In a schoolyard dispute, saying "But they did it too and they're not getting into trouble" won't cut it.

No, but we don't need it to either. The big difference with a schoolyard dispute is that the school rules are (usually ...) clearly defined. "Tanking" isn't, it's just a point on a line somewhere between two extremes: at one end we have leaving no stone unturned to try to win, a the other, we have deliberately manufacturing a loss i.e. match fixing.

As such, as with much that's involved with the AFL, the teams rely on precedence and accepted practice to establish what is and what isn't permitted, both within the laws of the game, but also, within the spirit of the game.

It seems to me that the "they did it too" argument is important here, simply because it's one factor in establishing where the point on that line is between committing an offense or not.

-13 (phase II)

fasten your seat belts

will today be the day?

-13 (phase II)

fasten your seat belts

will today be the day?

No reason other than gut feel dc

But I think tomorrow.

I hope today I was over this at least 3 months ago

No, but we don't need it to either. The big difference with a schoolyard dispute is that the school rules are (usually ...) clearly defined. "Tanking" isn't, it's just a point on a line somewhere between two extremes: at one end we have leaving no stone unturned to try to win, a the other, we have deliberately manufacturing a loss i.e. match fixing.

As such, as with much that's involved with the AFL, the teams rely on precedence and accepted practice to establish what is and what isn't permitted, both within the laws of the game, but also, within the spirit of the game.

It seems to me that the "they did it too" argument is important here, simply because it's one factor in establishing where the point on that line is between committing an offense or not.

I think that 'match-fixing' refers to when you actively conspire to lose a race/match that the majority of punters are expecting you to win and people involved profit, (usually be placing wagers on the un-expected result). In our case, the majority of punters weren't expecting us to win and the way to cause an upset for the bookmakers would of been for us to win. I think that when you look at our 2012 results when we only won a solitary match vs. four wins (five times in the lead at the final siren) in 2009, when playing the same teams (GWS& Suns were not there in 2009) that outsider could be excused for saying that it was last year we tanked (notwithstanding the fact that the priority pick was not an issue due to the GWS concessions).

-13 (phase II)

fasten your seat belts

will today be the day?

Seven News last night suggested Bailey was holding out against an 'agreed outcome' - which suggests there might be a day or three to go.

Sounds like they are shaping for negotiated penalties - although it's hard to see how a career coach could accept anything but 'no case to answer' or 'impossible to prove'.

I'd like the latter for us and for the AFL to shut down tanking once and for all by introducing a ballot for the bottom four clubs and then for the middle six.

Without a ballot there is still an advantage for lower clubs to lose in, say, the last month of the season. If there's a Cotchin in the draft and not much else then clearly the 'Spoon comes with an advantage for the theoretical possibility of tanking remains.

So let's have a strong statement that while suspicions were raised the MFC was able to explain its experimentation by means of player development in the context of a punishing injury list (20-strong - or should that be weak) after round 18, 2009.

So now we're guilty because the AFL took a long time to complete an investigation?

Not as such WJ................ but unfortunately,- unjustly - wrongly - the AFL's decision will be influenced by its desire to preserve its credibility..... and to do that it has to justify the time and cost of the investigation.

I am not saying it is right .. I just think we have to face the reality - and the reality is that the desire of the AFL to show itself an efficient and effective organisation will fundamentally influence its decision.

We all agree that the AFL will not want to be taken to court .......but equally neither will we . The AFL's strategy will be to find a sanction that is not sufficient to justify the disruption (and cost) of court action eg a six month suspension for Connolly. Its all very well to say that we should fight something like that on principle - but could the Board justify knocking $500k off its FD budget to pay for it?

Looking silly should not be a consideration for the AFL.

It's about truth, fairness and justice!

Absolutely agree - but I am not talking about what should happen - I am talking about what I think will happen.

Let's not kid ourselves - "not looking silly" will just about be the AFL's main consideration

looks like nothing happening today

little paper got it wrong again

someone (forgot who) on 3aw this morning said it will be next monday. doesn't sound right as it is the day the commission meets

looks like nothing happening today

little paper got it wrong again

someone (forgot who) on 3aw this morning said it will be next monday. doesn't sound right as it is the day the commission meets

What if dc the MFC / Bailey has said to the AFL over the last week.

We will only accept a not guilty decision.

Then the AFL might be taking it to the commission for a decision on how far do you want to push this?

"The MFC will go to every court in the land" we need you to decide before we embark on that course.

Then it might just be a 3AW guess ( no that would not happen in the media)

What if dc the MFC / Bailey has said to the AFL over the last week.

We will only accept a not guilty decision.

Then the AFL might be taking it to the commission for a decision on how far do you want to push this?

"The MFC will go to every court in the land" we need you to decide before we embark on that course.

Then it might just be a 3AW guess ( no that would not happen in the media)

who knows od, i'm just getting sick of it dragging on and on

as i understand it if the afl lay charges then it goes to the commission. if it does they have to give mfc time to prepare for the commission

if they miss this next commission meeting then it goes another month min extra

of course if no charges then that is moot

and of course finally if it goes to court add another year

maybe gillom still hasn't finished reading our response (said he hadn't last week) because he has been tied up on the drug stuff?

maybe they want to go back and re-interview all the witnesses, this time without a phone book?

We should not accept a guilty verdict just so the AFL "Look Good"

Harden Up please. We fight for our own integrity. The AFL's is in total dissaray if todays papers are even half right.

who knows od, i'm just getting sick of it dragging on and on

as i understand it if the afl lay charges then it goes to the commission. if it does they have to give mfc time to prepare for the commission

if they miss this next commission meeting then it goes another month min extra

of course if no charges then that is moot

and of course finally if it goes to court add another year

maybe gillom still hasn't finished reading our response (said he hadn't last week) because he has been tied up on the drug stuff?

maybe they want to go back and re-interview all the witnesses, this time without a phone book?

Those words are probably the most accurate that have been uttered in the last 6 months on this site dc.

I doubt you could more sick of it than I am.

Following a football club is not meant to be this hard is it?

Add this and the drugs crap and I am struggling.

Wish I was off OS for a couple of weeks to escape, somewhere were there is no Internet.

Hmm I wonder where that is?

We should not accept a guilty verdict just so the AFL "Look Good"

Harden Up please. We fight for our own integrity. The AFL's is in total dissaray if todays papers are even half right.

Today's papers half right.....not even that!!!!

Wish I was off OS for a couple of weeks to escape, somewhere were there is no Internet.

Hmm I wonder where that is?

If you are with vodaphone - anywhere in the greaterMelbourne metropolis

Today's papers half right.....not even that!!!!

i was being nice!!

If you are with vodaphone - anywhere in the greaterMelbourne metropolis

Very good nutbean I like it.

looks like nothing happening today

little paper got it wrong again

someone (forgot who) on 3aw this morning said it will be next monday. doesn't sound right as it is the day the commission meets

Robbo this afternoon on SEN said today or tomorrow but then quoted Garry Lyon as saying this could be going on for a very long time ie into the Courts we go.

Inside word:

AA had told people that he wanted our blood and was going to stop at nothing to get it.

Fortune has favoured us, GM is attempting to and from what i am told has started to negotiate an outcome to get this thing to go away. Supposedly he is after charges but is looking at ways that all parties save face (whatever that means).

Inside word:

AA had told people that he wanted our blood and was going to stop at nothing to get it.

Fortune has favoured us, GM is attempting to and from what i am told has started to negotiate an outcome to get this thing to go away. Supposedly he is after charges but is looking at ways that all parties save face (whatever that means).

I reckon that might be harder than fixing Syria

Is it too positive to say that the AFL desperately needs a good news story and a signal of normal integrity in the game, thus requiring an announcement of the innocence of the MFC?

Never too positive 45HG.

Otherwise it's off to the courts and the Fink meister will be calling each and every person that was interviewed or who gave information to the inquisition, up to the witness box for cross examination and then some. People here thought the AFL's 5 month interviewing everyone and anyone was detailed enough. The Fink will make that line of questionning look like a lazy Sunday afternoon meeting at Yum Cha.

So if you've confidentially contributed to a hour's worth of questionning and answering with Haddad and Clothier, once or twice. And charges eventuate, congratulations, your life is about to get a whole lot busier in a public outing sense...

Those words are probably the most accurate that have been uttered in the last 6 months on this site dc.

I doubt you could more sick of it than I am.

Following a football club is not meant to be this hard is it?

Add this and the drugs crap and I am struggling.

Wish I was off OS for a couple of weeks to escape, somewhere were there is no Internet.

Hmm I wonder where that is?

Harden up OD. It's not that bad and it certainly can't get any worse.

Jeez it's good being an optimist.

They tell me there's no internet in Heaven - but I'm not sure that's true. How else would God communicate with Jack Viney? After all, he is the new messiah and will need some guidance occasionally.

History tells us that when God's not happy about the way things are going he usually creates some devastating catastrophe in order to cleanse us of our sins and enable us to start afresh. This is it OD - the new beginning. Embrace the hardship as if it was a case of 25 year old Aberlour. Good times are ahead my friend.

Go DEES!

Harden up OD. It's not that bad and it certainly can't get any worse.

Jeez it's good being an optimist.

They tell me there's no internet in Heaven - but I'm not sure that's true. How else would God communicate with Jack Viney? After all, he is the new messiah and will need some guidance occasionally.

History tells us that when God's not happy about the way things are going he usually creates some devastating catastrophe in order to cleanse us of our sins and enable us to start afresh. This is it OD - the new beginning. Embrace the hardship as if it was a case of 25 year old Aberlour. Good times are ahead my friend.

Go DEES!

I am not going there to find out mate.

I just could not stand another season of this joke of an investigation, going into courts, taking focus away from trying to get off the bottom of the ladder.

This has dragged on long enough. it just baffles me due to some media coverage we have to spend countless hours, money etc defending ourselves.

They tell me there's no internet in Heaven

again....vodaphone

Edited February 11, 201312 yr by nutbean

Inside word:

AA had told people that he wanted our blood and was going to stop at nothing to get it.

Fortune has favoured us, GM is attempting to and from what i am told has started to negotiate an outcome to get this thing to go away. Supposedly he is after charges but is looking at ways that all parties save face (whatever that means).

Your have the contact, i was told DB wont negotiate.

Inside word:

AA had told people that he wanted our blood and was going to stop at nothing to get it.

Fortune has favoured us, GM is attempting to and from what i am told has started to negotiate an outcome to get this thing to go away. Supposedly he is after charges but is looking at ways that all parties save face (whatever that means).

I reckon this is spot on. No doubt in my mind AA left (or was pushed) because of the ridiculousness of this investigation.

They will do a deal and good on them. Should have happened 6 months ago. As i've said before there are no winners going to court and whilst it might make some supporters feel all warm inside if we fight city hall pragmatism will win out (as it usually should).

Avoiding court doesn't have to mean accepting guilt on tanking or offering CC up as a sacrificial lamb (or should that be sacrificial scapegoat).

Good on Gil for looking for a way out (if true)