That is a load of self-serving bullsh1t.

Thanks W_J, you said what I wasn't sure I would get away with But I did read Garry Lyon into those closing sentences, wonder how he enjoyed her "opinions"?

No were not, Baileys getting suspended for not reporting CC comments, the presser next week will clear us of Match Fixing, you can put your house on it.

You've changed your opinion, (several times) it appears that you no longer think that CS & CC will be sacked and we'll all be shattered; what happened there?

And you reckon Wilson's been wrong from start to finish.

I remember my grandmother once saying that hate is a wasted emotion, but geez I hate that Wilson woman. Just watched the video, and hate her even more.

Its a long line mate.

If this latest leak is nothing more than misinformation, Wilson will be finished, the icing on the cake.

You've changed your opinion, (several times) it appears that you no longer think that CS & CC will be sacked and we'll all be shattered; what happened there?

And you reckon Wilson's been wrong from start to finish.

Im not the only one thats changed there opinions several times, but i must apologise about my comments on CS, and i dont recall ever pumping up CW tyres.

Edited February 16, 201312 yr by mjt

To attract sponsors we will need to win games.

yes and no

more times in the news , more times in the papers make sponsors happy

was it maccas that once said there is no such thing as bad advertizing ?

still I prefer good news rather than bad news , but If Melbourne had my Logo ont he jumper I would be rapt with all the news coverage and articles showing it

Just a word of advice. If you've got a glass jaw don't go out of your way looking for a fight, which is exactly what YOU did.

Not to mention your absurd overreaction.

You may want to constitute exchanges on these threads as looking for a fight. I dont.

You may want to stoop to ignorant personal abuse to seize your victory in whatever fight you imagine is taking place.

And you may want to extend your ignorance by characterising my response as over-reaction. How do you know what my circumstances are and what is or isnt an over-reaction?

You made things personal because youd run out of wit (assuming sarcasm to be any form of wit in the first place). Talk about glass jaws. But dont be surprised when you get a response at the personal level if you want to summon it up.

I think it's best if I deal with your perpetual unpleasantness by making the ignore button is the best option.

yes and no

more times in the news , more times in the papers make sponsors happy

was it maccas that once said there is no such thing as bad advertizing ?

still I prefer good news rather than bad news , but If Melbourne had my Logo ont he jumper I would be rapt with all the news coverage and articles showing it

Hankook killed it with the TS drama, and they still went happy, but yeah like you said, there logos are in the paper for everyone to see, cant hurt there business.

There's an ignore button?

Im not the only one thats changed there opinions several times, but i must apologise about my comments on CS, and i dont recall ever pumping up CW tyres.

You've come on here and stated opinion as fact and still do.

Most on here have been steadfast in their view of this issue, you haven't you've lashed out at the club and its administration and declared to all that anyone that supported the administration was delusional. Well I guess you may have backed the wrong horse.

This isn't over by any means and there is still a bit to play but after DMcL's statement I'm confident they are on top of it.

I never said you pumped up her tyres or supported her I merely suggested that you are probably as incorrect as she is.

There's an ignore button?

You bet, it's in manage preferences.

You're quite clearly referring to me because I used the term "reining-in" - correctly.

If you read my posts you'll see that I very clearly stated that it would be far more preferable from "our" side if DB was not charged with anything. IMO if the AFL were prepared to accept this then the negotiated settlement would have been announced over a week ago. Quite clearly something has been holding it up and I've pointed to this being the case.

My prediction of the outcome is on the mark, including the argy-bargy around Bailey. I'm a centimetre away from the bulls-eye while you're still trying to find the arena in Google maps.

We may have botched tanking but I suspect we haven't botched the investigation. I don't know what the findings will be against DB until they're announced but I'm supremely confident they won't result in Webjet and Opel pulling their sponsorships or us losing our gaming licences as the resident hysterians here fear.

I wasn't referring to you or I would have been able to spell reining-in correctly. Sorry 55 to deflate your tyres.

Tony Tea, December 11:

You're kidding yourselves if you think Caro will eat humble pie if we cop a slap on the wrist or less. She will merely sneer: "I'm not wrong - everyone knows what Melbourne really did."

Yay me. I rock.

You bet, it's in manage preferences.

Cool.......I just found it.

But, it's a bit mean isn't it?

This is a forum for talking footy.

Bring it!!

Two things:

Does the AFL need to absolutely prove the charges with unequivocal evidence or does it only need to show reasonable cause for a guilty finding, i.e. that there was enough circumstantial evidence for them to form such a conclusion ?

Secondly, on the HS website they list their top 10 read stories each day. There are 4 AFL stories in their top 10 today - and I've checked a few times since about 7.30 am to a moment ago - and the "Demons to dodge draft ban" isn't one of them. My view is that the wider public aren't as fascinated by this story as you think. I don't see that the tarnishing of the brand will be that severe and that it will be out of people's minds pretty quickly.

Winning games of footy will put it on the back burner very quickly.

Two good questions.

Firstly, it is presumed that the charges will be one, two or all three of bringing the game into disrepute, draft tampering or in the case of Bailey, not allowing his team to play on its merits (the latter is what Demetriou and others at the AFL have called "tanking"). Up till now list management, resting players etc. have never been included under the AFL's definition of tanking. Legally, there must be evidence to prove each element and the AFL can't second guess or use circumstantial evidence which might be equivocal as a basis of a finding of guilt.

None of that matters in practical terms because it's fairly clear that the parties are trying to nut out a settlement. The views of you, me and the faux intellegensia on bigfooty matter jack squat about the final details to be nutted out. We will all have our opinions, many of which have already been expressed here. As far as I'm concerned the club should be looking forward to building itself up in the field and therefore what Mark Neeld and the players on the list do next is of paramount importance to me.

Notwithstanding that, I'm 99% certain that had this gone to court, we would have creamed the AFL and even Wilson grudgingly concedes this (it's only her bloodlust and hatred of the club that motivates her to produce her regular idiotic rants).

The second point is even more interesting. I agree that the general football public is becoming immune to this whole saga. I agree that not many people are interested in the subject as some would believe. It will blow over and the end result of Wilson's bloviating on this and other issues will be that she will have made herself irrelevant in much the same way as has happened to the once beautiful newspaper she works for (which is today very much a sinking ship).

You've come on here and stated opinion as fact and still do.

Most on here have been steadfast in their view of this issue, you haven't you've lashed out at the club and its administration and declared to all that anyone that supported the administration was delusional. Well I guess you may have backed the wrong horse.

This isn't over by any means and there is still a bit to play but after DMcL's statement I'm confident they are on top of it.

I never said you pumped up her tyres or supported her I merely suggested that you are probably as incorrect as she is.

The administration could be copping a 500,000 dollar fine next week, i wouldnt call that backing the wrong horse RF, how many memberships is that, so if you think the administration is flying i would suggest you are just as incorrect as CW, it works both ways RF.

I won't disagree with those who say the general footy public is not all that interested, dunno myself. But I wouldn't rely on bigfooty or even hits on websites in deciding. Maybe they don't bother to read the articles because they have already decided we are tankers and are bored with the details. Since articles about Cwood etc always get a large number of hits no matter how boring because of their membership base, that would probably drown the hits on an announcement that the MFC had demolished the MCG. And if they are interested, I don't personally care what they label us as.

But I am concerned about sponsors. They may well do some serious market research of their own which could indicate it could endanger their image to be associated with us. In the long term it won't matter as long as we start winning. But there might be short-term problems and even longer term ones if we don't improve much on the field. A long period of mediocre performance (which despite the depressives around here, we could survive) would probably hurt us more if sponsors think they would be putting their image in jeopardy because of a perceived tanking stain.

The administration could be copping a 500,000 dollar fine next week, i wouldnt call that backing the wrong horse RF, how many memberships is that, so if you think the administration is flying i would suggest you are just as incorrect as CW, it works both ways RF.

If you believe Wilson they will but I don't.

If we tanked it was a directive from the top and DMcL wasn't the President at the time.

There's an ignore button?

Could everyone who has me on their "ignore button" please let me know.

You bet, it's in manage preferences.

Awesome, didnt realise that. Iwill miss Ben-Hurs avatar but certainly not his holier than thou antagonistic rubbish. See ya mate!

"You aren't ignoring any users"

Wanna bet.

Want to get a feel for what fans of other clubs think about this likely outcome ...

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/big-announcement-penalties-to-be-handed-out-to-melbourne-re-tanking.990131/

And the other side of the lunatic fringe here want to go to court.

"Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right ..."

Stuck in the middle...

Don't tell me that we should give a great amount of credence to the views of other clubs' supporters. They are not as informed as they would need to be to make a judgement. For one, they have not followed the intricacies of our situation and have largely been 'informed' by CW with her 'vault' lies creating the initial and most lasting impression on the minds of the average AFL supporter.

And all they convince themselves of our guilt with "does anyone think they were trying to win games." As if that is enough for a conviction - CW used it on FC as if that in itself was enough to prove guilt.

The end of 2007 saw the beginning of a massive bottoming out of this club in an effort to rebuild through the draft, and while you can argue the merits of such a bottoming out and faith in youth and experimentation, you can't argue it is against the rules to have said faith.

But it is the very thing that caused us to be so poor - we put trying to win games to the rear of our desires.

So if experimentation in one game can be met with a fine - can an over-emphasis on youth also be punished accordingly?

"You aren't ignoring any users"

Wanna bet.

I wish I could have this function as a real life application with some of the old hags at work.

I know this is a tanking forum but I'm more worried about Mitch Clark's foot! He is not going to be ready for round one. Remember that ruckman whose foot never got better. Meesen-he got delisted after years on the sidelines.

Want to get a feel for what fans of other clubs think about this likely outcome ...

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/big-announcement-penalties-to-be-handed-out-to-melbourne-re-tanking.990131/

And the other side of the lunatic fringe here want to go to court.

"Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right ..."

That's what I was trying to explain to Sue and others. This is a tremendous outcome for the club. It's not the best outcome, but we're not privy to all of the evidence. It's certainly not worth going to court over.