately or through reckless use of language.

Methinks likely.

Why would Bailey be offered immunity?

If the players didn't tank then the accusation is that the coach tanked

Its either the players+coach or the coach so I can't see how the coach could be offered immunity

Following orders from above would be a pretty poor excuse and not worthy of immunity

Besides AD has said any coach guilty of tanking will never coach again

If anyone was offered immunity it would be a smaller fish

You know something???

I want you to come for a ride downtown.

You know something???

I want you to come for a ride downtown.

OK. meet me at my concreting plant

(btw what size shoe are you?)

On the basis of the evidence I have seen to date, I would like Caroline Wilson stood down by The Age.

There's more than a whiff of British tabloid style 'evidence gathering' and reporting to the way in which she has approached/written about this issue in recent weeks.

It's been absolutely devoid of sophistication and balance, and the fact that, plainly, she cannot write makes it even more infuriating to deal with.

Where are the standards Fairfax?! Your football editor seems to have lost his/her red pen.

On the basis of the evidence I have seen to date, I would like Caroline Wilson stood down by The Age.

There's more than a whiff of British tabloid style 'evidence gathering' and reporting to the way in which she has approached/written about this issue in recent weeks.

It's been absolutely devoid of sophistication and balance, and the fact that, plainly, she cannot write makes it even more infuriating to deal with.

Where are the standards Fairfax?! Your football editor seems to have lost his/her red pen.

Pull some strings Ron and get it done.

And I think this will be the crux of our defence.......

Hundreds of things may have been said at weekly meetings in the vault all season ,BUT.....

At no stage did a coach ever instruct players to deliberately lose a game.

I wrote this elsewhere but it's equally appropriate here.

The entire investigation appears to be unravelling day by day with these revelations of Gestapo tactics used to frighten witnesses into changing their stories. My experience is that its rare for everyone who attended a meeting 3½ years ago to have identical impressions and versions of what went on at those meetings. I wonder if the UN interrogator hasn't considered the possibilty that the ones who provided the "vault" scenario of threats about their jobs are the wrong accounts embellished perhaps because they are being told by disgruntled ex employees who have it in for the club?

The original "vault" stories spoke of the so-called dismissal threats as the major focus of the meeting. Now we learn that it was just an aside, a small part of a larger meeting making it even more plausible that it was all a part of Connolly being facetious - that's the man's sense of humour.

In any event, after reading this latest story I'm convinced that no witness should go into a meeting with an interrogator who conducts investigations using these tactics without a lawyer in tow. Notwithstanding that, the interrogation is probably tainted already and these revelations and the leaks emanating apparently from the AFL have made the entire investigation problematic.

I could understand that given the AFL Rule about all those involved in AFL having to cooperate fully they may be unwilling to lawyer up at this stage.

However, given this coercive power of the AFL and the reinterviewing, I would believe that the AFL case would fall apart very quickly in a court as there is a good chance testimonies would change under cross examination. The person changing their testimony would only have to say I felt coerced by Ken Wood into saying that.

What I want to know is how this is all getting leaked to the media?

Its as if the AFL wants everyone to know they are trying to get to the bottom of this only to be stoped at a dead end with a statement by Baily saying he didn't ask players to lose, which they knew when they opened the case last time.

I liked the part where it said we will be given 7 days after the AFL meets to come with a case so we will still be able to keep our picks in this years draft.

On the basis of the evidence I have seen to date, I would like Caroline Wilson stood down by The Age.

There's more than a whiff of British tabloid style 'evidence gathering' and reporting to the way in which she has approached/written about this issue in recent weeks.

It's been absolutely devoid of sophistication and balance, and the fact that, plainly, she cannot write makes it even more infuriating to deal with.

Where are the standards Fairfax?! Your football editor seems to have lost his/her red pen.

Wilson's next step will be to pay a boot studder to make statements regarding tanking, illegal drugs and Tory Politicians performing Lurid sex acts with Cameron Schwab. She is a class act worthy of the "News of the World"

Edited November 5, 201212 yr by reynolds46

AFL please don't fall for the trial by media.

Dean Bailey tells the AFL he didn't order players to lose

Am I the only one worried about these life bans? The AFL isnt a legal court, no one is under oath.

Carlton had a simple interview with Ratten and a game review.

But now we have some threatening, court esk, leaking investigation.

Not.Happy.Jan