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 !!

Do you really think that after all this time and media baying that they won't trump up some 'charge', albeit not 'tanking' just to save face? Nah, we won't be let off with an easy 'its all sweet folks' type of comment from the AFL. The President wouldn't be pushing (rightly) so hard on the 'we will defend our honour' if the AFL isn't up to something.

What's more I don't trust the very self-serving AFL! Nonetheless, really hope you are right and the findings won't be referred to the AFL Commission.

Edited December 4, 201212 yr by Lucifer's Hero

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.

Lol, when have we ever had a decent start to the year?

But I'm happy to see "alleged tanking" rather than "Demons tanked".

You have to remember that the media is driving this, but at the end of the day they dont decide, and if the Tippitt and Adelaide salary cap precedent is any measure the AFL is becoming more conservative and would rather punish the individual people involved (if any), not the club.

Plus add AD's original statements and not wanting to look like an idiot.

Re the dark cloud refer to MN's recent comment about tanking, why would an investigation into something that happened 3 years ago affect their training

Do you really think that after all this time and media baying that they won't trump up some 'charge', albeit not 'tanking' just to save face? Nah, we won't be let off with an easy 'its all sweet folks' type of comment from the AFL. The President wouldn't be pushing (rightly) so hard on the 'we will defend our honour' if the AFL isn't up to something.

What's more I don't trust the very self-serving AFL! Nonetheless, really hope you are right and the findings won't be referred to the AFL Commission.

I see quite a difference between the crows affair and Us. With Adelaide they clearly broke a rule. everyone can see it, not just the transgression but you can read up and find the rule broken. Its a cinch.

With us there is no rule. With the whole tanking fiasco what there essentially is , is a situation whereby the Boss ( Vlad ) has upteen times categorically denied it exists and hes also stated on numerous occasions that he and the AFL are fine with the position that Melbourne has taken.

what we then have is a league of very ordinary folk attempting to work their own agenda and get Vlad to recind his original stance. This just aint going to happen. Demetriou just doesnt back down, he doesnt change his mind. What he does and has done is to then visit the items in question and subtlely change things so as not to allow such instances to revisit him. He needs to stay in control and I cant see for one minute hes going to allow the likes of trollop Wilson or twoface healy run his game.

Whether the AFL is up to something or not Mclardy is doing the wise thing by showing the armour and battle flags. Its an old staging trick. it of itself doesnt mean Vlad is actually up to something it just postulates for all that we ( MFC ) wont be taking any sh!t from anyone anytime soon. This is as much a flying the flag to rout the like of Wilson and co as it is anything.

This for mine is an elaborate charade being played out by the AFL to have it look like its back in control etc. The ONLY finding possible that can be tabled is that there were circumstances prevailing that allowed impressions to be had that things werent all kosher, not that it wasnt ( cough ) but it might have appeared to be so the league has taken steps to prevent this type of interpretation from arising again.

Amen , the End

I see quite a difference between the crows affair and Us. With Adelaide they clearly broke a rule. everyone can see it, not just the transgression but you can read up and find the rule broken. Its a cinch.

With us there is no rule. With the whole tanking fiasco what there essentially is , is a situation whereby the Boss ( Vlad ) has upteen times categorically denied it exists and hes also stated on numerous occasions that he and the AFL are fine with the position that Melbourne has taken.

what we then have is a league of very ordinary folk attempting to work their own agenda and get Vlad to recind his original stance. This just aint going to happen. Demetriou just doesnt back down, he doesnt change his mind. What he does and has done is to then visit the items in question and subtlely change things so as not to allow such instances to revisit him. He needs to stay in control and I cant see for one minute hes going to allow the likes of trollop Wilson or twoface healy run his game.

Vlad even rang Schwab to congratulate him and stick to his guns re our list experimentation. If that ain't explicit approval what is?

From the Hun this am: "The AFL's concern centres on a comment from then football manager Chris Connolly which former coach Dean Bailey is known to believe wes a comedic throwaway line in a two hour match committee meeting."

That's it?

That's all ya got?

The article is by Jon Ralph which is encouraging since he was the one that corrected Caro's inaccuracies over The Vault - he pointed out it was a building, not a meeting - and over CC's comment - he pointed out it was an aside in a much longer meeting called for another purpose, whereas she suggested it was the title of a lecture.

From the Hun this am: "The AFL's concern centres on a comment from then football manager Chris Connolly which former coach Dean Bailey is known to believe wes a comedic throwaway line in a two hour match committee meeting."

That's it?

That's all ya got?

The article is by Jon Ralph which is encouraging since he was the one that corrected Caro's inaccuracies over The Vault - he pointed out it was a building, not a meeting - and over CC's comment - he pointed out it was an aside in a much longer meeting called for another purpose, whereas she suggested it was the title of a lecture.

One thing - she said that the 'aside' was an actual threat to people working for the MFC that they will lose their jobs if we continued to win.

One thing - she said that the 'aside' was an actual threat to people working for the MFC that they will lose their jobs if we continued to win.

My point is she suggested that aside was the purpose of the meeting when clearly it was not. Nor was it a threat to anyone's job.

Clear now?

Vlad even rang Schwab to congratulate him and stick to his guns re our list experimentation. If that ain't explicit approval what is?

Perhaps the AFL should be investigating Andrew Demetriou's involvement in tanking, sorry, alleged tanking, instead of Melbourne FC.

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.

The important point here being lost in the alleged tanking debate is the transparency of the AFL's processes. While I'm satisfied investigations - whether it is into allegations of tanking, draft tampering, salary cap breaches or players betting on football matches - should be done behind closed doors, I'm not so sure about the Commission's determinations on these matters. If it's good enough for our criminal and civil court processes to be conducted in public, perhaps it's time for AFL deliberations also to be. I accept that matters involving personal matters should be kept private, but I'm not so comfortable that matters involving the actions and behaviours of clubs should be.

The Press always argue for open processes, makes their job of grabbing juicy sound bites out of context and creating "stories" so much easier than having to research, interview and write stories with substance.

Problem is in an open process the allegations and lies so reported by an irresponsible grandstanding media rapidly turns fictions into fact, further damaging the reputation of any clubs being investigated... I.e. the Witch hunt.

Edited December 5, 201212 yr by PaulRB

Demetriou having a Press Conference at 12.15pm today (5 December) and The Age is tweeting that Caro is about to break a "big" AFL story.

Caro claims Adrian Anderson has quit.

From the Hun this am: "The AFL's concern centres on a comment from then football manager Chris Connolly which former coach Dean Bailey is known to believe wes a comedic throwaway line in a two hour match committee meeting."

That's it?

That's all ya got?

The article is by Jon Ralph which is encouraging since he was the one that corrected Caro's inaccuracies over The Vault - he pointed out it was a building, not a meeting - and over CC's comment - he pointed out it was an aside in a much longer meeting called for another purpose, whereas she suggested it was the title of a lecture.

Anyone who has been in the same room as Connolly (and I will assume that AD has at some time) would understand that he is highly likely to make light hearted comments that could easily be taken out of context if not heard first hand.

He simply enjoys working a crowd.

Caro claims Adrian Anderson has quit.

I was worried it was going to be something important (involving us) for a second there.

I was worried it was going to be something important (involving us) for a second there.

The conspiracy theorists might like to wonder whether Anderson's departure is involuntary and linked to criticism of his handling of the tanking investigation in 2009. I suspect it's more likely that after 9 years he's decided he wants a change. Perhaps he'll go back to the law.

I was worried it was going to be something important (involving us) for a second there.

The conspiracy theories will start soon. It says he's been thinking of it for a few months now. Caroline Wilson reports that he has been in discussion with Demetriou and the AFL Commission.

Twilight zone stuff ^ LDC. Thinking alike.

I wonder if it will throw a spanner in the works of the investigation.

Caro claims Adrian Anderson has quit.

How will the game survive?

There is speculation he is off to NMFC.

On the thread topic, I don't think we do ourselves any favours using words like "trollop".

Just the facts should do us in this instance.

I wonder if it will throw a spanner in the works of the investigation.

Let's for just a minute assume it has. Anderson interviewed Bailey for a few minutes and was satisfied and cleared him of any wrongdoing (so called tanking).

If Anderson has taken a fall for incompetence or lack of thoroughness, shouldn't Andrew Demetriou be under the microscope too?

Anyway, on topic...Wilson writes...:

The move comes as AFL auditors continue to investigate the Melbourne Football Club for deliberately forfeiting games to gain early draft picks in 2009 and follows last Friday's heavy sanctions handed down to the Adelaide Football Club, key Crows officials and former player Kurt Tippett.

Let's for just a minute assume it has. Anderson interviewed Bailey for a few minutes and was satisfied and cleared him of any wrongdoing (so called tanking).

If Anderson has taken a fall for incompetence or lack of thoroughness, shouldn't Andrew Demetriou be under the microscope too?

Anyway, on topic...Wilson writes...:

What you say makes sense, and as such I would be surprised if his resigning were due to his handling of the investigation into the alleged tanking.

As for Caro mentioning the Dees in her article, that was just her daily swipe at the MFC; nothing to worry about and no new info from her, as usual.

Caro claims Adrian Anderson has quit.

Then presumably he hasn't !

The Press always argue for open processes, makes their job of grabbing juicy sound bites out of context and creating "stories" so much easier than having to research, interview and write stories with substance.

Problem is in an open process the allegations and lies so reported by an irresponsible grandstanding media rapidly turns fictions into fact, further damaging the reputation of any clubs being investigated... I.e. the Witch hunt.

This is the whole point of my original post. Nicely summarised PaulRB!

What you say makes sense, and as such I would be surprised if his resigning were due to his handling of the investigation into the alleged tanking.

As for Caro mentioning the Dees in her article, that was just her daily swipe at the MFC; nothing to worry about and no new info from her, as usual.

She can't help herself, can she...the troll.

All he had to do was not forget the donuts and he had it made .Poor guy .