Yeah, where's the birth certificate?

Donald Trump, is that you?

I'm in the Insurance business and one of my mates in the industry is a Surveyor, it's his job to determine the suitability or otherwise of a risk and to recommend whether his company should accept or decline cover. He told me many years ago that if he looked at a risk, even if it was tip top, he would report some minor infringement of Fire regulations or Safety because if he didn't his employer would think he hadn't done his job.

These clowns have spent more than 6 months investigating this and I would imagine that they have determined that there must be a "sacrificial lamb" so they look like they've done their job.

I hope the club defend any employee of the club that's put under the pump, if we don't we will look like we are as weak as [censored] and as guilty as hell.

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.

Well done AGAIN Deegirl.

Disagree - If you are investigated and they believe there is strong evidence then you are firstly CHARGED with a crime - you are not guilty unless you plead guilty - you have every right to defend yourself against the charges. Then if you are found guilty, you can appeal the decision.

Its not bleating - its called justice.

Now none of us know what evidence has been uncovered - if the investigators have found a manual entitled "a blueprint for not winning more than 5 games and landing a priority pick" - then you plead guilty to lessen the penalty.

All I have heard so far is lots of subjective postulating and very little concrete evidence - if there is nothing concrete then you absolutely fight it.

So to you, bring back powell and dr Gonzo - I am sure that if the club is CHARGED they will have an opportunity to weigh up the evidence and decide whether or not it is strong.

Until the investigators put their cards on the table we are all guessing but rule one - don't throw you in the towel until you know what the opposition has lined up against you.

apologies, I should have been clearer - my comment was based on the assumption that if they have indeed found us guilty than they presumably have the required evidence to do so.. let's not forget they are the investigator but also the judge and jury. If an announcement is made that we are being punished then i think it is fair to say the case is a fait accompli and we can't mount an argument from there

There seems to be some confusion here but this report from the Herald Sun AFL asks Melbourne Demons to respond to tanking claims from 2009 season states that no charges have been laid against the club or any individual but evidence that has been gathered during the investigation will be put to "the relevant parties to give them an opportunity to comment."

There may very well be no charges laid at all depending on the evidence and the comments/explanations of the club and/or any of the individuals involved. This is a far cry from what deegirl maintained in the OP or what Damien Barrett claimed in his tweet several pages back.

Things could change over time but I have yet to see anything that resembles the sort of evidence necessary to amount to a breach of AFL rules of tanking as they have been interpreted by high ranking AFL officials over recent years. If evidence existed that was strong enough to sustain a charge against the club, I believe that charges would already have been laid.

This is yet another storm in the tanking teacup and it's time to go back to our Christmas parties and other end of year activities.

Let me get my head around this. An anonymous poster (as are we all) claims to have “sources” that have given her an exclusive bombshell concerning the MFC. This source is apparently superior to any that the mainstream media have since they have made no comment. It also apparent that Caro, who would give her left [censored] for this exclusive, has been scooped.

Remarkably this rumour draws around 100 responses many of which give it credence.

If that isn't silly enough, some are discussing what penalty we will get.

You have got to be kidding me!

as you must have read about 30 times so far the poster in question has runs on the board, which negates everything you are saying

This is yet another storm in the tanking teacup and it's time to go back to our Christmas parties and other end of year activities.

*cracks another beer*

If ever you wanted any evidence that Damian Barratt gets his stories from D'Land this is it. There is nothing new in the puff piece he wrote as usual.

This is normal procedure. AFL has finalised its investigation and gathered its evidence. It presents that to Melbourne that has 3 weeks to respond.

IF, after that, they believe there is a case to answer they will charge the club with some rule infraction. We will then have several options available to us to fight any said charges.

Its time to chill and enjoy Xmas...

We circle the wagons and dig in. I still think if all they have is an off the cuff comment, its pretty lame

When in the past, known clubs that set the std before our turn came. There are statements to the media openingly admitting their intentions or admitted to putting the cue in the rack. This is what has gets me pi$$ed off, more than the AFL doing an investigation on us.

They cant use us as the scapegoat, without charging the other clubs that already have admitted to their sins. A level playing field for all.

They give us a slap over the wrist,or they go all out on us and past culprits. I would be disappointed if any member of the MFC is hung out to dry over this. Hope commonsense prevails, we get a kick up the bum, and its put to bed.

apologies, I should have been clearer - my comment was based on the assumption that if they have indeed found us guilty than they presumably have the required evidence to do so.. let's not forget they are the investigator but also the judge and jury. If an announcement is made that we are being punished then i think it is fair to say the case is a fait accompli and we can't mount an argument from there

Remember C&B that there are several avenues the MFC, or any other club, can pursue in regards to the ruling of the AFL.

So far there it is obvious that this case is as water tight as the Titanic.

They are the judge and jury in the preliminary routine procedures, the are not however the executioner (ie have the final say).

Just because there a rumours that they want to press charges doesn't automatically mean we should roll over.

Fevola:

"You could tell in the rooms," Fevola said of the Round 22 loss to Melbourne.

"I didn't play that last game either. I had my finger done. I left at quarter time. I didn't even stay. I was home at half-time and listened to the radio.

"We didn't want to win. I always say to people that when you look at that game, were we tanking?

"We would tag Travis Johnstone every time we played them, because Ratts (coach Brett Ratten) came from Melbourne (as an assistant coach) - and Johnstone had 42 touches.

"We tagged him every single time we played him. (Heath Scotland) had a few touches as well. But they didn't play on each other.

"If we were serious about it, we would have tagged him."

FORMER AFL star Brendan Fevola has reignited the tanking furore, claiming Carlton took steps to make it "more difficult for us to win games" as the 2007 season drew to a close.

In his new book, Fev, In My Own Words, Fevola said the Blues were put in a "crazy situation", where they benefited from losing by gaining a priority draft pick for ruckman Matthew Kreuzer.

The two-time Coleman Medallist said the club took "initiatives" such as asking players to have surgeries and making unusual match-ups.

"It did seem like the club did a lot of things that made it more difficult for us to win games," Fevola, who yesterday kicked 18 goals in an exhibition match in Tasmania, wrote.

"Often there was banter on the field about tanking," Fevola has said in the book.

"I remember one incident in our game against Essendon in round 20. We kicked four goals in the second quarter and were 21 points up when the half-time siren sounded.

"As I started walking towards the rooms, my opponent, Mal Michael, turned to me and said, 'What are you blokes doing? You don't want to win this game.' I smiled and said to him, 'Yeah, I don't think we'll win, mate.'

"Sure enough, we ended up losing by 10 points."

Liberatore:

FORMER Carlton assistant coach Tony Liberatore has accused the club of "tanking" matches at the end of last season. The Blues lost their final 11 matches in 2007, ensuring they won few enough matches to earn a priority national draft pick, which they used to pick up talented young ruckman Matthew Kreuzer. Liberatore, who was part of the Blues coaching staff at the time, told the Footy Show last night that winning "wasn't the be all and end all'' for the club during the final matches of the year.

Asked if he felt that constituted tanking, he said: "I would have to say yes.'' The AFL will interview Tony Liberatore next week over tanking claims made against Carlton, but say the former Blues assistant will need to produce a specific allegation to prompt an investigation.

That appears unlikely, as Liberatore has already admitted coaching staff never talked about tanking and there was never any directive to lose from Blues officials. AFL chief executive Andrew Demetriou said that from what he had read of Liberatore's comments, made on the Nine Network's AFL Footy Show, there was nothing that would warrant an investigation. "If he put a specific allegation to us about the Carlton Football Club then we would go and speak to the Carlton Football Club and look into it," Demetriou said.

Asked what sort of allegation would be required, Demetriou said: "If someone at the football club said to Tony Liberatore, directed him to do A, B, C, D to lose the game, that's a really serious matter."

The Blues strongly defended themselves against Liberatore's claims and said they would consider legal action.

Liberatore said the club made dubious team selections and positional moves in the final games of last season, in what he believed amounted to tanking.

Amazing Carlton aren't being investigated with two insiders claiming the above. Would hope Melbourne raises this as well...

Why is there an investigation even??? What 'evidence' prompted this investigation?? McLean's comments? Is that it?? Seems pretty tame compared to the Carlton comments yet we are under the gun?? DOesn't make sense to me...

as you must have read about 30 times so far the poster in question has runs on the board, which negates everything you are saying

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

Read more: http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-premiership/afl-asks-melbourne-demons-to-respond-to-evidence-which-could-lead-to-them-being-charged-with-tanking/story-e6frf3e3-1226540669885#ixzz2FUflG4GA

Yes. I can read. Apparently youcannot. Talk to me in late January 2013.

The Australian Open starts in little more than 3 weeks......what odds an announcement to finally come of age during peak ratings of this event, an opportune time to sweep this mess under the carpet.

Nothing new to see from todays news.

Deegirl is always on the money. Hopefully the reaction from some of the clowns on here doesn't prevent her from sharing info in the future. I wouldn't give ya's a cracker.

I hope we fight it tooth and nail.

For those who say we should bend over to the AFL for a lighter penalty - thats not an option.

We have to make a stand, even if the penalty will be stiff, we can't rely on the AFL to look after us -

we are the wounded dog and we shouldn't just lie there and let them kick us while we are down.

Go Dees.

I'm in the Insurance business and one of my mates in the industry is a Surveyor, it's his job to determine the suitability or otherwise of a risk and to recommend whether his company should accept or decline cover. He told me many years ago that if he looked at a risk, even if it was tip top, he would report some minor infringement of Fire regulations or Safety because if he didn't his employer would think he hadn't done his job.

These clowns have spent more than 6 months investigating this and I would imagine that they have determined that there must be a "sacrificial lamb" so they look like they've done their job.

I hope the club defend any employee of the club that's put under the pump, if we don't we will look like we are as weak as [censored] and as guilty as hell.

Bloody oath.

We made this decision as a club, and it was well within the rules and our rights and no-one gets left behind!

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.

Yep that thought had crossed my mind - don't forget this whole thing kicked off while Demetriou was overseas on a jaunt to the Olympics/Europe.

"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".

I agree - someone should tell Haddad this isn't some 3rd world police state that kind of stuff doesn't fly here.

Fevola:

"You could tell in the rooms," Fevola said of the Round 22 loss to Melbourne.

"I didn't play that last game either. I had my finger done. I left at quarter time. I didn't even stay. I was home at half-time and listened to the radio.

"We didn't want to win. I always say to people that when you look at that game, were we tanking?

"We would tag Travis Johnstone every time we played them, because Ratts (coach Brett Ratten) came from Melbourne (as an assistant coach) - and Johnstone had 42 touches.

"We tagged him every single time we played him. (Heath Scotland) had a few touches as well. But they didn't play on each other.

"If we were serious about it, we would have tagged him."

FORMER AFL star Brendan Fevola has reignited the tanking furore, claiming Carlton took steps to make it "more difficult for us to win games" as the 2007 season drew to a close.

In his new book, Fev, In My Own Words, Fevola said the Blues were put in a "crazy situation", where they benefited from losing by gaining a priority draft pick for ruckman Matthew Kreuzer.

The two-time Coleman Medallist said the club took "initiatives" such as asking players to have surgeries and making unusual match-ups.

"It did seem like the club did a lot of things that made it more difficult for us to win games," Fevola, who yesterday kicked 18 goals in an exhibition match in Tasmania, wrote.

"Often there was banter on the field about tanking," Fevola has said in the book.

"I remember one incident in our game against Essendon in round 20. We kicked four goals in the second quarter and were 21 points up when the half-time siren sounded.

"As I started walking towards the rooms, my opponent, Mal Michael, turned to me and said, 'What are you blokes doing? You don't want to win this game.' I smiled and said to him, 'Yeah, I don't think we'll win, mate.'

"Sure enough, we ended up losing by 10 points."

Liberatore:

FORMER Carlton assistant coach Tony Liberatore has accused the club of "tanking" matches at the end of last season. The Blues lost their final 11 matches in 2007, ensuring they won few enough matches to earn a priority national draft pick, which they used to pick up talented young ruckman Matthew Kreuzer. Liberatore, who was part of the Blues coaching staff at the time, told the Footy Show last night that winning "wasn't the be all and end all'' for the club during the final matches of the year.

Asked if he felt that constituted tanking, he said: "I would have to say yes.'' The AFL will interview Tony Liberatore next week over tanking claims made against Carlton, but say the former Blues assistant will need to produce a specific allegation to prompt an investigation.

That appears unlikely, as Liberatore has already admitted coaching staff never talked about tanking and there was never any directive to lose from Blues officials. AFL chief executive Andrew Demetriou said that from what he had read of Liberatore's comments, made on the Nine Network's AFL Footy Show, there was nothing that would warrant an investigation. "If he put a specific allegation to us about the Carlton Football Club then we would go and speak to the Carlton Football Club and look into it," Demetriou said.

Asked what sort of allegation would be required, Demetriou said: "If someone at the football club said to Tony Liberatore, directed him to do A, B, C, D to lose the game, that's a really serious matter."

The Blues strongly defended themselves against Liberatore's claims and said they would consider legal action.

Liberatore said the club made dubious team selections and positional moves in the final games of last season, in what he believed amounted to tanking.

Amazing Carlton aren't being investigated with two insiders claiming the above. Would hope Melbourne raises this as well...

Why is there an investigation even??? What 'evidence' prompted this investigation?? McLean's comments? Is that it?? Seems pretty tame compared to the Carlton comments yet we are under the gun?? DOesn't make sense to me...

Well done , good post. Love to see the AFL address it. Won't happen of course. Makes me more confident this will still go away.

Maybe make that any first round pick we have in the first 6. If we get a later 1st rounder than that we are obviously not tanking. And it would actually create incentive for us to finish 12th or higher and retain our 1st rounder.

The grim reality is that playing the same teams* this year as 2009, we only won a quarter the games (i.e. one (Essendon) against four in 2009). The question for the AFL is in what year did we tank?

* GWS and the Suns weren't playing in 2009 and they accounted for 3/4 of our wins this year. We also were ahead of Richmond at the final siren in 2009 so I guess them scorung a goal after the siren is proof that they were conspiring to help us tank!

Bloody oath. We made this decision as a club, and it was well within the rules and our rights and no-one gets left behind! [img=http://www.explore-science-fiction-movies.com/images/malcolm-reynolds-angry.jpg]

Agree. Fight this with any legal power we can muster. Fight this. We supporters need to remove this stench. Fight the AFL. What rules? They created the priority. We back our men. Threaten the AFL with defamation and a fight.

From the AFL website ...

The probe, into practices employed during Dean Bailey’s tenure as coach, is believed to have found adversely against former football manager Chris Connolly. No official sanctions have been determined, as that will be a matter for the AFL commission. The Demons will be given at least three weeks to review and respond to the AFL findings .

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

It seems to me that we're still a strong chance to end up not being charged with anything . Charged with tanking ? Not yet . Not sure that would be the official charge even if we are charged .

So Clothier and Haddad have come up with some 'findings' - what are they ? It's my bet these 'findings' are bits and pieces that probably won't amount to anything . 5 months of investigations has to end up with some sort of findings but they may not be as damning as people might imagine .

At this stage the whole thing is still up in the air and we haven't been 'officially' charged with anything . As for Chris Connolly, it may come down to whether his off the cuff remarks are viewed as 'humourous asides' or serious comments . We may have to 'prove' humour - that's a laugh .

Bloody oath.

We made this decision as a club, and it was well within the rules and our rights and no-one gets left behind!

[img=http://www.explore-science-fiction-movies.com/images/malcolm-reynolds-angry.jpg]

I need to ask the question about how this picture relates to the situation. Not being smart, just curious.

The bloke looks like he's about to cry.

I've had this account for a while but now seems like an appropriate time to introduce myself...

Seriously if we get charged who else would we want backing us? Finkle-who?

S'all good man!