He claimed there weren't enough pictures and some of the words were too long. This has been going on how long?

I actually feel a bit for Gil....

Adrian gets hot under the collar and calls an investigation with the backing of Demetriou. Appoints Haddad and Clothier to bring in the chains and torture equipment (Cue German speak: we have ways of making you talk!....give me your finger nail..........)..

Adrian receives detailed information from Gerard Healy 12 months ago into banned substance rumblings at Essendon, sits on it (or handballs to relative authorities...).

Adrian in November/December decides to move onto better pastures, thinks he has left at a time of sustained integrity and left the AFL in good hands - in the midst of a lengthy investigation when Haddad and Clothier are still collating information from their 3rd round of interviews (ie.job not done).

Gil fills the gap for the time being at such an unprecedented and significant time in the AFL's history.

melbourne's visit to afl house last night doesn't necessarily mean there is negotiation re penalties etc. They would be set by the commission anyway if required

could be as simple as clarifiying some of the club's response items

but who knows?

I would be very surprised given the "no win" situation each party finds itself in if there wasn't some dialogue occurring to prevent the matter getting to court.

A guilty plea from an MFC employee or two is the best outcome for the AFL. It would vindicate their investigation whilst also being satisfied that "actual systematic tanking didn't take place".

I took McLardy's statement as a sign of unwillingness to offer up a sacrificial lamb. I then could be reading too much into things.

Why would there be a verdict? Surely the only thing that can be announced is that the investigation has recommended charging certain parties with various offences.

Is deanox a banned substance. Apparently if you mix deanox and redbull you get a nice high

melbourne's visit to afl house last night doesn't necessarily mean there is negotiation re penalties etc. They would be set by the commission anyway if required

could be as simple as clarifiying some of the club's response items

but who knows?

No one knows DC, including that fool CW, her sauces dried up along time ago, and as for Gary not having a crack on FC, as Rangey pointed out he is just part of the system, he holds no voice for this club.

I would be very surprised given the "no win" situation each party finds itself in if there wasn't some dialogue occurring to prevent the matter getting to court.

A guilty plea from an MFC employee or two is the best outcome for the AFL. It would vindicate their investigation whilst also being satisfied that "actual systematic tanking didn't take place".

I took McLardy's statement as a sign of unwillingness to offer up a sacrificial lamb. I then could be reading too much into things.

And so he should. Anything willing to offer as such is a sign of guilt. And more importantly a tainted future (labelled with asterisk) for all to see; for all time. Would you want your club to be tainted if you had the option to defend, defend and defend? (We already are by the 7 month investigation......but getting the all clear after an exhaustive inquisition will give it some gloss)

Perhaps an agreement satisfaction that "actual systematic tanking didn't take place", dropped charges, and a whack over the knuckles based on circumstantial and conflicting evidence on individuals??

I'm sure there would be dialogue occurring. Yesterday may have been a day of some discussion of further employment for CC beyond 2013/14...? Who knows..

No one knows DC, including that fool CW, her sauces dried up along time ago, and as for Gary not having a crack on FC, as Rangey pointed out he is just part of the system, he holds no voice for this club.

Gary is not your Eddie is he

And so he should. Anything willing to offer as such is a sign of guilt. And more importantly a tainted future (labelled with asterisk) for all to see; for all time. Would you want your club to be tainted if you had the option to defend, defend and defend? (We already are by the 7 month investigation......but getting the all clear after an exhaustive inquisition will give it some gloss)

Perhaps an agreement satisfaction that "actual systematic tanking didn't take place", dropped charges, and a whack over the knuckles based on circumstantial and conflicting evidence on individuals??

I'm sure there would be dialogue occurring. Yesterday may have been a day of some discussion of further employment for CC beyond 2013/14...? Who knows..

haha I like that. AFL offering Cuddles a job. No doubt to lift the PR and humour at AFL house

I am one too Of ( dinosaur0

I gave up on expecting objective report some years back.

With the competition in the media now it has to be instant story and result.

In that atmosphere objective reporting is something we have lost.

Not many of those reporters left unfortunately

Like you and Old Fity I'm also a dinosaur. Also like you i don't have an axe to grind with CW. However i dislike her style of journalism, which hovers between discussing the politics of the game and simple gossip mongering, which has always had a place in journalism but back in the day was more the provence of the Truth not the supposedly best newspaper in the state.

Some people like this style as evidenced by the popularity of Footy Classified and for that matter CW. For me the politics of the sport are of interest sometimes but i much prefer analysis of the game itself or at the least some depth to the discussion that can help me understand things better ie it doesn't just have to be report the facts style only (though more of that would be good).

For example CW (or for that matter few journalists) have explored what the actual tanking related charges mean, how they might be applied, how they might stand up in court and what the implications of any court case might have (eg a negative finding for the AFL may impact on other laws in the game such as the draft)?

Another example: Essendon's fate largely hinges whether the substance used by them was prohibited', which given no one has tested positive would be difficult to establish i would presume. Why then was it not discussed in an hour of discussion on Footy Classified if it is possible for ASADA to test any of the substances. Is there any of it still at Essendon? Are there records? How will they determine if the supplements contained banned substances? Can they be found guilt of contravening policy in terms of how the supplement was administered? What are the next steps?

These are the questions i am interested in. CW is not alone in not asking or answering them - hundreds of journalist and so little clarity!

The other thing i find amazing is that whilst CW and others were focusing on tanking the biggest story in AFL history was unfolding. How come no one knew about what was happening at Essendon - off site injections?, 40 odd player signing multiple forms? rumors swirling about possible use of Peptides?, the increase in size of the don's players?, the huge run of soft tissue injuries that apparently are often associated with use of growth hormones? the sheer scale of it?

What about the ACC investigation - how come no one broke that

I mean come on - where were the sources? Wha didn't this get out? Kudos to Damien Barrret for triggering this and interviewing Reimers but he said last night he was going to sit on this till the first footy show in March. Healy alterted the AFL about the Peptide issue 12 months go? And still it didn't make the news. Crazy stuff.

Gary is not your Eddie is he

That he isn't.

I won't be wasting any more valuable minutes above ground watching FC or TFS again.

Marngrook for me. Hang on.. Wayne Carey!!!

Gary is not your Eddie is he

Have we considered that the club which has taken the vow of silence has also worded up Gary and said "dont comment and dont bite".

Whilst I think if this all settled with no impact to us then we should all quietly move on , but I also know some will be baying for blood - CW's in particular. I think that keeping powder dry until we know what the outcome is, is a better idea than taking her task now before all the cards are on the table.

Have we considered that the club which has taken the vow of silence has also worded up Gary and said "dont comment and dont bite".

Whilst I think if this all settled with no impact to us then we should all quietly move on , but I also know some will be baying for blood - CW's in particular. I think that keeping powder dry until we know what the outcome is, is a better idea than taking her task now before all the cards are on the table.

{haha I know why you like waffles now; nice one nutbean}

No one knows DC, including that fool CW, her sauces dried up along time ago, and as for Gary not having a crack on FC, as Rangey pointed out he is just part of the system, he holds no voice for this club.

But we let him pick our coaches...

Have we considered that the club which has taken the vow of silence has also worded up Gary and said "dont comment and dont bite".

Whilst I think if this all settled with no impact to us then we should all quietly move on , but I also know some will be baying for blood - CW's in particular. I think that keeping powder dry until we know what the outcome is, is a better idea than taking her task now before all the cards are on the table.

i must say that makes way to much sense

please desist.

That he isn't.

I won't be wasting any more valuable minutes above ground watching FC or TFS again.

Marngrook for me. Hang on.. Wayne Carey!!!

Having met them both I'll take Wayne.

Like you and Old Fity I'm also a dinosaur. Also like you i don't have an axe to grind with CW. However i dislike her style of journalism, which hovers between discussing the politics of the game and simple gossip mongering, which has always had a place in journalism but back in the day was more the provence of the Truth not the supposedly best newspaper in the state.

Some people like this style as evidenced by the popularity of Footy Classified and for that matter CW. For me the politics of the sport are of interest sometimes but i much prefer analysis of the game itself or at the least some depth to the discussion that can help me understand things better ie it doesn't just have to be report the facts style only (though more of that would be good).

For example CW (or for that matter few journalists) have explored what the actual tanking related charges mean, how they might be applied, how they might stand up in court and what the implications of any court case might have (eg a negative finding for the AFL may impact on other laws in the game such as the draft)?

Another example: Essendon's fate largely hinges whether the substance used by them was prohibited', which given no one has tested positive would be difficult to establish i would presume. Why then was it not discussed in an hour of discussion on Footy Classified if it is possible for ASADA to test any of the substances. Is there any of it still at Essendon? Are there records? How will they determine if the supplements contained banned substances? Can they be found guilt of contravening policy in terms of how the supplement was administered? What are the next steps?

These are the questions i am interested in. CW is not alone in not asking or answering them - hundreds of journalist and so little clarity!

The other thing i find amazing is that whilst CW and others were focusing on tanking the biggest story in AFL history was unfolding. How come no one knew about what was happening at Essendon - off site injections?, 40 odd player signing multiple forms? rumors swirling about possible use of Peptides?, the increase in size of the don's players?, the huge run of soft tissue injuries that apparently are often associated with use of growth hormones? the sheer scale of it?

What about the ACC investigation - how come no one broke that

I mean come on - where were the sources? Wha didn't this get out? Kudos to Damien Barrret for triggering this and interviewing Reimers but he said last night he was going to sit on this till the first footy show in March. Healy alterted the AFL about the Peptide issue 12 months go? And still it didn't make the news. Crazy stuff.

Brilliant post.

EDIT: Unfortunately this type of "muckraking" reporting which is generally opinion disguised as journalism isn't limited to football/sport. It is the current state of journalism across the board. Think it's time for another wave of new journalism.

CC spent the best part of yesteday at AFL house , being interviewed for the job vacanted by Anderson.

Have we considered that the club which has taken the vow of silence has also worded up Gary and said "dont comment and dont bite".

Whilst I think if this all settled with no impact to us then we should all quietly move on , but I also know some will be baying for blood - CW's in particular. I think that keeping powder dry until we know what the outcome is, is a better idea than taking her task now before all the cards are on the table.

Bingo. Would have been great to see Garry go to town on her, but it was not going to happen....yet.

I think a protracted court case would be a vastly worse outcome for us than it would be for the AFL.

I see the current situation as being a little like the game of "Chickie Run" as portrayed in the classic "Rebel Without a Cause"... here we have the Fat Controller in his AFL-mobile (let's call him Buzz) staring down our Don M in his MFC-mobile (let's call him Jim)... they're both revving their engines madly, but all Buzz can think of is "what if I get my sleeve caught on the door handle and can't bail out?" (Jim was smart as he wore a navvy singlet).

Is Buzz prepared to risk going over the edge, taking his AFL-mobile with him?

Will Jim have a crisis of confidence and roll over to Buzz's strength in numbers at the last moment (all his mates are watching and waiting on the sidelines)?

Stay tuned for the next exciting installment...

Like you and Old Fity I'm also a dinosaur. Also like you i don't have an axe to grind with CW. However i dislike her style of journalism, which hovers between discussing the politics of the game and simple gossip mongering, which has always had a place in journalism but back in the day was more the provence of the Truth not the supposedly best newspaper in the state.

Some people like this style as evidenced by the popularity of Footy Classified and for that matter CW. For me the politics of the sport are of interest sometimes but i much prefer analysis of the game itself or at the least some depth to the discussion that can help me understand things better ie it doesn't just have to be report the facts style only (though more of that would be good).

For example CW (or for that matter few journalists) have explored what the actual tanking related charges mean, how they might be applied, how they might stand up in court and what the implications of any court case might have (eg a negative finding for the AFL may impact on other laws in the game such as the draft)?

Another example: Essendon's fate largely hinges whether the substance used by them was prohibited', which given no one has tested positive would be difficult to establish i would presume. Why then was it not discussed in an hour of discussion on Footy Classified if it is possible for ASADA to test any of the substances. Is there any of it still at Essendon? Are there records? How will they determine if the supplements contained banned substances? Can they be found guilt of contravening policy in terms of how the supplement was administered? What are the next steps?

These are the questions i am interested in. CW is not alone in not asking or answering them - hundreds of journalist and so little clarity!

The other thing i find amazing is that whilst CW and others were focusing on tanking the biggest story in AFL history was unfolding. How come no one knew about what was happening at Essendon - off site injections?, 40 odd player signing multiple forms? rumors swirling about possible use of Peptides?, the increase in size of the don's players?, the huge run of soft tissue injuries that apparently are often associated with use of growth hormones? the sheer scale of it?

What about the ACC investigation - how come no one broke that

I mean come on - where were the sources? Wha didn't this get out? Kudos to Damien Barrret for triggering this and interviewing Reimers but he said last night he was going to sit on this till the first footy show in March. Healy alterted the AFL about the Peptide issue 12 months go? And still it didn't make the news. Crazy stuff.

Yes but, but, but, haven't we been told that Wilson is the best in the business and has the best sources? I guess she had the info but didn't think it warranted column inches.

Well lets see how the Dunce handle the distractions.

Wonder how their sponsors will react.

I see the current situation as being a little like the game of "Chickie Run" as portrayed in the classic "Rebel Without a Cause"... here we have the Fat Controller in his AFL-mobile (let's call him Buzz) staring down our Don M in his MFC-mobile (let's call him Jim)... they're both revving their engines madly, but all Buzz can think of is "what if I get my sleeve caught on the door handle and can't bail out?" (Jim was smart as he wore a navvy singlet).

Is Buzz prepared to risk going over the edge, taking his AFL-mobile with him?

Will Jim have a crisis of confidence and roll over to Buzz's strength in numbers at the last moment (all his mates are watching and waiting on the sidelines)?

Stay tuned for the next exciting installment...

Let's be honest here - everyone knows we tanked, it's only whether it can be proven that is the issue. I don't think we really want to go to court with this at the end of the day and the consequences of a loss are far worse for us than they are for the AFL. If we go before the Commission and they strip us of a couple of draft picks for the next year or two cop it on the chin and move on. We already have enough top end draft picks to work with and have mitigated against any penalties somewhat by having Hogan up our sleeve and gaining Viney with F/S. FA will also mitigate any draft picks we lose.

If we've learnt anything out of this whole debacle it should be that draft picks are not the panacea we thought they were. Sydney haven't had many high draft picks and they've won 2 flags in recent years (COL hasn't really played a factor either). Adelaide haven't had many high draft picks either and they've got a decent squad. Just get on with it and let this club get back to the business of playing footy instead of being about anything but.

just on the radio news , investigation results to he handed down by end of next week ,

Does this line give us any hint on how the investigation I going?

"I will say this, if you are out there and you think that you can run the gauntlet of cheating in this system, whether to be with the salary cap or the use of performance enhancing drugs, gambling etc, make no mistake you will be caught."

Just saying

just on the radio news , investigation results to he handed down by end of next week ,

Yeah next Commission meeting is 18th of Feb I think so will definitely be next week the sooner the better.

just on the radio news , investigation results to he handed down by end of next week ,

I hope Gillom has had time to finish reading our submisson by then

interesting he admits to not yet reading it all but kero is sure we will be charged