"Tanking"

[Redleg 41,427]

I've just listened to Caro and Waitley and it's quite different to the views I've read on here.

Everybody here is worried about the garnish but the real crux of the matter is not that we tanked which is widely accepted but

• firstly that the club allowed it to be openly discussed at the time meaning that many many people knew it was a club policy clearly articulated (generally accepted here)
• but coupled with this allowed the FD and administration to become so divided that the disaffected people who felt so mistreated by the divisions and power plays were prepared to talk extensively and were motivated by revenge against those still at the club.

It was a failure of management. If we'd managed the process OR managed the people we'd be home free. But we didn't do either.

That's the crux of it. I think the discussion on Offsiders was right on the money.

Bob, not sure how you manage people you sack or let go. They will always be upset. I note ex Richmond Coach Terry Wallace admitted tanking, was he badly managed by the Tigers? Fevola and Libba said the Blues tanked, did the Blues badly manage that? Reimers put the Bombers in did the Bombers badly manage that? Jesse McGrath of the Lions put them in today for match fixing and drug use. Did the Lions badly manage that?

BTW do you think the Lions will cop a 7 month investigation on the back of a former player saying they match fixed , spot fixed and bought drugs off him. Bet your life the AFL will find a way to ignore it.

Caro says if the Blues had a vault meeting and were guilty they should also be investigated. Do you see anything unusual in her treatment of them compared to us? "If they were guilty" and "vault meeting" which only came to light as a result of the 7 month inquiry.

I just see us as a patsy. Yes we have done things poorly, but to be fair so have others, but again we take the blame, us alone. I can see why so many of our supporters have a victim mentality.

[The Reverend 1,736]

If CC was getting outed for 12months, you would like to think that MFC would be trying to negotiate a fine that would be the same as CC wage over the next 12mnths, that would be the smart thing to do.

But would it be the right thing to do? We talk about the lack of a strong culture at Melbourne and yet you advocate hanging one of our own out to dry. Not for me. I don't want to hear economic rationalism. This is our football club. Give me something to be proud of at the end of this.

[Hannibal 5,814]

Given the above and yet we still managed to be ahead at the siren, it would seem we were such a super team we should have been able to win the flag.

It's seems that you forget how poor Richmond were. It's been stated since that the Richmond coaching group were gutted, because they knew they'd only just beaten a team desperate to lose.

But if you really don't think we tanked that day give up watching footy.

[sue 9,142]

Don has stated that the integrity of the MFC will be defended in the strongest possible fashion. Does this clearly indicate we will not accept any charge whatsoever??

I would have thought that if we take any deal at all, then there is an admission of guilt.

Depends on what the charge is. What if the AFL says we didn't 'tank', but some officials made comments that were liable to misinterpretation and this had the potential to bring the game into disrepute?

(Of course, far less disrepute than this stinking 8 month investigation.)

[Redleg 41,427]

BTW seven news yesterday said Bailey's Solicitor would fight any charges levelled against him. Interesting.

[Redleg 41,427]

Depends on what the charge is. What if the AFL says we didn't 'tank', but some officials made comments that were liable to misinterpretation and this had the potential to bring the game into disrepute?

(Of course, far less disrepute than this stinking 8 month investigation.)

Trouble is they were said in private football discussions at the MFC not in the media. The AFL through leaks of their investigation, have brought them to public knowledge. The AFL have therefore leaked confidential club information and possibly intellectual property, it could be argued.

I still think the AFL have real problems with their charges. Maybe they charge us , we appeal and at a mediation or pre trial conference, we all settle.

[Dee Fan 3,247]

It's seems that you forget how poor Richmond were. It's been stated since that the Richmond coaching group were gutted, because they knew they'd only just beaten a team desperate to lose.

But if you really don't think we tanked that day give up watching footy.

Was it as bad as the game against Geelong when we lost by 186 points; did we try that day?

I've been to hundreds of Melbourne games and was there that day; I still believe that Carlton's performance against us in the Kruezer cup was worse and more blatant, do you agree?

[McQueen 17,867]

Depends on what the charge is. What if the AFL says we didn't 'tank', but some officials made comments that were liable to misinterpretation and this had the potential to bring the game into disrepute?

(Of course, far less disrepute than this stinking 8 month investigation.)

Well then it's all about perception isn't it now. But we all know that.

Hard evidence is another thing.

[Dee Fan 3,247]

Trouble is they were said in private football discussions at the MFC not in the media. The AFL through leaks of their investigation, have brought them to public knowledge. The AFL have therefore leaked confidential club information and possibly intellectual property, it could be argued.

I still think the AFL have real problems with their charges. Maybe they charge us , we appeal and at a mediation or pre trial conference, we all settle.

What would you accept from them as a settlement? I'd suggest that if they reimbursed us the wages expended on staff gathering information plus an apology would cover it.

[dee-luded 2,959]

I've just listened to Caro and Waitley and it's quite different to the views I've read on here.

Everybody here is worried about the garnish but the real crux of the matter is not that we tanked which is widely accepted but

• firstly that the club allowed it to be openly discussed at the time meaning that many many people knew it was a club policy clearly articulated (generally accepted here)
• but coupled with this allowed the FD and administration to become so divided that the disaffected people who felt so mistreated by the divisions and power plays were prepared to talk extensively and were motivated by revenge against those still at the club.

It was a failure of management. If we'd managed the process OR managed the people we'd be home free. But we didn't do either.

That's the crux of it. I think the discussion on Offsiders was right on the money.

So its OK as long as its under the carpet & kept pressed down?

Just so long as the dirty truth doesn't see the light of day?

You do seem to change your tone from the time you started Fan.

Your seem to be driving up roads previously rutted by Kero, who in turn seems to be following the company map.

[Hannibal 5,814]

Was it as bad as the game against Geelong when we lost by 186 points; did we try that day?

I've been to hundreds of Melbourne games and was there that day; I still believe that Carlton's performance against us in the Kruezer cup was worse and more blatant, do you agree?

"Was it as bad as the game against Geelong when we lost by 186 points"

No. The players had a crack against Richmond, which is why we nearly won.

"did we try that day?"

The players didn't.

"I still believe that Carlton's performance against us in the Kruezer cup was worse and more blatant, do you agree?"

Hell no.

[PJ_12345 1,098]

i would only accept that IF the afl then agreed to start an investigation on 6 other clubs (at least) suspected of "tanking"

i would love then to watch the media "speculation"

Fat chance that would ever happen. It took 8 months to investigate us, imagine how long it would take to investigate 6, most of which have been 6 + years in Carltons case, 7 in Freos and almost 10 years for Hawthorn.

I would like it however if we could get a statement that the club isnt being charged... just DB and CC - which is what the media is speculating.

[Dockett 32 1,239]

Trouble is they were said in private football discussions at the MFC not in the media. The AFL through leaks of their investigation, have brought them to public knowledge. The AFL have therefore leaked confidential club information and possibly intellectual property, it could be argued.

I still think the AFL have real problems with their charges. Maybe they charge us , we appeal and at a mediation or pre trial conference, we all settle.

Wouldn't look too good for the AFL if it went to court only to see the 'heir apparent' get belted all over the field due to a very ordinary first judgement call.

[Dee Fan 3,247]

"Was it as bad as the game against Geelong when we lost by 186 points"

No. The players had a crack against Richmond, which is why we nearly won.

"did we try that day?"

The players didn't.

"I still believe that Carlton's performance against us in the Kruezer cup was worse and more blatant, do you agree?"

Hell no.

I thought the game against Carlton was almost comical, at no stage did it look like Carlton were trying, in fact I would like that game to be part of our defence to the AFL.

If we are going to get done we should drag all the others in and question the integrity of the AFL, you cannot cherry pick.

[The Reverend 1,736]

If CC was getting outed for 12months, you would like to think that MFC would be trying to negotiate a fine that would be the same as CC wage over the next 12mnths, that would be the smart thing to do.

Fat chance that would ever happen. It took 8 months to investigate us, imagine how long it would take to investigate 6, most of which have been 6 + years in Carltons case, 7 in Freos and almost 10 years for Hawthorn.

I would like it however if we could get a statement that the club isnt being charged... just DB and CC - which is what the media is speculating.

I repeat -

But would it be the right thing to do? We talk about the lack of a strong culture at Melbourne and yet you advocate hanging one of our own out to dry. Not for me. I don't want to hear economic rationalism. This is our football club. Give me something to be proud of at the end of this.

I'm realistic enough to know that we probably can't escape without some sort of whack. However, I'll be really disappointed if we are seen to make scapegoats of our own people just to minimise the damage to our finances. Bugger that - fight it out and hold our heads high for once. Look after our own and stand united.

[dee-luded 2,959]

Trouble is they were said in private football discussions at the MFC not in the media. The AFL through leaks of their investigation, have brought them to public knowledge. The AFL have therefore leaked confidential club information and possibly intellectual property, it could be argued.

I still think the AFL have real problems with their charges. Maybe they charge us , we appeal and at a mediation or pre trial conference, we all settle.

this is gettin closer to all parties saving 'Face'...

We have to prove we are No Longer anyones Patsy's!

Let all the world see that Ye Oldest Footy Club, has done with lying down & won't beg for mercy.

Fight, Fight, & Fight again.

The way to onfield success is We will Never Surrender...

Was it as bad as the game against Geelong when we lost by 186 points; did we try that day?

I've been to hundreds of Melbourne games and was there that day; I still believe that Carlton's performance against us in the Kruezer cup was worse and more blatant, do you agree?

I was there & the impression I had was the Carlton players were trying to not win that Kreuzer cup game.

they appeared to pull their kicks & their matchups & general play was so indirect against barely any pressure. they out tanked the match winner. just as Richmond failed.

[hoopla 418]

Why advocate accepting mooted penalties when there are no specifics on what the charges are.

What is the club charged with to earn a half-million dollar fine?

What is CC charged with?

What is DB charged with?

Does anyone really know?

Strange process when the penalties are accepted before the charges are known.

Strange .............. and unacceptable !!

The only one I reckon you could put your house on is the CC charge of bringing the game in to disrepute, for comments, regardless of their intention, about ensuring we lose required games, and threatening employees with their employment should this not happen.

Should he be punished for making a "joke" about tanking/losing games/etc? Sounds harsh, but the AFL need to get something out of this investigation, and from all reports, it's about the only piece of evidence that seems consistent, and has people/witnesses willing to put hand on heart in a court of law and tell it how it is.

I know I will cop the "it was only a joke" crap, but how about those posters have a realistic look at it and board this reality bus that seems to be the favoured mode of transport around here.

It'd have to be a straw house circled by an out-of-control bushfire!!

Even a serious comment in an a internal operations meetings - does nothing to the reputation of the "game".

Attempted draft tampering would be the only possible charge - and as the draft nominations weren't open at that stage - that's stretching a long bow as well.

Don has stated that the integrity of the MFC will be defended in the strongest possible fashion. Does this clearly indicate we will not accept any charge whatsoever??

I would have thought that if we take any deal at all, then there is an admission of guilt.

I agree. In year's to come we don;t want to be one of a handful of clubs convicted of bringing the game we invented into disrepute !! We have our integrity to defend

What's the charge Mr McLachlan??

Edited February 18, 2013 by hoopla

[mjt 640]

But would it be the right thing to do? We talk about the lack of a strong culture at Melbourne and yet you advocate hanging one of our own out to dry. Not for me. I don't want to hear economic rationalism. This is our football club. Give me something to be proud of at the end of this.

Who knows what the right thing to do is, one things for sure, CC needs to think before he speaks, the average supporter is over this [censored], they just want it settled.

[Redleg 41,427]

Nine news said Commission will rubber stamp $500k fine tonight and let us know tonight.

Seven news said Commission meeting is a marathon and tanking situation up in the air.

[The Reverend 1,736]

Who knows what the right thing to do is, one things for sure, CC needs to think before he speaks, the average supporter is over this [censored], they just want it settled.

I'm over this shite as well, but it needs to be finished to our satisfaction, not the AFL's. The song says, "Every heart beats true..." It doesn't exclude those who open their mouth and say the wrong thing at times. If that was the case there wouldn't be too many members left in the reserved seat section where I sit.

[Biffen 12,946]

Nine news said Commission will rubber stamp $500k fine tonight and let us know tonight.

Seven news said Commission meeting is a marathon and tanking situation up in the air.

They cant even leak a legal dispute to the media properly .

[Redleg 41,427]

It is interesting that when CC and CS were for the sack according to Wilson, at that stage without any proof of anything at all, no one except some of us at Demonland stood up for the unfairness of her report. However when poster boy Hird is suggested may be sacked so many media types are jumping to his defence, raising all sorts of reasons why he should stay, including lets wait for the findings.

Pity that standard doesn't apply to our people.

[jumbo returns 6,741]

I thought the game against Carlton was almost comical, at no stage did it look like Carlton were trying, in fact I would like that game to be part of our defence to the AFL.

If we are going to get done we should drag all the others in and question the integrity of the AFL, you cannot cherry pick.

True....whilst 2009 was a joke, allowing TJ to collect 40 odd touches was farcical.

Getting traded that year was incredibly clever by the Club - you fool, Matthews.

[old dee 23,871]

Well another day draws to a close with no result.

We are rapidly approaching 8 months.

What a farse.

If we are hit with $500k head to the courts boys what do we have to lose.

If they want to crucify us then lets go down fighting.

Please no more of the weakling getting sand kicked in its face.

I want to support a club that fights hard and gives no quarter

Edited February 18, 2013 by old dee

[Hannibal 5,814]

It is interesting that when CC and CS were for the sack according to Wilson, at that stage without any proof of anything at all, no one except some of us at Demonland stood up for the unfairness of her report. However when poster boy Hird is suggested may be sacked so many media types are jumping to his defence, raising all sorts of reasons why he should stay, including lets wait for the findings.

Pity that standard doesn't apply to our people.

Why didn't you point out that Wilson is at least consistent ? She's also stated that Hird should go, as has Smith.

There is a difference though. Every man and his dog believes that Melbourne conspired to lose except for some Melbourne supporters, while Hird is guilty of not being across all aspects of his club. A marked difference imo. Leigh Matthews has stated that as a coach he couldn't unequivocally say what his players were given as it was left to the Doctors and sports scientists.

I don't believe Hird should be sacked. The fact that all clubs reviewed their own policies in light of what is happening at Essendon insinuates that the same situation could/would have been happening at other clubs.

Edited February 18, 2013 by Ben-Hur