THE WILSON FILE - the arrogance at the heart of the innuendo

[hoopla 418]

I think they want to penalise us, to placate the rest of the AFL supporters re the priority pick, & to exonerate vlad & anderson in the eyes of the public.

But they don't want to open up a pandoras box, so are looking for enough dirt to get our admins to except a prescribed punishment, with out a fight.

They don't want us to take it to court & open up a wider investigation AFL wide.

They want us to Lay down, as I'm sure they expected us to do.

If - as we are saying - we are not going to lay down - they have placed themselves in an impossible position. You can't all achieve all those aims simultaneously.... hence the delay - it's all too hard.

But the longer it goes - and the more time and effort they put into it - the harder it will be for them to justify doing nothing. They might decide that they they will be less likely to confront an earth shattering court challenge if they ping an individual - say Connolly.

In all honesty I would be happy with anything that leaves the club untouched - but I'm not sure the club should abandon any loyal employee.

As far as I am concerned no penalty will be fair if they are imposed without a detailed investigation of other clubs.

[old dee 22,930]

If they investigate the other clubs for 'tanking' just as intensely as the MFC the inquiries would go on for 5 or more years

So what is their strategy?

[a] no case to answer, change some draft rules (lottery) hope it blows away

case to answer, token agreed penalties

[c] case to answer, come down heavy, mfc lawyers get involved, [censored] fight ensues, media love it

[d] case to answer, inquiry expanded to any/all AFL clubs, bad for everyone (but at least fairer)

I'd like to believe [a] but it does seem to be escalating. Can't believe they would go for [d] at least not to same intensity

If it was would you like to bend over and cop it. I wouldn't

[c] would seem a lose/lose situation and disastrous for us even if we came through on top

Oh please dc my head hurts.

Part of me wants it over today whatever the result and part of me wants to fight to the bitter end.

I think there is a two day AFL board meeting going on I am confident we will be one item on the agenda.

Any thoughts that the AFL might be asking the board to approve their action before they start?

[Longsufferingnomore 1,482]

But maybe it doesn't get to court because our fearless legal representation will go in and go through the AFL's determination with a fine tooth comb and point out to the AFL all the bits that would not stand up in a "legal" court rather than the kangaroo court that the AFL have conducted. The AFL in their wisdom decide secretly that their findings would not stand up in court and therefore release a finding of no case to answer. Well, I can dream.

[hoopla 418]

If they investigate the other clubs for 'tanking' just as intensely as the MFC the inquiries would go on for 5 or more years

So what is their strategy?

[a] no case to answer, change some draft rules (lottery) hope it blows away

case to answer, token agreed penalties

[c] case to answer, come down heavy, mfc lawyers get involved, [censored] fight ensues, media love it

[d] case to answer, inquiry expanded to any/all AFL clubs, bad for everyone (but at least fairer)

I'd like to believe [a] but it does seem to be escalating. Can't believe they would go for [d] at least not to same intensity

If it was would you like to bend over and cop it. I wouldn't

[c] would seem a lose/lose situation and disastrous for us even if we came through on top

As noted above (b with penalties imposed on individuals might be it?

Edited November 20, 2012 by hoopla

[old dee 22,930]

If - as we are saying - we are not going to lay down - they have placed themselves in an impossible position. You can't all achieve all those aims simultaneously.... hence the delay - it's all too hard.

But the longer it goes - and the more time and effort they put into it - the harder it will be for them to justify doing nothing. They might decide that they they will be less likely to confront an earth shattering court challenge if they ping an individual - say Connolly.

In all honesty I would be happy with anything that leaves the club untouched - but I'm not sure the club should abandon any loyal employee.

As far as I am concerned no penalty will be fair if they are imposed without a detailed investigation of other clubs.

What if said employee is at the top and seen to have been implementing the policy?

It seems to me that unless the AFL bans a person the MFC have to stick to that person other wise the person could make life very difficult for accomplices

[hoopla 418]

What if said employee is at the top and seen to have been implementing the policy?

It seems to me that unless the AFL bans a person the MFC have to stick to that person other wise the person could make life very difficult for accomplices

I take your point but you could argue that it is not a policy if it hasn't come from the Board - or the CEO. I'm not suggesting it is right - or that it isn't open to criticism - but it might be a little area of grey the AFL ( with the club's agreement) might be able to use to get itself out of a jam

As Connolly is not part of the footy department anymore, his potential to damage the club is limited- particularly if he gets a healthy pay out

[old dee 22,930]

I take your point but you could argue that it is not a policy if it hasn't come from the Board - or the CEO. I'm not suggesting it is right - or that it isn't open to criticism - but it might be a little area of grey the AFL ( with the club's agreement) might be able to use to get itself out of a jam

As Connolly is not part of the footy department anymore, his potential to damage the club is limited- particularly if he gets a healthy pay out

I take your point but you could argue that it is not a policy if it hasn't come from the Board - or the CEO. I'm not suggesting it is right - or that it isn't open to criticism - but it might be a little area of grey the AFL ( with the club's agreement) might be able to use to get itself out of a jam

As Connolly is not part of the footy department anymore, his potential to damage the club is limited- particularly if he gets a healthy pay out

None of the possibilities look good they all give me a head ache.

Perhaps I will wake up soon and realise it was all a bad dream.

[Bossdog 2,002]

I take your point but you could argue that it is not a policy if it hasn't come from the Board - or the CEO. I'm not suggesting it is right - or that it isn't open to criticism - but it might be a little area of grey the AFL ( with the club's agreement) might be able to use to get itself out of a jam

As Connolly is not part of the footy department anymore, his potential to damage the club is limited- particularly if he gets a healthy pay out

Gee I'd hate to be with you in the trenches.......""Just walk out there and be shot will you....It will save all the rest of us"

The MFC would be mangled....Who would want to work for us if we just hang a bloke(who has done a lot for this club) to take a hit for the rest of us......

[old dee 22,930]

Gee I'd hate to be with you in the trenches.......""Just walk out there and be shot will you....It will save all the rest of us"

The MFC would be mangled....Who would want to work for us if we just hang a bloke(who has done a lot for this club) to take a hit for the rest of us......

I think that happened quite a lot Bossdog

My father who was on the Kokoda told that is exactly what they did with the 39th.

And I have read lots of accounts in war where large numbers of people were expendable.

I am not suggesting we do it at the MFC but it is hard to see someone not getting it in the neck

[Sir Why You Little 34,615]

As the coach said a few weeks back..."Bunker down"

This could take a long time. We must stand united.

CC should not be talked about as expendable just because Wilson writes it.

[PaulRB 5,977]

Just hope the AFL make their move before the end of the year, so we can either hit 2013 with a clear runway, or beating the drums of legal action to clear said runway.

Either way we need clear air come Round 1 to give our boys the best chance to be successful, and for any success to be translated into memberships, sponsors, dollars etc...

Edited November 20, 2012 by PaulRB

[old dee 22,930]

Just hope the AFL make their move before the end of the year, so we can either hit 2013 with a clear runway, or beating the drums of legal action to clear said runway.

Either way we need clear air come Round 1 to give our boy the best chance to be successful, and for any success to be translated into memberships, sponsors, dollars etc...

100% agreement

[Bossdog 2,002]

I think that happened quite a lot Bossdog

My father who was on the Kokoda told that is exactly what they did with the 39th.

And I have read lots of accounts in war where large numbers of people were expendable.

I am not suggesting we do it at the MFC but it is hard to see someone not getting it in the neck

I know old dee......But I think to deprive a great worker of his livelyhood to be the scapecoat is unloyal and unfair...

My mistake to bring up a war senario....As I've always hated the comparison

[old dee 22,930]

I know old dee......But I think to deprive a great worker of his livelyhood to be the scapecoat is unloyal and unfair...

My mistake to bring up a war senario....As I've always hated the comparison

I agree

Lets suppose he did something that will get us into trouble.

I have difficulty believing it would be him on his own.

The MFC is either guilty or innocent we either cop it as a group or not at all.

[hoopla 418]

Gee I'd hate to be with you in the trenches.......""Just walk out there and be shot will you....It will save all the rest of us"

The MFC would be mangled....Who would want to work for us if we just hang a bloke(who has done a lot for this club) to take a hit for the rest of us......

Fair comment !!

(............ though what would you do if the AFL said - "Ban from next two drafts or X's dismissal?")

PS: Best not go there: need to keep hoping we'll be OK

[Redleg 37,816]

I am getting sick of this "inquisition", which is what it is. Threatening and intimidating of witnesses belongs somewhere else than an AFL investiagation. Computers now confiscated.

I think the next step should be forceful injection of truth serum, to any witness who has given a statement the investigators didn't want to hear. Are we now living in Russia?

We have had the man who made the famous remark state it was a joke, several players including the captain, who have said they did their best and the Coach admit only to experimentation and list management. Why then if this is the case is this this still an ongoing investigation?

Why also are we the only club being investigated when the Tigers Coach has admitted a breach of Rule 19A to get Cotchin, he admitted doing nothing which is a clear breach of not performing on his merits and the Blues with Fevola and Libba both saying they tanked. Yet on the word of a former player with a less than perfect reputation who has never used the words "tank" or "deliberately lost", we are being subjected to the most intense AFL Investigation ever.

All of this after the AFL CEO has cleared and endorsed our behaviour. I am sorry but this is now a bloody joke and a major embarrassment to the game and the AFL running it.

[old dee 22,930]

I am getting sick of this "inquisition", which is what it is. Threatening and intimidating of witnesses belongs somewhere else than an AFL investiagation. Computers now confiscated.

I think the next step should be forceful injection of truth serum, to any witness who has given a statement the investigators didn't want to hear. Are we now living in Russia?

We have had the man who made the famous remark state it was a joke, several players including the captain, who have said they did their best and the Coach admit only to experimentation and list management. Why then if this is the case is this this still an ongoing investigation?

Why also are we the only club being investigated when the Tigers Coach has admitted a breach of Rule 19A to get Cotchin, he admitted doing nothing which is a clear breach of not performing on his merits and the Blues with Fevola and Libba both saying they tanked. Yet on the word of a former player with a less than perfect reputation who has never used the words "tank" or "deliberately lost", we are being subjected to the most intense AFL Investigation ever.

All of this after the AFL CEO has cleared and endorsed our behaviour. I am sorry but this is now a bloody joke and a major embarrassment to the game and the AFL running it.

Iran might be a better comparison now Redleg.

But you are correct, love to be a fly on the wall at the AFL board meeting the last 2 days

[daisycutter 28,618]

Redleg, i hear the afl have a contract out for a quantity of lie-detector machines

They already have enough racks and thumb-screws apparently

[dee-luded 2,958]

Well I hope not!

We have been [censored] for too long.

Fight to the bitter end is my strategy.

But what if they do find something?

The will find something, just a they would in all the clubs.

The thing is do we have the will & nerve to lay it all out, & bring the whole competition into the fray.

That is what the AFL is most fearful of, & should be.

They're are a lot of skeletons around the AFL, & some are still playing, & some within the Clubs themselves.

[dee-luded 2,958]

If - as we are saying - we are not going to lay down - they have placed themselves in an impossible position. You can't all achieve all those aims simultaneously.... hence the delay - it's all too hard.

But the longer it goes - and the more time and effort they put into it - the harder it will be for them to justify doing nothing. They might decide that they they will be less likely to confront an earth shattering court challenge if they ping an individual - say Connolly.

In all honesty I would be happy with anything that leaves the club untouched - but I'm not sure the club should abandon any loyal employee.

As far as I am concerned no penalty will be fair if they are imposed without a detailed investigation of other clubs.

Totally agree hoopla, if we leave one of our mates behind for the dogs to nor on, its one too many.

All for one, & one for all !

[Redleg 37,816]

This is the last straw for me. I thought she had some credibility, but I won't believe a word she writes from now on (assuming I'm bothered to read it). She is either a fool, in thrall of someone at Carlton or trying to insert the 'suggestion' by the underhand method of saying no one has made it. Either way, she should hang her head in shame. Where is the Age editor?

Agree Sue. You actually only need to ask one question to see if players money should be in the salary cap.

To Visy I would ask " how many players from other clubs get the same deal as the 15 Blues players, including the massive amount for Judd from your company?

It's the former Carlton President's company and now the Vice President's.

Give me a break. Give them as much as they want, but it goes in the salary cap, where it belongs.

[hoopla 418]

I am getting sick of this "inquisition", which is what it is. Threatening and intimidating of witnesses belongs somewhere else than an AFL investiagation. Computers now confiscated.

I think the next step should be forceful injection of truth serum, to any witness who has given a statement the investigators didn't want to hear. Are we now living in Russia?

We have had the man who made the famous remark state it was a joke, several players including the captain, who have said they did their best and the Coach admit only to experimentation and list management. Why then if this is the case is this this still an ongoing investigation?

Why also are we the only club being investigated when the Tigers Coach has admitted a breach of Rule 19A to get Cotchin, he admitted doing nothing which is a clear breach of not performing on his merits and the Blues with Fevola and Libba both saying they tanked. Yet on the word of a former player with a less than perfect reputation who has never used the words "tank" or "deliberately lost", we are being subjected to the most intense AFL Investigation ever.

All of this after the AFL CEO has cleared and endorsed our behaviour. I am sorry but this is now a bloody joke and a major embarrassment to the game and the AFL running it.

Your point is well made ................ and totally valid

It is a disgrace that we have been targeted the way we have .If they eventually clear us - will they compensate us for the disruption to our operation?

It is outrageous that we are the only club under investigation. If Wilson had half an unbiased brain - she'd be hammering away at that fundamental point right now

[Bossdog 2,002]

I am unaware of any rule that forces any employee to talk to the AFL investigators........Even in the court system you are not obliged to say anything unless you wish to do so....

I don't think the methods of the investigators are even condoned by Police forces around Aust...(Maybe 20 years ago)

The AFL had better be very careful ......Also did they get warrants for the computers taken???

The NRL when investigating Storm did things correctly....

[Redleg 37,816]

I am unaware of any rule that forces any employee to talk to the AFL investigators........Even in the court system you are not obliged to say anything unless you wish to do so....

I think there is a rule that AFL licenced personnel, players, coaches, officials etc, must co-operate with an investigation.

Co-operation doesn't mean putting up with threats and intimidation though. Disgraceful conduct by the AFL investigators if true.

[dee-luded 2,958]

Your point is well made ................ and totally valid

It is a disgrace that we have been targeted the way we have .If they eventually clear us - will they compensate us for the disruption to our operation?

It is outrageous that we are the only club under investigation. If Wilson had half an unbiased brain - she'd be hammering away at that fundamental point right now

That may not Suit/fit her contacts though, & may anger them.

She's playing the game, they're game.

"tools of the trade"