Who is making anyone expendable?

The AFL will decide who they charge and with what.

It's not like Demetriou will decide to charge Connolly and McLardy will step forward on behalf of the club and say "no, that is not acceptable - the club will take any penalties on behalf of the individual."

There's no "hanging them out to dry" -- there is only damage control.

We limit the damage as much as we can, and at the end of that, if there are penalties to be handed out, those that receive them cop it sweet.

Fortunately, the AFL don't have a leg to stand on with this issue.

But you cannot be exempt from a crime because other people have committed the same crime.

OldDee, as I've posted earlier, that is true if, for example, you get pinged for speeding and the next car does not. You have no relationship to the other driver. But the situation is significantly different in the AFL where we directly compete with other clubs under the AFL's system.

The AFL cannot investigate and punish us (severely) without investigating other breaches which have as much initial evidence as McLean provided. My hope is that they give us a slap on the wrists so that we (or any real journalist if there are any) won't feel tempted to demand a widening of their investigation to other clubs.

Who is making anyone expendable?

The AFL will decide who they charge and with what.

It's not like Demetriou will decide to charge Connolly and McLardy will step forward on behalf of the club and say "no, that is not acceptable - the club will take any penalties on behalf of the individual."

There's no "hanging them out to dry" -- there is only damage control.

We limit the damage as much as we can, and at the end of that, if there are penalties to be handed out, those that receive them cop it sweet.

Fortunately, the AFL don't have a leg to stand on with this issue.

Well there are certain posters on this site who might be happy if a couple of our people were made expendable . And they've intimated that the club should abandon them . That's what I was alluding to .

Edited January 6, 201312 yr by Macca

Sanctions handed down to individuals would still hurt the club if they weren't guilty of anything substantial .

It's still the lesser of two evils. Not ideal, but the club is better off, which, of course, is what I'd prefer.

I have a problem with the notion of anyone getting penalised if they, or we as a club, are not actually guilty of anything.

My issue is with Demetriou sanctioning at that time, what a lot of Clubs were doing - player management. I liken it to receiving a letter from the ATO confirming that the olive grove that you just purchased for taxation purposes was approved and then down the track rescinded that evaluation and got you for tax evasion. Any Accountant/Tax Lawyer would have a field day in Court. What is the difference here. This will teach our Glorious Leader to be on holidays during the footy season.

Bh, Macca , Sue and anyone I have forgotten.

I just see this as a sorry mess.

I wish to god the thing would be bought to an end ASAP.

It hangs over my enjoyment of the 2013 pre season ( which is usually the best time of my year in recent times )

Believe me I have no desire to see anyone associated with the MFC suffer any penalty flowing from this sorry affair.

I just cannot be sanctimonious about the activities of the MFC in 2009.

Almost everything about the Bailey era leaves me with a feeling of loss.

IMO it will go down as the low point in the history of 150 years of the MFC.

In 2009 I wanted to win ever game possible and then work out the draft opportunities.

That was my opinion then and it is now and it will be until I die.

Anything else is poor judgement IMO.

Can it please be over very soon?

My issue is with Demetriou sanctioning at that time, what a lot of Clubs were doing - player management. I liken it to receiving a letter from the ATO confirming that the olive grove that you just purchased for taxation purposes was approved and then down the track rescinded that evaluation and got you for tax evasion. Any Accountant/Tax Lawyer would have a field day in Court. What is the difference here. This will teach our Glorious Leader to be on holidays during the footy season.

Attending the Olympic games what's more.

I have a problem with the notion of anyone getting penalised if they, or we as a club, are not actually guilty of anything.

You see Ron B there are a few who have a desire to get rid of CC and CS.

This is their last and only chance.

Attending the Olympic games what's more.

Representing the AFL - what a junkett/joke

Representing the AFL - what a junkett/joke

To see what?

How to run a world class event.

It appears to me the Poms came and watched us to learn the correct way.

So he was watching us in effect.

yes whatever way you look at it a junket in Footy season.

Bh, Macca , Sue and anyone I have forgotten.

I just see this as a sorry mess.

I wish to god the thing would be bought to an end ASAP.

It hangs over my enjoyment of the 2013 pre season ( which is usually the best time of my year in recent times )

Believe me I have no desire to see anyone associated with the MFC suffer any penalty flowing from this sorry affair.

I just cannot be sanctimonious about the activities of the MFC in 2009.

Almost everything about the Bailey era leaves me with a feeling of loss.

IMO it will go down as the low point in the history of 150 years of the MFC.

In 2009 I wanted to win ever game possible and then work out the draft opportunities.

That was my opinion then and it is now and it will be until I die.

Anything else is poor judgement IMO.

Can it please be over very soon?

Fair comment old dee .

Don't be thinking we're necessarily wholly disagreeing with you - just trying to add some balance to the discussion . You'd have to agree that the singling out of our club is ridiculously unfair (regardless of the goings on in 2009)

I know you've mentioned before that you know of and are friends with a number of Hawk fans . Well , that teams 'List management' in 2004 and 2005 has to come under question in all manner of fairness .

2 priority picks in a row was the Hawks reward (they got to keep their priority picks as well !) The picks they received from those years helped to win them a flag in 2008 (Buddy and Roughy were a couple of handy acquisitions) Tarnished flag ? That's what I say to people and they've never got any comeback .

I have a problem with the notion of anyone getting penalised if they, or we as a club, are not actually guilty of anything.

Who wouldn't ?

You see Ron B there are a few who have a desire to get rid of CC and CS.

This is their last and only chance.

If it wasnt for those two we would be ready to rip into a controversial free preseason, just like the other 17 clubs, wouldnt that be nice for a change.

If it wasnt for those two we would be ready to rip into a controversial free preseason, just like the other 17 clubs, wouldnt that be nice for a change.

you'll have to use a bigger hook than that mjt - lol anyway

If it wasnt for those two we would be ready to rip into a controversial free preseason, just like the other 17 clubs, wouldnt that be nice for a change.

Feel better now mjt?

When was your interview?

Bet you couldn't wait to roll over and bare ya bott to the world could ya.

you'll have to use a bigger hook than that mjt - lol anyway

you would think so, apart from one fruit cake, the truths hard to cope with sometimes.

you would think so, apart from one fruit cake, the truths hard to cope with sometimes.

So if the truth happens to include your favourite player; how will you handle that?

you would think so, apart from one fruit cake, the truths hard to cope with sometimes.

mjt I have no idea why you think people on Demonland cannot handle the truth.

If we could not handle the truth we would have all stopped following the Dees years ago.

The truth has been ugly for most of the last 48 years but here we still are.

Macca I don't disagree with you.

But you cannot be exempt from a crime because other people have committed the same crime.

I have said umpteen times that we we were one of many who used the system in similar ways.

I do not want the MFC penalised and we should fight it to the bitter end.

but please we did not want to win that Richmond match and it does not matter that it is only one game during 2009 IMO.

PS I wish to God I had not gone to that 2009 game.

I could then be so self righteous

But I saw what I saw!

If we were 'tanking' in that game, then why were we leading at full time?

Why did Petterd and Grimes kick a couple of late goals to snatch back the lead in the dying minutes?

Why did Miller kick a 50 mtr goal on the run from the boundary line in the last quarter?

There was certainly a wish from a lot of MFC fans (myself included) that we were better off not winning that match.

But using this match to prove we definitely 'tanked'? That will be very difficult.

If we were 'tanking' in that game, then why were we leading at full time?

Why did Petterd and Grimes kick a couple of late goals to snatch back the lead in the dying minutes?

Why did Miller kick a 50 mtr goal on the run from the boundary line in the last quarter?

There was certainly a wish from a lot of MFC fans (myself included) that we were better off not winning that match.

But using this match to prove we definitely 'tanked'? That will be very difficult.

Is that a serious question ? Obviously the players didn't tank. Even the greatest plans can be laid bare when your servants are desperately trying to win. It doesn't mean that the coach wasn't trying to manipulate a loss.

Macca I don't disagree with you.

But you cannot be exempt from a crime because other people have committed the same crime.

I have said umpteen times that we we were one of many who used the system in similar ways.

I do not want the MFC penalised and we should fight it to the bitter end.

but please we did not want to win that Richmond match and it does not matter that it is only one game during 2009 IMO.

PS I wish to God I had not gone to that 2009 game.

I could then be so self righteous

But I saw what I saw!

But it wasn't a crime. we weren't tanking to win money.

we were simply "list managing", just like most of the competition had done previously for the previous 10 + years... akin to jay walking, but the council inspectors were told to turn a blind eye to those who crossed the road diagonally.

so we did just that also.

Heres the problem, for 40 years we did nothing wrong against our strict moral code, and we floundered at the bottom, with the shark shite.

now we imitate the state of art, & our own supporters want to hang us for finally trying to succeed.

some didn't like it then, & some still don't, but the important thing is we tried, & so now is not the time to stop trying, we have to keep on fighting for what we believe in.

Not a strict imaginary moral code which doesn't exist.

but for a belief in an level playing field,, it's not good enough for commissioners to change the written/unwritten rules after the event, to suit themselves & hang us in the process.

Fight boys fight. learn to fight, learn to scratch, bite, buck & kick, when were attacked.

If we were 'tanking' in that game, then why were we leading at full time?

Why did Petterd and Grimes kick a couple of late goals to snatch back the lead in the dying minutes?

Why did Miller kick a 50 mtr goal on the run from the boundary line in the last quarter?

There was certainly a wish from a lot of MFC fans (myself included) that we were better off not winning that match.

But using this match to prove we definitely 'tanked'? That will be very difficult.

The Kreuzer cup game was close to the most 'fixed' game in the history of sport . We won the game by 31 points and kicked 21 goals so I'm not apportioning any blame our way . All gambling was suspended apparently (?) and being at the game was like being at social footy game - seriously . Best comparison is the NFL Pro-Bowl (especially for the lack of tackling involved)

How, in 5 and a half months , this game hasn't been brought up again by the media is obscenely suspicious . Even just as a reference point ? No - nothing . The selectiveness employed by the media in this whole witch hunt is astonishing . It's what they haven't looked at (or conveniently ignored) is what stands out . Here are the game stats from that sorry day .

Edited January 6, 201312 yr by Macca

Well there are certain posters on this site who might be happy if a couple of our people were made expendable . And they've intimated that the club should abandon them . That's what I was alluding to .

IMO those who want to abandon our boys to fitzpatricks firing squad, should suffer a similar fate.

people who jump in the deep end on my behalf, Will have my loyalty.

The Kreuzer cup game was close to the most 'fixed' game in the history of sport . We won the game by 31 points and kicked 21 goals so I'm not apportioning any blame our way . All gambling was suspended apparently (?) and being at the game was like being at social footy game - seriously . Best comparison is the NFL Pro-Bowl (especially for the lack of tackling involved)

How, in 5 and a half months , this game hasn't been brought up again by the media is obscenely suspicious . Even just as a reference point ? No - nothing . The selectiveness employed by the media in this whole witch hunt is astonishing . It's what they haven't looked at (or conveniently ignored) is what stands out . Here are the game stats from that sorry day .

well said Macca. Couldn't agree more.

The fact that the Kruezer Cup is not top of the pile of this investigation means the WHOLE investigation is a sham.

None of our tactics came close to that one.