"Tanking"

[beelzebub 23,374]

In balance of probability we did tank. So if found guilty and the punishment is relatively light we have to accept it. DM is just making noises to save face. I seriously doubt this will go to court if we are found guilty. The costs will cripple the club. All our dirty laundry will be aired in public. Civil matters are not bound by the need of finding undeniable proof. If the evidence says we likely did it then the case will be turfed out of court. Better take our medicine, move on and concentrate on footy.

you seem new... ( seem )

go stand over there >>>>>>>>>>>>

with all the other soft apologists.

You plainly dont get it. There is a line in the sand.

[daisycutter 29,616]

Wilson last night maintained she had her 5 "unofficial reasons" were based on discussions with people inside the club including a director

Either she lied - or a director has been leading her up the garden path ( which is pretty funny).

If the former (which I suspect) DM should issue another message to the supporters today assuring the supporters that no director has leaked to the press - and that Caroline's assertions are again - "just plain wrong"

If Gary questions her again next week - will she maintain that she speaks regularly with a Melbourne Director at the water cooler in the office ..... Beverley O'Connor ?" Come on Gary, you have no credibility when it comes to Melbourne, I didn't say it was a current director!"

correct hoopla

but shifty kero would then claim that she was a "current" director in 2009 when the tanking occurred and that she was correct

like i said shifty. she wants to give the impression she has connections with the current board and they are leaking to some extent

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

Who gives a stuff what other people think of us? Carlton are known as the brown paper baggers, do you think that hurts them or they give a stuff.

And the Hawks are the "wee and poo", and so on.

But we will forever more be known as Tankers. "Yes, Mr Prospective Sponsor. We're tankers. Hadn't you he---- Mr Sponsor? Mr Sponsor?"

By the way having some sort of fines/suspensions handed out doesn't make us guilty of tanking - it will depend on what the findings/charges are but it is not a black & white issue.

Oh. They'll charge us for nothing, then?

[Dr. Gonzo 24,215]

I'm trying to imagine Eddie or any other president uttering words like "we have to accept it".

This kerfuffle is not about whether we tanked. We did. It is about the hypocrisy and unfairness of the AFL to investigate us for it.

A court case won't be about whether we tanked or not. It will about whether the AFL correctly applied their own rules.

Again (and I don't mean to single you out, this is a response to all on here who think similarly) who gives a stuff about what Eddie would or wouldn't do - we are our own club and our own men.

You admit we tanked and then complain because we may get some (very light) sanctions? What good is pride when you have no money to feed your family? I'll be glad if we can just move on from this whole sordid affair without the club being crippled. It's not fair if we get done and Carlton, Collingwood etc get away with it but life isn't fair that's just the way it is. Taking this to court when we could get off pretty much scot-free would be not only stupid but irresponsible.

[Dee Fan 3,247]

And the Hawks are the "wee and poo", and so on.

But we will forever more be known as Tankers. "Yes, Mr Prospective Sponsor. We're tankers. Hadn't you he---- Mr Sponsor? Mr Sponsor?"

Oh. They'll charge us for nothing, then?

I'm sure the AFL will be able to manufacture a charge to bring against us, bet it won't be tanking though.

One of the problems we face is the charge of "bringing the AFL in to disrepute", is so vague it is almost impossible to define.

[beelzebub 23,374]

Again (and I don't mean to single you out, this is a response to all on here who think similarly) who gives a stuff about what Eddie would or wouldn't do - we are our own club and our own men.

You admit we tanked and then complain because we may get some (very light) sanctions? What good is pride when you have no money to feed your family? I'll be glad if we can just move on from this whole sordid affair without the club being crippled. It's not fair if we get done and Carlton, Collingwood etc get away with it but life isn't fair that's just the way it is. Taking this to court when we could get off pretty much scot-free would be not only stupid but irresponsible.

Mate..I like a lot of your work but right here you ( for mine ) highlight that which many just dont/wont get.

You CAN NOT just move on. There are consequences in exactly teh manner Ted and others are trying to show. The club would be eternally branded...not as Demons...but as Tankers.

You cant be a little bit dead, pregnant or Tankers. You are or youre not.

We cant afford to be. its really as simple as that.

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

Again (and I don't mean to single you out, this is a response to all on here who think similarly) who gives a stuff about what Eddie would or wouldn't do - we are our own club and our own men.

You admit we tanked and then complain because we may get some (very light) sanctions? What good is pride when you have no money to feed your family? I'll be glad if we can just move on from this whole sordid affair without the club being crippled. It's not fair if we get done and Carlton, Collingwood etc get away with it but life isn't fair that's just the way it is. Taking this to court when we could get off pretty much scot-free would be not only stupid but irresponsible.

All right.

Let me put it another way.

Forget Eddie and all the rest.

Why should we roll over on this?

Why should we not fight tooth and nail to clear our name?

PS. "Scot-free?" Mind boggling.

[hoopla 418]

I'm sure the AFL will be able to manufacture a charge to bring against us, bet it won't be tanking though.

One of the problems we face is the charge of "bringing the AFL in to disrepute", is so vague it is almost impossible to define.

I reckon the lawyers will have this covered. Even if you commit a crime, you cant damage reputation by doing what everybody else already understood - and did. Actions consistent with standard practice can't possibly damage reputation. There will be so many "tanking" articles out their prior to 2009 that the AFL won't be able establish that our actions damaged peoples perceptions of the AFL competition.

[H_T 3,047]

I think the claim that GM is a deal maker is just her covering her backside if she's wrong.

Then it'll be because GM "made a deal" and MFC were lucky.

It couldn't possibly because AA was feverishly pursuing charges, without a considerations for the lack of evidence, but has now been replaced by the relatively level-headed GM.

Also funny to listen to SEN this morning and hear that beauty remains firmly in the eye of the beholder.

Some twit actually called in and said CW was good last night, and actually made Lyon look silly!

Fancy that!

Anyway, she's not a popular girl this morning.

Agree, she is trying to pave her way out. She's using the "goalposts have moved", "things have changed in the past few weeks" method, when really the investigation has taken it's natural course. Despite Adrian moving on and Gil taking over in early December. - Why didn't she say the goalposts have moved back then?

because it's more convenient for her to say that now having learnt more information against her opinions.

[Guest]

I just watched the tanking bit on Footy Classified. It almost seems like Caro is arguing with imagined Melbourne supporters (!) as opposed to the board who are the ones making the argument that Melbourne will live or die by. What a self obsessed knucklehead! Is she really that stung by what a few suburban white men say to her every now and then? Who cares what the punters in the stands are saying? There are roughly 120,000 Melbourne supporters out there with varying opinions on this. Why not address what the board is actually saying and leave it at that? All she is doing is trying to muddy the waters to suit her own agenda.

[Goodvibes 3,596]

If we accept that, we're accepting and announcing to the world that we "tanked".

Ummmmmm, we did.

[Ron Burgundy 8,584]

Perhaps The Age should be found guilty of tanking.

Rapidly declining readership base, appallingly low journalistic standards, cost cutting - surely it all points to one thing.

They are tanking.

I'd like to see Cameron Schwab write an article to this effect and place it on the MFC's official website ...

[dpositive 1,665]

Could be a bad year for Kero .

I hope it is an agonising and bumpy fall for her.The Wangaratta Times is calling.

She wants to be in a "boys club" , breaks the rules of journalism, decency and respect, gets dressed down and threatens to take her bat and ball home.

I love it.

Biffo

its the Mrytleford Times and the Wangaratta Chronicle but both are papers that have to report to a demanding local community and their standards may be a little too difficult for Kero to reach.

Entertainment pages may well suit her fiction talents but she may need some training in timing and delivery if she wants to continue in comedy.

[beelzebub 23,374]

she is the queen of the Strawman argument

[H_T 3,047]

Ted, BB59,If you read Fifty-5's post again: -

Schwab: no charge

Bailey: irregular activities, no firm evidence, no charge

Connolly: Bringing game into disrepute with threats relating to tanking - 6 months and $50K

MFC: Bringing game into disrepute for not reining Connolly in - fine $300K

Where is the charge for tanking?

^Here Bailey is cleared, Schwab is cleared, and the disrepute charges are for Connolly's apparent 'threats' and the club for not reining him in (but they did boot him out to Admin) and a fine.

There's no charge for tanking as such.

So will it be as tainted as you're making out? (mind you a 7 month investigation has done enough damage).

[beelzebub 23,374]

Ted, BB59,If you read Fifty-5's post again: -

Where is the charge for tanking?

^Here Bailey is cleared, Schwab is cleared, and the disrepute charges are for Connolly's apparent 'threats' and the club for not reining him in (but they did boot him out to Admin) and a fine.

There's no charge for tanking as such.

So will it be as tainted as you're making out? (mind you a 7 month investigation has done enough damage).

thatt would effectively be this bit...

Connolly: Bringing game into disrepute with threats relating to tanking - 6 months and $50K

a rose by any other name... its still the same sh!t !!

[McQueen 17,864]

I'm hoping (dreaming) that the AFL announce that the reason the investigation has taken so long is that every other club suspected of tanking has also been investigated and in conclusion, the AFL have found the following...

(insert perfect outcome)

[Sir Why You Little 37,036]

Ted, BB59,If you read Fifty-5's post again: -

Where is the charge for tanking?

^Here Bailey is cleared, Schwab is cleared, and the disrepute charges are for Connolly's apparent 'threats' and the club for not reining him in (but they did boot him out to Admin) and a fine.

There's no charge for tanking as such.

So will it be as tainted as you're making out? (mind you a 7 month investigation has done enough damage).

it's still a guilty verdict.

6 months for a one liner.

Does that mean the gaming licenses go?

Sponsorships?

[old dee 23,791]

I'm hoping (dreaming) that the AFL announce that the reason the investigation has taken so long is that every other club suspected of tanking has also been investigated and in conclusion, the AFL have found the following...

(insert perfect outcome)

Now McQueen the next thing you will tell us is there is a easter bunny and he is coming on March 31st!

[Guest José Mourinho]

It looks like Eddie is trying to pre-empt the AFL decisions.

If he comes close to what they decide, he appears (to a simpleton) to have been correct and possibly influenced the decision.

Geez that Eddie is a clever one!

Anyway, it increasingly looks like not going to court.

I'd still angle for "no case to answer".

In terms of the AFL's desire, they want us to concede something, but they want it to go away even moreso.

I say hold out for a "no charge."

I doubt the AFL is that stubborn to drag this out any longer.

GM seems like a sensible person.

We'll see.

[GM11 776]

Now McQueen the next thing you will tell us is there is a easter bunny and he is coming on March 31st!

What about the easter bunny????

[jabberwocky 2,301]

I'll take:

Schwab: no charge

Bailey: irregular activities, no firm evidence, no charge

Connolly: Bringing game into disrepute with threats relating to tanking - 6 months and $50K

MFC: Bringing game into disrepute for not reining Connolly in - fine $300K

"The investigation has been thorough and well conducted and there was sufficient information to warrant an investigation. Investigator Fancypants has 30 years experience etc etc..

The brief has been provided to both the Melbourne Football Club and independent legal experts employed by the AFL. Our legal people have perused the evidence and the responses from the Melbourne Football Club. They have concluded that there is insufficient evidence to lay any charges that would be upheld in a court.

The AFL has since addressed the drafting rules in order to prevent clubs from gaining from not performing on thier merits in the future to prevent these allegations from rearing their head in the future."

NB: This has not happened, but I had a dream..

Edited February 15, 2013 by dandeeman

[Demon Stalwart 255]

Garry got too heated and emotional and couldn't nail her. I understood the point he was trying to make as caro flip flopped about the MFC defence. - what nonsense - we have an official and unofficial defence.......plllleeeaassseeee.

He did call her out on the players being questioned about them fumbling and her response........ She didn't know that they were accused of that.....

She is extremely clever... Garry didnt land a telling blow on her.

Sorry I must have been watching a different station to you??

What I saw last night was a very uncormfortable Wilson and when she called into account Gary's credibility on the topic

Gary tore strips of here. The funny thing was I said to my Wife look at Caro's body language arms crossed in front of her leaning back in her chair

No sooner had I said that to my Wife then Gary nailed her on that exact point . Oh god how I laughed

Gary showed last night why he was a true champion of the MFC he had obviously been waiting for the chance to let her have it and he took that chance last night

At one stage she was totally lost for words and could only mumble something in response

Caro looked like she was about to take her batt and ball and storm out the door !!!!

Bloody shame she didnt !

But To Gary I say Thankyou Thankyou so very much it was Beautiful to watch and "not before time " that somone took her down a peg on Public TV to show her for the true Buffoon she really is

[rpfc 28,424]

rpfc's guess:

Bailey, Schwab no charge.

Connolly apology about language used. No fine or suspension.

MFC mea culpa on Connolly's words - bad image and all that. No fine.

AFL delicately worded phrase on their own culpability in this, and even more delicate words on their being no case to answer for the club but for unfortunate words at an in-house meeting.

CW apoplectic.

[sue 9,106]

Eddie joins the groupthink:

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/more-news/eddie-mcguire-says-the-afl-should-take-some-blame-for-melbourne-tanking/story-e6frf9jf-1226578529477