"Tanking"

[Deebate 7]

"are so so flimsy, irrelevant and in some cases childish" Hmmm is she describing MFCs defence or her presentation of hearsay and re-telling of past events as fact. Unfortunately for her and her brand this whole Melbourne witch hunt has opened my eyes to all her articles, unfortunately not many are accompanied with any 'real' facts

[heartbeatstrue 57]

It's not much more than an opinion piece with a few current likelihoods thrown in. And I agree with her take on the overall situation.

The funny thing is that prior to any hint of an investigation into tanking most supporters on here thought we "tanked", but now there's an investigation into us "tanking" the indignation is extraordinary. I too don't believe there's enough proof to find us guilty, but I'm not indignant about the views of others when I share those very views.

There's no rule about "tanking". The AFL created the situation where bottom, fumbling sides like ours got penalised for winning more than 4 games. The rule-makers contrived the situation and they will find in court that that's a very hard fact to get over, if they want to charge any bottom footy club of not wanting to win more than the prescribed 4 games.

[waynewussell 5,738]

Caroline's respect for legal process ended at the witch trials... Her logic in this matter goes something like this:

"Throw MFC into the river. If they float, they tanked. If they sink.... WTF, they should have relocated when the offer was made!"

[Whispering_Jack 30,054]

I have just tweeted my thoughts to her and she has retweeted it. Everyone I talk to regardless of who they follow think exactly the same. No credibility

Hate to break the news Demon Forever but the twitter account CarowhineWilson is actually a fake. It's not Caro at all.

Still, it should make you feel better to know that Carowhine's tweets are more informative and credible than the real thing.

[Guest José Mourinho]

It's not much more than an opinion piece with a few current likelihoods thrown in. And I agree with her take on the overall situation.

The funny thing is that prior to any hint of an investigation into tanking most supporters on here thought we "tanked", but now there's an investigation into us "tanking" the indignation is extraordinary. I too don't believe there's enough proof to find us guilty, but I'm not indignant about the views of others when I share those very views.

There's a difference between thinking we most likely tanked, and thinking we should be punished for it.

Especially when it's something that can't really be proved, has been tacitly approved in the past, is not breaking any concise and definitive rule but rather a media driven moralistic stance, and is a retroactive investigation into something that was deemed fine at the time.

Maybe the AFL should go back to investigate and punish the teams involved in the Nathan Buckley to Collingwood saga, now that the details are out in the open?

How about the former club officials that openly tell stories of paper bags full of money changing hands with players decades ago?

Where do you draw the line?

My indignation is over the injustice of it, and the fact that it won't stand up in court.

[Wilbur 447]

Caroline Wilson has had it in for us for some time. Its time to stop reading the filth that is the age forever.

In fact send her an email [email protected] stating that you will be boycoting the age while she remains a journalist there.

[Grapeviney 9,718]

What's with the "so so flimsy" ?

What is she, in year 9?

[Carrot Top 947]

The funny thing is that prior to any hint of an investigation into tanking most supporters on here thought we "tanked", but now there's an investigation into us "tanking" the indignation is extraordinary. I too don't believe there's enough proof to find us guilty, but I'm not indignant about the views of others when I share those very views.

Mate, I wasn't a big fan of us joining in the invasion of Iraq. I thought it was a terrible idea that we should have nothing to do with, but that doesn't mean that I'm going to join the Iraqi resistance does it? The tanking issue is the same. I despise that we went down that path and I'd like all those involved sacked from the club, but it's still my club. I don't want the AFL screwing us and I don't like po faced media hacks attacking my club. I'm not joining the Iraqi resistance over this either.

[Jesse Christ 2,884]

Caroline Wilson has had it in for us for some time. Its time to stop reading the filth that is the age forever.

In fact send her an email [email protected] stating that you will be boycoting the age while she remains a journalist there.

Done. Perhaps the guys at Bomberhits I mean bomberblitz can do the same?

[demoniac 1,333]

Shurely the most blatant example of tanking is the Kreuzer Cup. Will the Chief Commissioner Mike Fitzpatrick investigate the club he played for? There could be a t shirt in that should we be penalised.

Ms Wilson does not seem to understand that in repeatedly stating that the players went out to win we are forcing the AFL to come up with a definition of tanking that will ensnare other clubs like the Blues, Tigers and Pies. Does Andy really want to be in the witness box answering questions about the Kreuzer Cup?

It may be that a negotiated settlement is in the best interests of the club if the penalties are relatively light. I trust the board to make that judgement.

[pantaloons 2,019]

It's actually just really sad. Her articles say so much more about the writer than about the MFC. What kind of sad, bitter creature spends hours and hours writing her vitriolic opinions about another entity? If she was presenting new, interesting facts that would be another matter. The irrationality in her pieces only grows in accordance with her bitterness. It is Gollum all over again. I feel for her.

[P-man 13,366]

Yet again we see bold yet totally unfounded statements by Caro, stating that the club's "unofficial" defence is that others were doing it. Seriously, WHAT is she on about? At what point has the club come out and said this? And what exactly is an "unofficial" defence in this context? Is she actually stupid enough to confuse the defences of fans with those of the club? To me this looks noting short of intentionally defamatory to state that the club is defending itself on such grounds, be it "unofficial" or not.

The "disgusting and pathetic" article had me seething, but this is just lame watching her desperately cling to what remains of her ridiculous witch hunt. It would be a bit easier to overlook if she showed a degree of humility when her accusations are shown to be untrue. Like all idiots do, she sticks to her guns with a disregard for the facts. Did the same thing with her vendetta against Brayshaw.

Someone needs to take her arse to court. Until they do she will continue writing libellous drivel and shrugging her shoulders at the consequences.

[FarNorthernD 5,861]

I think it's a completely accurate article in its depiction of the whole debacle.

It would be an accurate depiction if written by a supporter on a fan website. For an experienced, professional journalist with years of experience and contacts it is a disgrace

To me it reads as if she has lost her primary contact at the AFL and is now trying to create some public outrage at a positive verdict for the MFC

Honestly, if we are guilty or not, it is a poorly written article

[Scoop Junior 3,471]

"Perhaps in legal terms they are correct".

So on what basis should we be punished Wilson?

Thanks for confirming how far out of your depth you are.

[Jesse Christ 2,884]

It's actually just really sad. Her articles say so much more about the writer than about the MFC. What kind of sad, bitter creature spends hours and hours writing her vitriolic opinions about another entity? If she was presenting new, interesting facts that would be another matter. The irrationality in her pieces only grows in accordance with her bitterness. It is Gollum all over again. I feel for her.

Pretty harsh on Gollum

[waynewussell 5,738]

Tonight I have come to a conclusion that has already been expressed by others on this site. Caroline has been enlisted by key AFL staff to inflame public opinion against MFC. The AFL will announce heavy penalties within days, maybe hours. The AFL are fully aware that they will be charging MFC for practices that were common in the competition for several years. The AFL want to be seen to be firm and decisive wherever the 'integrity' card is played. The AFL expect MFC to fight the charges through the legal system. The AFL expect several of the charges to be thrown out, as they can't be proven. Caroline has simply been a pawn in the AFL's stategy to shore up it's public image. We must fight! It will be a long fight. We will have our day!

[P-man 13,366]

It's not much more than an opinion piece with a few current likelihoods thrown in. And I agree with her take on the overall situation.

The funny thing is that prior to any hint of an investigation into tanking most supporters on here thought we "tanked", but now there's an investigation into us "tanking" the indignation is extraordinary. I too don't believe there's enough proof to find us guilty, but I'm not indignant about the views of others when I share those very views.

Come off it Ben. You agree with her take that the club is defending itself using "lame duck excuses", none of which the club has actually used as excuses for its conduct? Her entire article is based on "facts" straight from her own head.

She then cements this stupidity by admitting the club has a strong legal case...that is somehow based on lame ducks. I'm honestly mystified as to how this nonsense gets to print.

[Hannibal 5,814]

There's a difference between thinking we most likely tanked, and thinking we should be punished for it.

Especially when it's something that can't really be proved, has been tacitly approved in the past, is not breaking any concise and definitive rule but rather a media driven moralistic stance, and is a retroactive investigation into something that was deemed fine at the time.

Maybe the AFL should go back to investigate and punish the teams involved in the Nathan Buckley to Collingwood saga, now that the details are out in the open?

How about the former club officials that openly tell stories of paper bags full of money changing hands with players decades ago?

Where do you draw the line?

My indignation is over the injustice of it, and the fact that it won't stand up in court.

Why tell me that ?

Did you not read where I said "we should be found not guilty" ?

[Hannibal 5,814]

Mate, I wasn't a big fan of us joining in the invasion of Iraq. I thought it was a terrible idea that we should have nothing to do with, but that doesn't mean that I'm going to join the Iraqi resistance does it? The tanking issue is the same. I despise that we went down that path and I'd like all those involved sacked from the club, but it's still my club. I don't want the AFL screwing us and I don't like po faced media hacks attacking my club. I'm not joining the Iraqi resistance over this either.

I don't want us found guilty either, but I won't sound like a fool and bleat and moan when I agree we tanked.

You can please yourself.

[Demon Forever 219]

Hate to break the news Demon Forever but the twitter account CarowhineWilson is actually a fake. It's not Caro at all.

Still, it should make you feel better to know that Carowhine's tweets are more informative and credible than the real thing.

Thanks WJ. have been coping a barrage from everyone on there

[diesel 420]

all over the place like a mad woman

In November she said Connolly and Schwab would be banished from the game and she has worked back from there shifting her position to suit this disheveled investigation which has built a case on innuendo with no smoking gun.

She has managed to maintain the personally coloured invective all the way along though.

Fact is she has blood lust and cares little for fairness or balance.

Melbourne will not negotiate a punishment over this farce. Wilson (and the AFL for that matter) can go to hell. I'm done if we cop any penalty without every other club who list managed going down as well.

[Hannibal 5,814]

"Perhaps in legal terms they are correct".

So on what basis should we be punished Wilson?

Thanks for confirming how far out of your depth you are.

That's the whole point. She's right, it's really hard to prove we're guilty, which is why I'm still confident.

Don't get too rapt up in her personal disgust, as it's irrelevant and not entirely without understanding for a writer with bias.

[Hannibal 5,814]

Come off it Ben. You agree with her take that the club is defending itself using "lame duck excuses", none of which the club has actually used as excuses for its conduct? Her entire article is based on "facts" straight from her own head.

She then cements this stupidity by admitting the club has a strong legal case...that is somehow based on lame ducks. I'm honestly mystified as to how this nonsense gets to print.

Of course they're lame duck. They're also hard to disprove.

Do you honestly believe we DIDN'T tank ? Try to refrain form the crap definition excuses used on here, as I'm not talking from a legal sense.

[Guest José Mourinho]

Why tell me that ?

Did you not read where I said "we should be found not guilty" ?

Nope!

Missed that.

FMD, it's too late at night for this crap...

[heartbeatstrue 57]

There's a difference between thinking we most likely tanked, and thinking we should be punished for it.

Especially when it's something that can't really be proved, has been tacitly approved in the past, is not breaking any concise and definitive rule but rather a media driven moralistic stance, and is a retroactive investigation into something that was deemed fine at the time.

Maybe the AFL should go back to investigate and punish the teams involved in the Nathan Buckley to Collingwood saga, now that the details are out in the open?

How about the former club officials that openly tell stories of paper bags full of money changing hands with players decades ago?

Where do you draw the line?

My indignation is over the injustice of it, and the fact that it won't stand up in court.

Very good post.

Of course we "tanked". By which I mean "we" as in many supporters and undoubtedly many at the club, did not want to win more than the prescribed 4 as we got near season's end. But not the players which is a fact that annoys C. Wilson so very much. I watched all those games and it's fair to say, in every game every player was trying his hardest to win. Even despite the occasional fumble, which annoyingly persisted all through the DB years (it was that type of game plan).

We all hated the AFL system (rules) which would penalise us severely for winning more than 4. It was so conflicting, I went and watched, wanting the team to win on the day, but not wanting them to win for the future. The system was their doing, they contrived a system which strongly discouraged a bottom, fumbling side from winning more than the prescribed 4. They did that, and we hated it.

What about the coach? IF (and it's still an "if", despite C. Wilson the hanging judge) he coached with an eye on next season, many before him have done just that (including Terry Wallace by his own admission at Wilson's beloved Richmond, and Sheeds also, who went on to win a flag with what he developed). Neither Wallace nor Sheeds coached (or selected) to the best of their abilities to win each game, but looked ahead in hope of a better future.

But unfortunately mud sticks. This is the reputation of MFC that Wilson is trying to drag down. Pity a club can't sue for defamation. Nevertheless, perhaps MFC lawyers should be considering an injunction against The Age for articles like this.