MT-AFL. Cameron do you have any comment about the tanking issue ?

CS No

MT-AFL is that your comment ?

CS No, i have No comment to make

MT-AFL So your comment is no comment ?

CS I am not making any comments

MT-AFL Will the club be making any official comments ?

CS I have no comment

MT-AFL Is the club confident of evading charges relating to tanking

CS No comment

MT-AFL Will Melbourne refer action to the courts if found guilty of charges.

CS No Comment

MT-AFL Thanks for talking exclusively with us Cameron

CS Youre an idiot !!

Matt Thompson is a very dull man. He will do anything for a $$$.

He was suprised at how much chinese food there was at the Chinese Olympic Games..says it all really.

Perhaps another interesting topic starter on the forum, but this guy would have to be one of the most annoying people in radio, second only to possibly Jason Richardson

Perhaps another interesting topic starter on the forum, but this guy would have to be one of the most annoying people in radio, second only to possibly Jason Richardson

Is that the Jason "Richo" Richardson the horse racing bloke that's on TVN?

That's the one. Occasionally on SEN as well

That's the one. Occasionally on SEN as well

Gee, harsh! I have the luxury of not getting SEN where I live, but when I watch Richo on TVN, especially on a Friday night, I think he is quite funny but also very knowledgable! Each to their own!

Gee, harsh! I have the luxury of not getting SEN where I live, but when I watch Richo on TVN, especially on a Friday night, I think he is quite funny but also very knowledgable! Each to their own!

I think he also won the Stawell Gift. I find him ok.

Gee, harsh! I have the luxury of not getting SEN where I live, but when I watch Richo on TVN, especially on a Friday night, I think he is quite funny but also very knowledgable! Each to their own!

Don't you realize that any reporter that says anything about us and tanking is a dud, doesn't know what they're talking about and only worth of ridicule.

Let's hope Emma doesn't get involved or DL will lose its love child.

I think he also won the Stawell Gift. I find him ok.

Yes and Yes

I think he also won the Stawell Gift. I find him ok.

He did indeed Redleg...

Don't you realize that any reporter that says anything about us and tanking is a dud, doesn't know what they're talking about and only worth of ridicule.

Let's hope Emma doesn't get involved or DL will lose its love child.

ho hum

..

As you know very well its not the WHAT but the how of its reporting.

Many a scribe is lazy, inaccurate and seemingly coseted by some motive nefarious.

Id welcome an article by EQ .

Don't you realize that any reporter that says anything about us and tanking is a dud, doesn't know what they're talking about and only worth of ridicule.

Let's hope Emma doesn't get involved or DL will lose its love child.

If EQ starts doing a Wilson and making up her own version of events she will rightly cop criticism here; that's fair isn't it.

Don't you realize that any reporter that says anything about us and tanking is a dud, doesn't know what they're talking about and only worth of ridicule.

Let's hope Emma doesn't get involved or DL will lose its love child.

Flanagan got involved and we still respect him.

I think you will find that the vast majority of footy 'journalists' are not well liked because they are illiterate ADHD sufferers and not because we don't like them reporting on the tanking investigation...

Flanagan got involved and we still respect him.

I think you will find that the vast majority of footy 'journalists' are not well liked because they are illiterate ADHD sufferers and not because we don't like them reporting on the tanking investigation...

If you think they are illiterate ADHD sufferers what does it make you when you keep reading them.

Beggars belief really.

If you think they are illiterate ADHD sufferers what does it make you when you keep reading them.

Beggars belief really.

We often scout the enemy, not to embrace them , just to note what they are up to.

Perhaps another interesting topic starter on the forum, but this guy would have to be one of the most annoying people in radio, second only to possibly Jason Richardson

...Jason Richardson drives me mad, thinks he's funny, keeps laughing at his own dumb jokes. I guess someone has to.

If you think they are illiterate ADHD sufferers what does it make you when you keep reading them.

Beggars belief really.

It 'beggars belief' that I read sports journos who write about the team I love and the sport I follow and play?

I am content with my judgement of sports media (and media in general but let's not get into that here) and the fact that as much as some posters on here are an unavoidable nuisance for a Demon fan on Demonland as Robinson, Clark, Pierik, Wilson, et al are for any enlightened footy fan of good conscience.

You cannot escape it - doesn't mean you can't judge it.

In fact, if you simply 'ignore' something or somoene - then you are passively allowing it to continue and tacitly approving of it.

Flanagan got involved and we still respect him.

I hate the constant comparisons between Flanagan and other journalists.

Flanagan is a colour / feature writer - his job is not to break stories or report the news.

He's given the time (and he has the skill) to really practise writing as a craft - a luxury not afforded to a news journo on deadline.

If he was forced to report news or break stories you might well come to loathe him as you do the others.

That's not an attack on him either - I really enjoy his writing.

But you can't compare him to Caro et al. He writes about the game in the way that Garrie Hutchinson used to do.

I hate the constant comparisons between Flanagan and other journalists.

Flanagan is a colour / feature writer - his job is not to break stories or report the news.

He's given the time (and he has the skill) to really practise writing as a craft - a luxury not afforded to a news journo on deadline.

If he was forced to report news or break stories you might well come to loathe him as you do the others.

That's not an attack on him either - I really enjoy his writing.

But you can't compare him to Caro et al. He writes about the game in the way that Garrie Hutchinson used to do.

You're not arguing with me. Journos have their responsibilities and I feel that you don't have to have eloquence to be an adequate journo. But you do need to have facts, write on substantive topics and refrain from editorialising news. And if you can't do that because 'you are on a deadline' then you should get off the TV, stop tweeting, and attempt to a better job of your chosen profession.

Forgive my passion on this - I am the son of two former journos and I have been annoying the regulars with this stuff for a couple years now.

The basis of a lot of thinking here is that if a journalist writes a complimentary article on Melbourne they are a 'good' journalist, but if they write a negative article on Melbourne they are a 'hack'. Stories supportive of Melbourne are immediately described as 'great' (regardless of their real literary worth), while stories criticising Melbourne have their author's integrity questioned

I think it's sloppy logic and poor debate.

The basis of a lot of thinking here is that if a journalist writes a complimentary article on Melbourne they are a 'good' journalist, but if they write a negative article on Melbourne they are a 'hack'. Stories supportive of Melbourne are immediately described as 'great' (regardless of their real literary worth), while stories criticising Melbourne have their author's integrity questioned

I think it's sloppy logic and poor debate.

Notwithstanding, this doesn't justify opinion articles which smear the club and it's officials or single them out for contempt for doing what several others were doing for several years with little if no condemnation at all.

Moreover, many here have been known to cringe at articles that are complimentary of the club if they sense a touch of fairy floss about them.

And while I accept grapeviney's comments about Martin Flanagan's role as a colour/feature writer, his piece defending Melbourne was in response to Wilson's loathsome attack on the club (which was itself an op ed) so in that instance the comparison is valid.

The basis of a lot of thinking here is that if a journalist writes a complimentary article on Melbourne they are a 'good' journalist, but if they write a negative article on Melbourne they are a 'hack'. Stories supportive of Melbourne are immediately described as 'great' (regardless of their real literary worth), while stories criticising Melbourne have their author's integrity questioned

I think it's sloppy logic and poor debate.

So is yours.

There's a lot more to a lot of posts about journalists on these threads.

Just because some posts are as you describe doesn't make them all like that.

The basis of a lot of thinking here is that if a journalist writes a complimentary article on Melbourne they are a 'good' journalist, but if they write a negative article on Melbourne they are a 'hack'. Stories supportive of Melbourne are immediately described as 'great' (regardless of their real literary worth), while stories criticising Melbourne have their author's integrity questioned

I think it's sloppy logic and poor debate.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but some of these articles are very slanderous, particularly when we may well be found to have no case to answer for.

It's really quite simple, they shouldn't open their mouths unless they know exactly what they're talking about. If we are found guilty we deserve whatever anyone gives us, until then they should on the most part be more respectful and at least be open minded to the idea that we may not be found guilty.

The basis of a lot of thinking here is that if a journalist writes a complimentary article on Melbourne they are a 'good' journalist, but if they write a negative article on Melbourne they are a 'hack'. Stories supportive of Melbourne are immediately described as 'great' (regardless of their real literary worth), while stories criticising Melbourne have their author's integrity questioned

I think it's sloppy logic and poor debate.

Trial by media is the domain of hack columnists.

The basis of a lot of thinking here is that if a journalist writes a complimentary article on Melbourne they are a 'good' journalist, but if they write a negative article on Melbourne they are a 'hack'. Stories supportive of Melbourne are immediately described as 'great' (regardless of their real literary worth), while stories criticising Melbourne have their author's integrity questioned

I think it's sloppy logic and poor debate.

Yes it does seem like that sometimes on here especially in regards to MFC and alleged Tanking. Unfortunately Journalists since the beginning have numbered more towards imbalance views and propaganda than balanced truth. Yes the invention of the printing press enable many good causes and the sharing of ideas that changed peoples life for the good, but unfortunately it was also used to spread unsavoury messages that hurt many innocent people. Journalism today is like everything else a business and it is also unregulated and protected by the idea of a free press. But to have a regulated press that was controlled and run by government would just be a form of tyranny. So we are left with a system that means that people right stuff to make money and sell papers, these days trying to sift through the mass media for unbiased, non-sponsored and balanced information is a challenging task that people just don't have the time and energy to waste on. Sometimes you gotta just find the article that you agree with and ignore the rest. Is that the right thing to do? IDK you tell me! FWIW I think that what's right, is a hell of a lot harder to do then what is easy. I reckon Journo's and D'landers like me are guilty of it on occasions. Does that mean that they and I are wrong? Who knows, Who cares. But now that I have written all this I have realised that like a fluffy cloud on a spring day this post meanders across the sky going no where in particular seen by some and missed by others. I stop and think an ponder the question if words are written and remain unread by others do they exist.......

I think there is something in that for none of us Ba Ha Ha Ha!