AFL investigation

[McQueen 17,864]

What's all the panic for? The findings have been handed in for review and "it is believed to have found adversely against former football manager Chris Connolly."

The club has no case to answer.

CC on the other hand might..

[mjt 640]

What's all the panic for? The findings have been handed in for review and "it is believed to have found adversely against former football manager Chris Connolly."

The club has no case to answer.

CC on the other hand might..

Thats how it reads to me, im no fan of CC but hes been a great servant of the game, as a player and coach, hope he beats whatever the parasites throw at him, after all he is one of us.

[Longsufferingnomore 1,631]

If any charges laid against CC are based on his flippant remarks then I would hate to see CC thrown to the wolves for the reasons mjt has outlined. If however there is written evidence well that lifeline will get shorter and shorter. It is still absolutely incredulous to me that we alone have been targeted

[Redjacket 756]

If any charges laid against CC are based on his flippant remarks then I would hate to see CC thrown to the wolves for the reasons mjt has outlined. If however there is written evidence well that lifeline will get shorter and shorter. It is still absolutely incredulous to me that we alone have been targeted

If we are the only ones charged and found guilty then so be it but it is an absolute farce if we are the only ones investigated.

Plus they have given all the other clubs amble opportunity to delete and shred any evidence.

[Longsufferingnomore 1,631]

The AFL has commented that:

" It is expected that a final decision regarding whether any charges under AFL rules are warranted will be made in late January 2013" (My highlighting)

Therefore no decision.

[beelzebub 23,355]

I still see this as a process in the journey to a non-finding.

That and the AFL finds that Cuddles tells really lame dad-jokes

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

Who says it's even the same deegirl?

Yeah, where's the birth certificate?

[deegirl 1,577]

Really, someone who created a profile in August with just 4 posts to their name and all four posts have been extremely negative to the MFC.

My spidery senses are tingling!

I'll belive it when I see it

I joined in August because until then I'd stuck to posting on Demonology. With regards to negative comments, considering the season we had, making only four negative posts was restrained. I'm not trying to stir up trouble, was merely sharing what I'd heard with my fellow hardcore demons.

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

My question is that if they are going to charge us for this are they now going to investigate all clubs that got a priority pick? The mind boggles. Gippy

Reminder: this is the AFL we're talking about.

Consistency, fairness, etc ... are they even words?

[Redleg 40,903]

Just reported on SEN Dees found guilty

So much for accuracy and responsible reporting.

[Pennant St Dee 13,173]

Adverse finding - what does that tell you we have witnesses who say Connolly said this

Connolly now has right of reply

1) I said that word for word and it was a joke, on other occassions I have also said these things did these witnesses also tell you this. and are you investigating all things I have said in jest, because they are clearly as ridiculous as these comments I said during this meeting your referring to. The only meaning they have is of a joke or comments made in jest

2) This has been taken totally out of context

You can not write off an inquiry till you first interview the person who is alleged to have said the comments in question.

FFS as others have said don't panic, the sky is falling.

I would really hate to be under the pump or in the trenches with a lot on this forum. And some of you have the cheek to question our players not responding well to pressure

[Redleg 40,903]

Patrick Keane from the AFL:

"AFL confirms Melbourne FC inquiry has now reached stage of evidence to be provided to relevant parties to give them opportunity to comment.

It is expected that a final decision regarding whether any charges under AFL Rules are warranted will be made in late January 2013."

If the AFL was convinced by the evidence they have obtained, we would be charged and then given the opportunity to defend the charges. The fact that they are letting us make submissions on the evidence is a mechanism to avoid charges being laid.

This still sounds to me that they lack the necessary evidence and that they are going through the motions for the public and the media.

[Redleg 40,903]

If any charges laid against CC are based on his flippant remarks then I would hate to see CC thrown to the wolves for the reasons mjt has outlined. If however there is written evidence well that lifeline will get shorter and shorter. It is still absolutely incredulous to me that we alone have been targeted

Agree.

[beelzebub 23,355]

If the AFL was convinced by the evidence they have obtained, we would be charged and then given the opportunity to defend the charges. The fact that they are letting us make submissions on the evidence is a mechanism to avoid charges being laid.

This still sounds to me that they lack the necessary evidence and that they are going through the motions for the public and the media.

yep, but your word smithing beats mine

[Sir Why You Little 37,034]

This is how the process works. It is stage 2.

Now our Legal Team earn their pay.

Deegirl was on the money so i think a few apologies are in order.

[Redleg 40,903]

Adverse finding - what does that tell you we have witnesses who say Connolly said this

Connolly now has right of reply

1) I said that word for word and it was a joke, on other occassions I have also said these things did these witnesses also tell you this. and are you investigating all things I have said in jest, because they are clearly as ridiculous as these comments I said during this meeting your referring to. The only meaning they have is of a joke or comments made in jest

2) This has been taken totally out of context

Don't forget the other comment, " Jimmy has fallen out of bed in hospital". CC being serious, or making another of his well known jokes.

[diesel 420]

If the AFL was convinced by the evidence they have obtained, we would be charged and then given the opportunity to defend the charges. The fact that they are letting us make submissions on the evidence is a mechanism to avoid charges being laid.

This still sounds to me that they lack the necessary evidence and that they are going through the motions for the public and the media.

I tend to agree. This looks like house cleaning associated with Anderson's exit. in actual fact I don't discount that this whole episode is in part associated with his departure.

[Pennant St Dee 13,173]

Don't forget the other comment, " Jimmy has fallen out of bed in hospital". CC being serious, or making another of his well known jokes.

Yep that is pretty much what I am referring to, do they want to investigate every comment made in jest.

From my experiences mountains can be made out of mole hills when persons involved have an axe to grind and can state things to an investigator regarding comments made.

Eventually you give the suspect a right of reply they clarify what was said and the context in which it was said and you realise - Agenda

I like most on here really have no idea what the AFL have but still nothing to make me run for the hills

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

The Afl has obviously got some hard core evidence if they're going to charge us.

The AFL obviously make it all up as they go along. On every issue.

They are also vindictive and arbitrary.

Let's not stick our tail between our legs and encourage them.

[Redleg 40,903]

The probe, into practices employed during Dean Bailey’s tenure as coach, is believed to have found adversely against former football manager Chris Connolly.

The above comment by Damien Barrett if true, is the innocent finding against the club we have all waited for.

Remember the section allegedly breached, required a Coach or Player to breach it. If the above is true then obviously there is no evidence of said breach or we would be seeing headlines about Bailey. It would appear that Bailey has denied tanking and he was in charge. If there is no evidence that we did, end of story.

What are we then left with if Barrett is correct? An off the cuff comment by CC that Bailey has been reported as saying was a joke and that clearly he didn't act on. What then? The AFL charges CC for making an unfunny joke.

[DeeZee 7,389]

It actually sounds like good news.....if all they have are Connollys flippant remarks, i dont think we have too much to worry about

[Redleg 40,903]

"AFL.com.au believes the investigating officers have been applying massive pressure on some witnesses to make admissions on certain incidents, or potentially face heavy sanctions."

Coercion. Very, very naughty indeed, by the inquisitors. They should know better. Tainted statements, wonderful. "Admit this, or you will be punished, we don't care if it's true just admit it, Russia cold war at its best".

[rumpole 515]

So these blokes spent 5 months while being paid good coin investigating a club's activities.

Reckon they might look really smart if they spent that time and came up with nothing.

If they have nothing more than what was written about in the media as their evidence, then the MFC doesn't need a smart operator like Finkelstein to defend it. A first year articled clerk will do.

[beelzebub 23,355]

Very crafty of Vlad, I'm impressed. Not only had to clean up Andersens mess but had to find a way to wipe the slate.

All this and seen to be seemingly placating the freaks in the media. Actually using them against themselves.

Yes Merry Christmas indeed ,,

[Frank Grimes 121]

I reckon the afl don't want to charge us for tanking and that's why they have made it so the decision is in January where it will recieve as little media attention as possible, and will be swept under the rug going unnoticed by the majority of the footy public (I hope)