All in all a reasonable argument, particularly in regard to the AFL holding the cards. It isn't in our interest to go to war with the AFL. We've got 15 games at the G this year. How many will we get if this ends up in court and deal can't be sorted?

However i disagree with a couple of points. One the idea that that the people you have named are responsible for how this has played out. In my opinion this saga is a direct result of the poisonous politics that have wrecked the dees over the last 30 years and the inability to keep things in house. All clubs have politics at board and rich supporter levels but most are better at keeping things from getting out into the public.

The second is your premise that the club and others need to come out smelling of roses to have a win. In my opinion the AFL will be unable to prove we tanked and therefore the proposed charges cannot be laid. The goals of embarrassing the club will have been met, the suggestion will have been made we did something wrong but it will all go away and no one will be charged. We won't smell like roses but nor will we be forced to sack anyone.

Interestingly if that tramspires it will happen immediately before the AGM meaning Mclardy will go to it in a pretty strong position as will CS.

If the Board and Admin aren't responsible then who is? Ultimately the buck must stop with them. This goes for managing club politics as much as anything else - especially when the current group have made so much of "uniting the club". "Inability to keep things in house" is clearly the responsibility of the Board and Admin.

Re: Smelling of roses - I take your point, it was an exaggerated expression. I just don't think the "no case to answer" scenario is likely, particularly in light of our aggressive posturing towards the AFL and the other details of the case (e.g. Schwab, Connolly and Bailey are already being asked why they should not face charges). I will be happy if the club manages to escape sanctions, even if this means that Schwab and Co stick around. I still think they need to go but then this becomes a separate matter.

Fighting it out in the courts would be a no-win situation however.

Perhaps you should proof read befor posting.

If we can be found to have no case to answer how would they make us insolvent? If this is the case, according to you, we may as well fold as we have no future.

So what your saying is that if we fight it we will go bankrupt if we don't fight it we will go bankrupt.

One of my sons grew up supporting Carlton but now he never misses a Melbourne game so what's you point there?.

You might as well block me because you're no longer of interest to me.

Hazy, why do you bother wasting your time with arguments? Just make your point and move on. This is not a forum for balanced rational arguments. I used to be a very moderate benign poster until I stated my belief that TS was gone in early in 2011. Then I copped a barrage from the idiots that mostly average 20 post a day here and dominate every discussion. We all know who they are. There is no way you can present and argue a diverse opinion with them. Their heads are truly buried in concrete. I got flamed and provoked into retaliating. Hence suspended a few times. Now I don't bother. I say what I have to and move on and don't argue with them. Only answer rational replies. Luckily some of them have now blocked me(orchestrated by rpfc) because I stated my opinions forcefully and ignored their abuse which is now a relief as I don't have to put up with their diatribe.

I don't recall you saying 'i believe Scully is gone'. I do recall the definitive line 'Scully is gone' - with never a shred of evidence to back it up.

You were asked whether you had proof or was it just a gut feeling. And we got nothing.

I don't mind adverse opinions. I think we need supporters who look at 'the dark side'. It keeps us informed. But please don't present opinion as fact.

I will be happy if the club manages to escape sanctions, even if this means that Schwab and Co stick around. I still think they need to go but then this becomes a separate matter.

Fighting it out in the courts would be a no-win situation however.

To say I'm not a fan of smooth is not unknown here or on 'ology.

But we are being targeted as we are viewed as a soft target. Carlton were much more obvious, other clubs just as obvious. Wallet is on record as saying he did nothing to help them win from the box.

Where are their charges?

Screw this, I'm fed up with being the easy target, fed up with new rule interpretations leading to our players getting rubbed out ridiculously. The line in the sand must be drawn and we must fight Vlad and his comrades tooth and nail.

If that leaves us stuck with smooth running the joint, it'd be a slightly bitter pill for me, but a lot better than laying down, rolling over and inviting Vlad to have his way with us again!

Would you care to expand on your views in relation to poisonous politics and tanking?

Thanks

My comment was in response to Hazy saying the board, CS and CC 'did the wrong thing - not tanking, but getting caught out and letting things get to where they stand now'. In my view the poisonous politics is why we alone are in the gun and why things have got to where they stand now. Too many axes, too much grinding and too many people prepared to go after each other to the detriment of the club.

The politics didn't have anything to do with the choice to maximise our draft position (not tanking). Taking that path was standard practice across the league. What CS and the board can be criticised for is not taking the road less travelled and decide to not go for the carrot. For me this would be hindsight I was ambivalent at the time but can see the strength of the arguments that the path we took negatively impacted on our culture. However if they had not chosen to prioritise draft picks they would have been criticise by many and as Eddie McGuire noted it was considered to be good business practice (and still is - as evidenced by GWS's decision to maximise the likelihood of getting the number 1 draft pick by fielding an uncompetitive side against GC)

Interesting to compare us to Carlton. There will be a handful of very angry people leaving the club with MM coming on board and people staying who were upset with how Ratten were treated. There will no doubt be fall out but i suspect we won't hear about much about it and they will keep in house, something the dees seems incapable of doing

Welcome one and all to the Demonland Troll Party.

They're all here at the same time waiting to be fed but please - nothing more than peanuts for this lot.

If the Board and Admin aren't responsible then who is? Ultimately the buck must stop with them. This goes for managing club politics as much as anything else - especially when the current group have made so much of "uniting the club". "Inability to keep things in house" is clearly the responsibility of the Board and Admin.

I agree with the bolded part. In terms of the importance of keeping things in house this applies to those that have left the club as much as those still at the club. Once someone has left the organisation obviously the board or CEO are not responsible for managing them. In this scenario it would appear that much of the stuff that has been damaging has potentially been leaked by people who have left the club.

I agree with the bolded part. In terms of the importance of keeping things in house this applies to those that have left the club as much as those still at the club. Once someone has left the organisation obviously the board or CEO are not responsible for managing them. In this scenario it would appear that much of the stuff that has been damaging has potentially been leaked by people who have left the club.

Ok but then why do these mysterious people have the information in the first place and why are they upset with the current board/admin?

Clearly the current board/admin have been very indiscrete and they have also been very poor people managers. The buck stops with them.

That's just the preventative stuff, then there are things like ensuring plausible deniability and having a media strategy to deal with crises. The current board/admin have shown themselves to be inept in these respects also.

If that leaves us stuck with smooth running the joint, it'd be a slightly bitter pill for me, but a lot better than laying down, rolling over and inviting Vlad to have his way with us again!

Ok, but what if it leaves us in Tasmania in a few years?

Ok, but what if it leaves us in Tasmania in a few years?

What if you don't know your elbow from your ass?

What if you don't know your elbow from your ass?

Shiny elbows; lumpy, smelly underwear

What if you don't know your elbow from your ass?

Well apparently that would qualify me to be the next MFC Chairman.

Ok, but what if it leaves us in Tasmania in a few years?

I'm approaching 40 and have yet to see a board or admin from the Melbourne FC that has impressed me - so if you happen to be an old board member, thanks for the effort, pity you were useless, - if you're not an old board member, disregard.

The petty and poisonous politics, the childish, follow the leader direction this club has undertaken for a long, long time is embarrassing.

The AFL think they can use us as a punching bag as for too long those that ran the club wore it, did next to nothing and carried on as if nothing happened (who can forget the pathetic response to us doing nothing when Beamer got 2 weeks for almost laying a bump - a disgrace and not by the AFL).

Enough is enough, we've never been ran well in my lifetime, are not now, but anyone who is happy for the club to bend over and take it again due to their pathetic little differences with smooth and his mates, is too dam selfish to love the Melbourne football club

Well apparently that would qualify me to be the next MFC Chairman.

Now you just need and stop pissing on everyone from behind the bush and get your ticket in...

I'm approaching 40 and have yet to see a board or admin from the Melbourne FC that has impressed me - so if you happen to be an old board member, thanks for the effort, pity you were useless, - if you're not an old board member, disregard.

The petty and poisonous politics, the childish, follow the leader direction this club has undertaken for a long, long time is embarrassing.

The AFL think they can use us as a punching bag as for too long those that ran the club wore it, did next to nothing and carried on as if nothing happened (who can forget the pathetic response to us doing nothing when Beamer got 2 weeks for almost laying a bump - a disgrace and not by the AFL).

Enough is enough, we've never been ran well in my lifetime, are not now, but anyone who is happy for the club to bend over and take it again due to their pathetic little differences with smooth and his mates, is too dam selfish to love the Melbourne football club

I'm sure that's all very stirring, but what if it leaves us in Tasmania in a few years?

Now you just need and stop pissing on everyone from behind the bush and get your ticket in...

I know I can count on your support.

I'm sure that's all very stirring, but what if it leaves us in Tasmania in a few years?

Better to die on your feet than live on your knees.

Try standing up straight if you get back in. Tall an proud. Remember it's the members club, something I doubt any Melbourne admin has ever realised.

Ed. it's late and hazy has corrected me!

Clearly the current board/admin have been very indiscrete and they have also been very poor people managers.

Clearly?

Better to live on your feet than die on your knees.

Try standing up straight if you get back in. Tall an proud. Remember it's the members club, something I doubt any Melbourne admin has ever realised.

It is clear that you are tying to attack me personally but you are making it difficult for yourself by pretending you have the faintest idea who I am.

I believe the expression is:

"better to die on your feet than live on your knees"

I for one to not want to risk the ongoing existence of the Melbourne Demons Football Club for the sake of Schwab and his mates nor for your juvenile pride.

In any case, I would feel no shame as a Melbourne supporter in letting Schwab and his mates accept personal responsibility for their botched tanking efforts. I have however been embarrassed as a Melbourne supporter by Schwab and his mates on numerous occasions, the tanking debacle being only the latest example.

Clearly?

Yes, clearly. How else do you explain the leaks.

2 quick examples:

Indiscreet - see the Vault.

Poor people managers - see Bailey dismissal.

Do you disagree with the assertion that they have been indiscreet and poor people managers? Why?

But those actively trying to destroy them are putting the ongoing existence of the club at risk.

I've been embarrassed long before Schwab came along. Board after board have been embarrassing.

I won't defend Smooth, but I have utter contempt for people that will endanger our club to try destroy him for their personal satisfaction - as they (you?) clearly count getting even as being more important than standing up to a corporate bully.

Those using this saga to undermine him are even more pathetic than he is.

Ed. ps I don't know who you are, but have contempt with your current behaviour. My opinion on Schwab is widely known here, I will express it widely, along with my reservations and reasoning (where you'll find we are not dissimilar in beliefs - but wouldn't consider doing it now)

I have utter contempt for people that will endanger our club to try destroy him for their personal satisfaction.

And who is doing this exactly?

I have utter contempt for people that will endanger our club to try and protect him out of misguided loyalty, cronyism or selfishness.

I know I can count on your support.

Sure I'll support you at your coming out party.

This will parallel the grand finale of Gossip Girl.

What is he guilty of by the AFL's rules.

Not playing Watts enough?

Fumbling for 3 mins in a Richmond game?

You can try BSing yourself as much as you want, you want a guilty verdict, just for individuals. Don't act like you are carrying on for the good of the club, it's all about him embarrassing you isn't it?

Guilty of what rules by definition, please tell me?

Sure I'll support you at your coming out party.

This will parallel the grand finale of Gossip Girl.

A homophobe too? Why am I not surprised.

Next time you sneak off to attend one of your parties, don't worry about bringing protection - I have no doubt that you will only spend your time trying to insert yourself into people's elbows.