The sad fact of the matter is we have been riddled with drama's and disasters, some of our making and some we couldn't control, which means we are the joke of the footy world.

I agree with this (and for what its worth, personally i couldn't care less that Carlton or others have not been investigated). My view is that the dramas that have so regularly beset the club over the last 30 odd years are in large part due to the political infighting and rubbish at board level (which then flows to the FD and admin). This has left us exposed to being investigated for tanking in this instance.

There appears to be a united front at board level at the moment and i for one hope it remains so. It is right and proper to transparently question the governance of an organisation, indeed robust critique is a vital component of good governance. But lets hope, as a club, we have moved past the sort of bickering and sly attempts to destabilize the board and FD personnel that has led to our club being regarded as a joke. And yes winning helps but clubs don't win regularly without quality, solid united governance systems.

The board have elected to reappoint CS and good on them for doing so despite the flack that were always going to get from those who dislike CS (to decalre my hand i'm ambivalent about CS but a 3 year deal is a fair vote of confidence by a board who seems to have finally got its act together).

The board also moved CC sideways over 12 months ago, a clever and prescient move that suggests they were more across things than some might have given them credit for.

Edited January 7, 201312 yr by binman

Is it true you are a moderator? (A genuine question, but if the answer is yes, then you can take it as a criticism.)

Couldn't be - surely.

Some of us believe that part of 'dealing with it and moving forward' is to use the fact that it is we are not being treated fairly to our advantage. That is not 'playing the victim'. Standing up to this is important in winning respect. Winning games would also help!

I agree that we should use all that we can to our advantage to present our case but that does not extend to suggesting conspiracy theories about one club getting favourable treatment because of the make up of the AFL Commission.

I've been here (DL) for a long time Sue and it's my opinion that too many here want a free kick. We are where we are because of the decisions we've made as a Club. And we are in a very bad spot. We've had 6 years of terrible under performance and are only the second club to stuff up the bottoming out process. We, like Richmond, have bottomed out twice. But reading much here you'd think we have been victimized. We haven't, we have just made a series of terrible decisions and they have come from the top down.

It doesn't mean some good hasn't happened in that time but in our core business, which is winning games of football, we are a joke. We need to take responsibility for that because until we do we won't go anywhere. FWIW I think Neeld is doing that.

Is it true you are a moderator? (A genuine question, but if the answer is yes, then you can take it as a criticism.)

No, I'm not a moderator.

Some of us believe that part of 'dealing with it and moving forward' is to use the fact that it is we are not being treated fairly to our advantage. That is not 'playing the victim'. Standing up to this is important in winning respect. Winning games would also help!

I agree with your point .

As an example - Pie fans play victim and suffer from persecution complex's but it's their own fault - they bring it on themselves with their own unrealistic expectations .

We, on the other hand, have been blindsided and attacked for what ? We've already yapped about the 'What' so I won't go down that track again . It could be an easy thing to have a 'Guilt trip' about the events of 2009 but did any of us feel guilty back then ? Many people's attitude back then was "Everyone else has done this so why not us?" . The 'Done this' bit is also open to interpretation . 'Vague' is not a strong enough word to describe all this

If we threw games then where are the betting plunges ? Why haven't the bookies come forward ? Not even a $5 Heath Shaw type bet - nothing .

The AFL 'Rubber stamped' our behavior at the time - fact . Unless there is a 'Smoking gun' then all they have is the same circumstantial stuff they had back in 2009 . Oh , and a couple of 'gags' from Connolly and some idiotic utterances from an ex-player .

Edited January 7, 201312 yr by Macca

Is it true you are a moderator? (A genuine question, but if the answer is yes, then you can take it as a criticism.)

She's got you there Fan. A moderator who has just written some sort of editorial about the right to respect and free speech has no businessdropping in a one-liner like "You are so stupid it's mind-boggling"

Seriously Fan you owe him an apology .........( seriously!)

Subsequent note: OK so you are not a moderator ..... but I'd be careful before jumping back on to my high horse!

Edited January 7, 201312 yr by hoopla

No, I'm not a moderator.

Thank God/Allah for that.

Can't you all get past the vitriol and argue your case without launching into personal abuse.

It is getting tiresome and boring. It is far more interesting reading all your posts without the abuse factor otherwise go on to Collingwood's site where I am sure you will all feel at home

I agree that we should use all that we can to our advantage to present our case but that does not extend to suggesting conspiracy theories about one club getting favourable treatment because of the make up of the AFL Commission.

I've been here (DL) for a long time Sue and it's my opinion that too many here want a free kick. We are where we are because of the decisions we've made as a Club. And we are in a very bad spot. We've had 6 years of terrible under performance and are only the second club to stuff up the bottoming out process. We, like Richmond, have bottomed out twice. But reading much here you'd think we have been victimized. We haven't, we have just made a series of terrible decisions and they have come from the top down.

It doesn't mean some good hasn't happened in that time but in our core business, which is winning games of football, we are a joke. We need to take responsibility for that because until we do we won't go anywhere. FWIW I think Neeld is doing that.

I don't think people want a "free kick" they just want to be treated as equal.....The club has progressed a great deal,stability wise, and has made some great steps forward in the football dept......Most clubs have down periods......Most people on here just want to know Why we have been singled out and no one else.....It's not playing the victim.....It's all about equal rights.

No. Ben is telling me what is happening...which i already know.

I am saying it is being run as a sham that could have been stopped.

Large difference.

If you don't wish to read the post. Don't

Turn it off.

That's my point exactly, you are arguing different things.

That's my point exactly, you are arguing different things.

Your just adding fuel to the flames, LOL.

She's got you there Fan. A moderator who has just written some sort of editorial about the right to respect and free speech has no businessdropping in a one-liner like "You are so stupid it's mind-boggling"

Seriously Fan you owe him an apology .........( seriously!)

Firstly I'm not a moderator.

Secondly I think he is stupid if he suggests BH wants the club to fail. I'm just telling the truth as so many have to me in the last few weeks.

Your just adding fuel to the flames, LOL.

No I'm not, if anything I am putting them out.

Firstly I'm not a moderator.

Secondly I think he is stupid if he suggests BH wants the club to fail. I'm just telling the truth as so many have to me in the last few weeks.

My guess is that you would be happy to see the investigation find us guilty if CS and CC were the only ones to suffer and that your mate Bailley walked away with a clean slate.

A few weeks ago there was an article from somewhere in the media about our interchange 'numbers' back in 2009 . Now, those numbers were on show in ..... 2009 . And the AFL could have acted then - they didn't . They can't act now (they are acting now, but it has to fall flat, eventually).

That type of evidence has to be inadmissible now. Like everything other bit of 'evidence' from that year . What was allowable back then can't be 'non-allowable' in hindsight . I can't see how that type of evidence could stand up in court - and the AFL must know that

This whole thing is a nonsense unless there is a smoking gun .

Edited January 7, 201312 yr by Macca

My guess is that you would be happy to see the investigation find us guilty if CS and CC were the only ones to suffer and that your mate Bailley walked away with a clean slate.

You'd be wrong.... Again.

Firstly I'm not a moderator.

Secondly I think he is stupid if he suggests BH wants the club to fail. I'm just telling the truth as so many have to me in the last few weeks.

But you were a moderator, do tell the whole story not just the bits that suit.

So many have told you so much truth lately...Really?

Planning to elaborate here or in the press?

A few weeks ago there was an article from somewhere in the media about our interchange 'numbers' back in 2009 . Now, those numbers were on show in ..... 2009 . And the AFL could have acted then - they didn't . They can't act now (they are acting now, but it has to fall flat, eventually).

That type of evidence has to be inadmissible now. Like everything other bit of 'evidence' from that year . What was allowable back then can't be non-allowable in hindsight . I can't see how that type of evidence could stand up in court - and the AFL must know that

This whole thing is a nonsense unless there is a smoking gun .

As i said it is a sham Macca

2012-13 laws being applied to 2007-9 business practises that were ticked off at the time.

and some around here just wish us all to be quiet and cop the good whack.

Phew what a long read... So any news from the AFL about penalties for the club? Or are we still in limbo?

As i said it is a sham Macca

2012-13 laws being applied to 2007-9 business practises that were ticked off at the time.

and some around here just wish us all to be quiet and cop the good whack.

Yep, though there aren't that many on here that would want that .

They are here but you've always got to factor in the 10% rule

Remembering that Vlad is street smart and knows how to pull off a deal (TV rights was a goodin') He, like Bailey, could be one of our strongest allies .

and some around here just wish us all to be quiet and cop the good whack.

Who ?

You'd be wrong.... Again.

So you want Bailey to go down too?

Or are you saying you're happy to see CS and CC walk away from this unscathed? Yeah sure.

Yep, though there aren't that many on here that would want that .

They are here but you've always got to factor in the 10% rule

Remembering that Vlad is street smart and knows how to pull off a deal (TV rights was a goodin') He, like Bailey, could be one of our strongest allies .

Vlad also said a few years ago that this club stood for nothing.

Now at the time i wasn't against him saying it because i think it is what fired up Jimmy to get on board.

But if he still believes it we have a long and bloody fight on our hands.

I have no problem with the MFC being investigated per se, but i think it is disgraceful others have been given the Gold Pass to caqrry on when there crimes were worse.

That other clubs havent been included in the investigation is why I think this is a sham and will end up with a "nothing to see here move on". The AFL didnt want this in the first place and in my opinion are working to a game plan to show the world at large that this is being taken seriously.

If the AFL were really serious and wanted to charge a club with tanking then my belief is that they would widen this investigation to include all clubs. The AFL know we are going to go down kicking and screaming and will go legal. If we go legal and are found guilty there will be clarity around what constitutes tanking. Every reporter will then apply this to other clubs ( Carlton first and foremost) - that is not what the AFL wants.

However I think the AFL are minimising the width of the investigation to us only with a certain amount of insight as to the outcome.

1/ investigate

2/ Find flimsy, non specific and UNPROVEABLE evidence

3/ ask MFC to explain

4/ MFC says - meh - tongue in cheek humor, ex players with axes to grind and list management

5/ AFL says - on the basis of the evidence and responses there is not sufficient hard evidence to charge

6/ AFL institutes a lottery system

7/ tanking is dead

Why would you widen an investigation to include other clubs when the club that has been the most transparent in its activity ( and yes you could argue Carlton as well - but six to one half a dozen of the other) is going to wind up with no charge to answer - yes we are copping the pain and media attention but it will be yesterdays news shortly.

If I am wrong and charges are laid then bring on the fink and let it get ugly.

So you want Bailey to go down too?

Or are you saying you're happy to see CS and CC walk away from this unscathed? Yeah sure.

No, I want the club, and by extension Bailey, to be cleared of any wrong doing.

No, I want the club, and by extension Bailey, to be cleared of any wrong doing.

You still haven't said what you would like to happen to CS and CC so can I assume you'd be happy to see them both cleared of any wrong doing and the status quo remain?

You can try to be as clever as you like.

Edited January 7, 201312 yr by RobbieF