"Tanking"

[farmerwiz 60]

we would be niaive to think that we arent in head deep in this......every journo says we are guilty, 7 months of investigation etc

we should be bracing for bad news and the massive financial cost to fight it

this is a massive issue and bagging out every journo in town is putting our heads in the sand

[Sir Why You Little 36,747]

we would be niaive to think that we arent in head deep in this......every journo says we are guilty, 7 months of investigation etc

we should be bracing for bad news and the massive financial cost to fight it

this is a massive issue and bagging out every journo in town is putting our heads in the sand

journo's have got nothing to do with it.

I am only interested in the legality. What HARD evidence has been uncovered?

[rpfc 28,084]

Well he's "Not Guilty" - that's the thing.

IMO the best negotiated settlement is that Chris Connolly spoke injudiciously about tanking and that brought the game into disrepute. Trigg-like punishment for CC and some benefactor soft landing for him. He loves the club and he did a dumb thing. Maybe a fine for MFC for not clamping down on him. No firm evidence that tanking actually occured. Case closed

No fine and a suspended sentence at most.

If all there is is that comment then that's all I would give them.

[dee-luded 2,959]

journo's have got nothing to do with it.

I am only interested in the legality. What HARD evidence has been uncovered?

journo's favoured are acting as the AFL's court, & judges. loss of face is the game. ours.

the AFL should get its act together. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, or more wrongs, don't make one single Right.

this all comes back to equity,,, in the fixture, big games draw, & recruiting. decades of inequity, & poor decision making as well. = battling clubs.

[old55 23,053]

No fine and a suspended sentence at most.

If all there is is that comment then that's all I would give them.

Or what? Go to court - you've got to be kidding. We've got to throw them a bone and that's pretty much the Stapes.

[Hannibal 5,814]

we would be niaive to think that we arent in head deep in this......every journo says we are guilty, 7 months of investigation etc

this is a massive issue and bagging out every journo in town is putting our heads in the sand

[daisycutter 29,441]

No [censored] Sherlock!!! Do you want this to go away or not?

of course einstein, but being found guilty of bringing the game in to disrepute still has to make sense. the media will pull it apart if it illogical....

[rpfc 28,084]

Or what? Go to court - you've got to be kidding. We've got to throw them a bone and that's pretty much the Stapes.

You make it sound like this deal is a grand offering from a benevolent AFL.

The started this mess they don't want and are trying to get out of.

If there is a deal to be had - both parties have equal share in its completion.

I am not afraid to go to court to save our name.

Some things you can't see cost more than lawyers fees.

[beelzebub 23,254]

I think many are confusing two aspects to all this.

On one hand there is the idea of WANTING to go to court.

The other is the PREPAREDNESS to go to court if need be.

Whilst no one in their right mind particularly wants to go to court, other than beaks and sharks, one needs your adversary to understand you will if no agreeable solutions present.

In my mind the club should stick firm with the attitude that you, AFL , created this f'n mess. You fix it,no cost to us.

Or......

Im not blind to realities etc but neither do i see a need for us (esp alone) to be the patsy.

The AFL is stretched. Now is not the time to cave,buckle or even blink.

Everyone will judge the club on this , the endgame, from members to media to corporate interests as well as those who can impose legalities.

This is our Waterloo, Trafalgar and Normandy....all rolled into one.

We either will swim or sink on the outcome.

David won; he was clever, lateral and unerringly steadfast.

As we must be.

[rpfc 28,084]

lol

Why am I lol-ing?

Correct guess gets an inflated sense of self.

[TRIGON 4,783]

lol

Why am I lol-ing?

Correct guess gets an inflated sense of self.

Not really sure rfpc...but if he's a (club that shall remain nameless for legal reasons) fan I hope he doesn't drown when the (pep)tides come in.

[old55 23,053]

You make it sound like this deal is a grand offering from a benevolent AFL.

The started this mess they don't want and are trying to get out of.

If there is a deal to be had - both parties have equal share in its completion.

I am not afraid to go to court to save our name.

Some things you can't see cost more than lawyers fees.

The down side of taking the AFL to court is hardly lawyers fees.

[old55 23,053]

of course einstein, but being found guilty of bringing the game in to disrepute still has to make sense. the media will pull it apart if it illogical....

You over-estimate their reasoning powers.

[Tim 3,367]

The down side of taking the AFL to court is hardly lawyers fees.

MFC home games at Alberton and Fremantle Oval would probably be the shallow end of the down side. Edited February 12, 2013 by Tim

[mjt 640]

You make it sound like this deal is a grand offering from a benevolent AFL.

The started this mess they don't want and are trying to get out of.

If there is a deal to be had - both parties have equal share in its completion.

I am not afraid to go to court to save our name.

Some things you can't see cost more than lawyers fees.

If your not afraid to go to court, put your money were your mouth is, start a fighting fund if it ends up getting settled by silks.

Edited February 12, 2013 by mjt

[daisycutter 29,441]

MFC home games at Alberton and Fremantle Oval would probably be the shallow end of the down side.

not necessarily if the greek cypriot is no longer around

[daisycutter 29,441]

If your not afraid to go to court, put your money were your mouth is, start a fighting fund if it ends up getting settled by silks.

silks don't "settle" such matters mjt. they have Judges to do that. ....LOL

[rpfc 28,084]

The down side of taking the AFL to court is hardly lawyers fees.

Well, I know the downsides to admitting to tanking - which is what will be read out of a deal that sees us fined.

What the costs of that will be I don't know - will it effect the licences?

We have admitted guilt - it should.

Will it cost us sponsorship? I'll let individuals judge that.

[Bossdog 2,002]

I think that some people, as well as the AFL commission itself, forget that they are only in existence because of the footy clubs involved

They are empowed by the clubs to run a fair and equal competition.....

To bad if they get their noses out of joint over an unequal decision to investigate one club......

If we fold on this, the MFC will lose more than it gains in respect,membership and sponsorship......

Edited February 12, 2013 by Bossdog

[mjt 640]

silks don't "settle" such matters mjt. they have Judges to do that. ....LOL

Whatever, if all you diehards want to go to court put your money were your posts are.

[Slartibartfast 16,960]

I am not afraid to go to court to save our name.

Firstly we may lose the club. You really don't get the relationship we have with the AFL do you.

Secondly we may lose the court case.

[old55 23,053]

Well, I know the downsides to admitting to tanking - which is what will be read out of a deal that sees us fined.

What the costs of that will be I don't know - will it effect the licences?

We have admitted guilt - it should.

Will it cost us sponsorship? I'll let individuals judge that.

Where did I say that? I specifically said that we don't admit to that. How about you read my posts.

I said Connolly admits to bringing the game into disrepute by injudiciously talking about tanking, even if it was "just a joke" that was never acted upon - takes a Trigg-like penalty, we take a fine for not reining him in. Bailey is NOT GUILTY of tanking, MFC is NOT GUILTY of tanking. And you wanna go to court???

[rpfc 28,084]

Where did I say that? I specifically said that we don't admit to that. How about you read my posts.

I said Connolly admits to bringing the game into disrepute by injudiciously talking about tanking, even if it was "just a joke" that was never acted upon - takes a Trigg-like penalty, we take a fine for not reining him in. Bailey is NOT GUILTY of tanking, MFC is NOT GUILTY of tanking. And you wanna go to court???

Why are we being fined then, for not 'clamping down' on CC's private joke?

[Bossdog 2,002]

Where did I say that? I specifically said that we don't admit to that. How about you read my posts.

I said Connolly admits to bringing the game into disrepute by injudiciously talking about tanking, even if it was "just a joke" that was never acted upon - takes a Trigg-like penalty, we take a fine for not reining him in. Bailey is NOT GUILTY of tanking, MFC is NOT GUILTY of tanking. And you wanna go to court???

Yes......You must never joke about 'T' word.......All gags and jokes in all clubs must be banned forthwith.....

Why not just bend over and take it whatever they want to give us????

Sometimes this club must stand up and be counted.....or forever be disregarded

[old55 23,053]

Why are we being fined then, for not 'clamping down' on CC's private joke?

Yes that's right - he quite clearly sufficiently upset some MFC employees with his "joke" to cause them to relay it to the inquiry. Quite simply on ANY level he should not have been saying that.