Hats off to Saintsational poster White Winmar whose opening paragraph reads -

"I have been subjected to the unfortunate situation in which I share mutual friends with Wilson. At the risk of attacking the woman, rather than what she writes, may I just say she is one of the most thoroughly unpleasant people I've ever met. She is contrary, rude, aloof and comes across as embittered. As for her writing, let's just say she reports gossip, rather than making any insightful observations. If she wasn't Ian wilson's little girl, I doubt we'd ever heard of her."

That's a tad unkind IMO because she is was a good journo in the past. Perhaps the pressures of working on a shocking and awful sinking ship have caused her to transmogrify into a gossip columnist.

And on the subject of gossip, I won't quote White Winmar's second paragraph but I'm tempted to send it to New Idea or Who Weekly. I'm sure they would have an investigative journalist on staff to check out what he claims to be impeccable "thourthes".

PS: You will have to register to read Saintsational.

I really think you have hit the bottom line there WJ

I often listen to the 3AW sports show where she appears on a regular basis.

Over the last year she seems to have total lost her sense of humour

and sounds like she is carrying the world on her shoulders.

I have a couple of friends who have sounded like her in recent times.

The result for them were extended times under mental care.

Hats off to Saintsational poster White Winmar whose opening paragraph reads -

"I have been subjected to the unfortunate situation in which I share mutual friends with Wilson. At the risk of attacking the woman, rather than what she writes, may I just say she is one of the most thoroughly unpleasant people I've ever met. She is contrary, rude, aloof and comes across as embittered. As for her writing, let's just say she reports gossip, rather than making any insightful observations. If she wasn't Ian wilson's little girl, I doubt we'd ever heard of her."

That's a tad unkind IMO because she is was a good journo in the past. Perhaps the pressures of working on a shocking and awful sinking ship have caused her to transmogrify into a gossip columnist.

And on the subject of gossip, I won't quote White Winmar's second paragraph but I'm tempted to send it to New Idea or Who Weekly. I'm sure they would have an investigative journalist on staff to check out what he claims to be impeccable "thourthes".

PS: You will have to register to read Saintsational.

Thankyou for this WJ - very interesting reading. Its not only Melbourne supporters who think "she is embittered"

We tend to have forgotten her article on Sam Fisher which was in many ways nastier than the Swan dig. It will be interesting to see if heis removed from the leadership group as she seems to think. I wonder if she picked that up from a disgruntled former employee like Brock Goddard.

You do wonder if White Winmar's point is right - that's she's under huge pressure to lift readership and that The Age's editorial policy is driving her muck raking. If so they'd do better to employ journos who are respected for their football knowledge rather than one whose understanding of the relationship between administrators coaches and players is looking more and more simplistic by the day.

Hats off to Saintsational poster White Winmar whose opening paragraph reads -

"I have been subjected to the unfortunate situation in which I share mutual friends with Wilson. At the risk of attacking the woman, rather than what she writes, may I just say she is one of the most thoroughly unpleasant people I've ever met. She is contrary, rude, aloof and comes across as embittered. As for her writing, let's just say she reports gossip, rather than making any insightful observations. If she wasn't Ian wilson's little girl, I doubt we'd ever heard of her."

**That's a tad unkind IMO because she is was a good journo in the past. Perhaps the pressures of working on a shocking and awful sinking ship have caused her to transmogrify into a gossip columnist.

And on the subject of gossip, I won't quote White Winmar's second paragraph but I'm tempted to send it to New Idea or Who Weekly. I'm sure they would have an investigative journalist on staff to check out what he claims to be impeccable "thourthes".

PS: You will have to register to read Saintsational.

** I think that you are being far too generous: it is SHE who is being bitter, vindictive and holds a very obvious personal grudge against Schwab which is reflected in her utterances. To blame the institution for which she is working is just a cop out, IMMHO.

Caro on The Crows on Offsiders: "They weren't actually cheating the salary cap in this case, they just broke salary cap rules."

Caro on The Crows on Offsiders: "They weren't actually cheating the salary cap in this case, they just broke salary cap rules."

wtf ? ( I didnt murder him - I just shot him repeatedly for absolutely no good reason)

Caro on The Crows on Offsiders: "They weren't actually cheating the salary cap in this case, they just broke salary cap rules."

Hahaha thats funny. I must tune into ABC iview & check that out thanks...

Hahaha thats funny. I must tune into ABC iview & check that out thanks...

I had to watch it for myself, and she did say it! We understand that the Storms salary cap breaches were worse than Adelaide's but that is possibly only because Adelaide didn't win a flag? What Adelaide were found guilty of and punished for was a salary cap breach. Same thing!

She's made a dill of herself, again. It's hardly surprising though given her Judge, Jury & Executioner mentality.

So, given all the evidence before her she maintains that the Crows just broke the rules but weren't actually cheating and yet, on the same programme a few weeks earlier, she accused us of match fixing.

Delightful!

Breaking the rules isn't cheating......Really.

Chief Football Writer said this on TV...& believes it.

I hope Barry Cassidy & Roy got stuck in to her...

Caro on The Crows on Offsiders: "They weren't actually cheating the salary cap in this case, they just broke salary cap rules."

Quote of the year.

Keep up the good work, Caro.

So what were Melbourne supposedly doing tanking Caro? We didn't break any rules but she has us hung drawn and quartered.

New Carowhine headline:

"Oh they weren't breaking any rules but they were cheating"

Caro on The Crows on Offsiders: "They weren't actually cheating the salary cap in this case, they just broke salary cap rules."

George W Bush would be proud of that little pearler.

Caro on The Crows on Offsiders: "They weren't actually cheating the salary cap in this case, they just broke salary cap rules."

Actually, makes perfect sense to me. What she's saying is that even though they had a 'secret deal' with Tippett, if you add the dollar value of that amount to their disclosed total player payments, the Crows would still have remained inside their total player payment cap. But by not disclosing that 'secret deal', they broke one of the rules of the salary cap system.

Caro on The Crows on Offsiders: "They weren't actually cheating the salary cap in this case, they just broke salary cap rules."

Actually, makes perfect sense to me. What she's saying is that even though they had a 'secret deal' with Tippett, if you add the dollar value of that amount to their disclosed total player payments, the Crows would still have remained inside their total player payment cap. But by not disclosing that 'secret deal', they broke one of the rules of the salary cap system.

That's my understanding too. So she might be technically correct.

Actually, makes perfect sense to me. What she's saying is that even though they had a 'secret deal' with Tippett, if you add the dollar value of that amount to their disclosed total player payments, the Crows would still have remained inside their total player payment cap. But by not disclosing that 'secret deal', they broke one of the rules of the salary cap system.

That's my understanding too. So she might be technically correct.

They cheated the system by agreeing a deal with a player outside the cap, the fact that they were not able to find a player or players to pay that extra cap space to is irrelevant.

And they also agreed an illegal 'trade clause' that might have meant Tippett leaving back in 2009 if it was not in place.

So, yeah, I don't see what Wilson sees.

They broke rules and cheated the system.

The reason the Crows stitched up a dodgy deal with Tippett is to keep space free under the salary cap.

The reason the Crows stitched up a dodgy deal with Tippett is to keep space free under the salary cap.

That's exactly right - they wanted to reserve space to try to retain Davis but that all went pear-shaped. This is now conveniently forgotten by all concerned.

Good point. That should have been brought to everyone's attention ...

The sanctions are a joke. So, wilful and deliberate payments outside of the salary cap aren't cheating?? Nor systematic as Dimwit would say?

And we are to believe the Board of the Crows didn't know about it????

Bwah hah hhahahahahahahhhahhha.

As if.

Caro on the Crows on Offsiders: Start at about 3 minutes, 20 seconds.

So, given all the evidence before her she maintains that the Crows just broke the rules but weren't actually cheating and yet, on the same programme a few weeks earlier, she accused us of match fixing. Delightful!

The curious shape of equations in Caro's even curiouser moral universe begins to emerge.

They broke the rules without cheating.

We cheated without breaking the rules.

The latter is, obviously, by far the greater sin. I'm just not quite sure I could explain why. Or what rules are, for that matter.

Actually, makes perfect sense to me. What she's saying is that even though they had a 'secret deal' with Tippett, if you add the dollar value of that amount to their disclosed total player payments, the Crows would still have remained inside their total player payment cap. But by not disclosing that 'secret deal', they broke one of the rules of the salary cap system.

It's a crap argument. The intention was to pay players outside the salary cap. The clear intention was to breach it or why would you do it? Her choice of position on this adds weight to criticisms of her journalistic style contained in this thread.

Here we go again! Patrick Smith in the Australian today, wrote:

It has become apparent to influential members of the AFL hierarchy that there is a greater need for transparency when the administration and the commission hold their hearings into results of investigations. The next hearing, though unlikely to happen before Christmas, will be into Melbourne's alleged tanking. That shapes as the perfect vehicle for the AFL's first open judgment day. Otherwise it will turn into another conspirators' convention. And the AFL needs that like Trigg does another radio interview.

Why is it that the rules get changed when its Melbourne's 'turn' for something! eg AFL strengthened 3rd party agreement rules when we tried to keep Scully; we are getting hammered on so called 'tanking'. Now an open (public) hearing. (The hearing has to happen as the AFL findings will go to the Commission, after which legal action may/may not occour).

An open hearing is a great set-up for another media frenzy and 'open-duck-season' on MFC by an already obsessed media. I don't like our chances of getting a fair hearing if the media is reporting (and pressuring the AFL) with their daily rants.

The media frenzy worries me more than the investigation itself given the cavalier ramblings with facts by commentators (they no longer deserve the 'journalist' title). If there is an open hearing the media frenzy will become a major off-field distraction and we need that like a hole-in-the-head.

If this is to be another 'drak cloud' hope it is all over before the season starts. We deserve a decent start to the year to let our new team shine without a media bashing of the Club.

Gerard on 3AW last night said it's time for the AFL to put up or shut up on the Melbourne tanking investigation so that the club can move forward and sign sponsors and members who may be hanging off awaiting the outcome. He said tanking is one thing, proving it is another. Dwayne commented that Gerard often knew more than he said.

Gerard on 3AW last night said it's time for the AFL to put up or shut up on the Melbourne tanking investigation so that the club can move forward and sign sponsors and members who may be hanging off awaiting the outcome. He said tanking is one thing, proving it is another. Dwayne commented that Gerard often knew more than he said.

Good to hear Gerard finally say something positive, especially as it was he who triggered the whole damn thing!

Hard to see how we can avoid an AFL Commission hearing as the investigation will find something to accuse us of (even if not tanking) just to justify the amount of time they have spent on it. And because of the high profile they will let it go through to the Commission to determine 'penalties' so a hearing (open or otherwise) will follow.

Healey isnt saying anything positive, he wouldnt know how. He is trying to nudge Bill and Ben ( aka Adrian and Andy ) into action.

its easy to understand how we WONT be brought before a Commission; they wont have anything to charge us with !!