"Tanking"

[nutbean 8,838]

Exactly what I was thinking. She reads Demonland. So improve your writing people or the Age's standards will fall even further.

She does read Demonland - unfortunately like everything else she does - she reads demonland selectively

Tomorrows headline

Exactly what I was thinking. She reads Demonland. So improve your writing people or the Age's standards will fall even further.

[Mac7 309]

She is almost pleading with the AFL to charge us now to try and save some face!!

Career hanging by a thread. The vast majority of the fooball public now see straight through her. If she continues like this throughout 2013 bye bye Carowhine.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,166]

Hopefully there's some announcement today (though I won't hold my breath) I'm sick of the speculation.

[biggestred 5,015]

the thing that annoys me is - apart from the fact she has NO evidence - that if/when we are innocent, she will just say how pathetic the afl are because we clearly tanked.

[nutbean 8,838]

We had the debate with fan/bob regarding her influence and I suggested my dislike for her work isbecause she is widely read,respected and noticed (as opposed to that giant [censored] Denham).

After reading some of Bomberblitz and their indignation at her work I will say that her influence is even worse as 400 odd pags (of which I only read a sampling) there is not a mention of her work elsewhere - ie on the tanking probe.

This tells me that unless her writings directly affect your club her articles would be read digested and hardly questioned by a large cross section of supporters of other clubs. I am not sure that other supporters would be dissecting her writing like we do and seeing the very obvious lack of quality - this is the most worrying part of her writing IMO.

[The Chazz 4,077]

Oh you must have read the 800 pages as well and all the references to CC's joke. you have just contradicted yourself

If they had any real evideNce you would have heard about it by now. Fumbling?? NOt playing Watts? really? Is that all you've got??

How have I contradicted myself? I am the first to admit that if a bulk of the evidence is what has been reported in the media, then absolutely they have minimal chance of proving we are guilty of losing games on purpose (through the fumbling comments, not playing Watts, etc). If that's their evidence for that subject, then I find it quite amusing to think that they would try and get that to stick.

However, if as reported, a number of people have mentioned CC making those comments, then I'm concerned.

I, like every single person on here, am only juding my opinions based on what the media is feeding us, as dangerous as that is. I'm as one-eyed and as passionate as anyone on here, but I'm also realistic. I can't see how it is at all possible that we will be found guilty of "tanking", however, CC is in serious crapola.

Excellent point. To my knowledge there has been no official or unofficial defence issued by the club at all. Perhaps she reads Demonland and has cherry picked some of the poorer posts and anointed them as forming our "unofficial defence"?

She's certainly shown that she doesn't understand the fact that if you have a "serious case to answer", you are entitled and have a right to mount a defence based on the legalities of the situation.

Her sheer ignorance of this fact simply beggars belief.

I'm interested to know which posts you refer to there WJ? From my observations, a massive majority of the posts from day 1 of the investigation, especially from those posters who think this whole thing is a joke, have frequently suggested that "if we're guilty, then so are other teams". I don't think there has been one occasion that I have used in my defending of the Club that if we are found guilty then everyone else should be, because in my opinion, it is a weak and childish defence, which is the opinion shared by Kero. The only time I even talk about other teams doing it is well is when I say that we were the stupid ones that got caught out.

Don't get me wrong, I have a strong disliking for Kero, but I just can't see the point in getting worked up by what she publishes. It's quite a simple thing - if she's right, we probably deserve what's coming, if she's wrong, then I will happily assist with the funding required to ruin her career.

The thing that does concern me out of that article however, is the fact that she has been very exact with her view and hasn't held back in any way. But, by the end of the article, she has given us none of her regular CS hate. I ask myself, why is this article any different to the ones that she has published is the past? Nothing in the past has stopped her from knifing CS, and she has done it with great moisture, but this one he's barely mentioned...

[PJ_12345 1,098]

She is almost pleading with the AFL to charge us now to try and save some face!!

Career hanging by a thread. The vast majority of the fooball public now see straight through her. If she continues like this throughout 2013 bye bye Carowhine.

Yeah talk about putting everything on red.

She has really put herself in an awkward situation... but at the end of the day if we beat all the charges, and yes we could sue for defamation, lets face it she and us know we wont

[jabberwocky 2,301]

"The Demons have engaged former Federal Court judge Ray Finkelstein to lead their defence and their view is that they have a very good case. Perhaps in legal terms they are correct even though their stated excuses are so so flimsy, irrelevant and in some cases childish.

Perhaps, in the name of political expediency, their punishment will be mitigated."

This is the relevant part of the article and the conclusion that I have begun to draw.

The rest is just Caro rambling. What matters is what will matter in a court of law not a court of journos. I couldn't give a stuff about her opinion.

Edited February 12, 2013 by dandeeman

[loges 6,767]

"The Demons have engaged former Federal Court judge Ray Finkelstein to lead their defence and their view is that they have a very good case. Perhaps in legal terms they are correct even though their stated excuses are so so flimsy, irrelevant and in some cases childish.

Perhaps, in the name of political expediency, their punishment will be mitigated."

This is the relevant part of the article and the conclusion that I have begin to draw.

The rest is just Caro rambling. What matters is what will matter in a court of law not a court of journos. I couldn't give a stuff about her opinion.

Its amazing how she fobs this off as practically irrelevant

[Soidee 1,496]

Wilson is running a public campaign against the MFC, as a current member I have had a gut full of her rage against our club. Her stories have a hate tone and I am finding this offensive.

I implore the MFC to fight damn hard against this on behalf of its supporter base. I want this gutter journalist to be held accountable for her public campaign against this club. This daily rant has to stop.

[Guest]

All we need now from Caro is an article about James Brayshaw and she will have fulfilled her quota of negative articles for the week. You just knew she couldn't avoid whacking us even with the drugs scandal having reached it zenith.

Let's have a look at some of her arguments about why we should be punished.

1) The first is the schoolyard excuse: that everybody else was doing it -or at least a sufficient number of clubs, meaning that their club should not be singled out. Further, if the club is punished, then it will drag down others along with it.

It would be a school yard excuse Caro but I believe you are using the wrong part of the school in your analogy. This situation is like a student who has spent all week playing Tetris during class time. Instead of being left to their own devices, the teacher then turns around and gives them the answers to the test in the name of fairness. When the teacher is then reprimanded as to why little Johnny has then been deliberately goofing off in class and yet is being rewarded for it, he/she then blames the student in spite of the rules put in place. I don't know too many classrooms/schoolyards that work like that.

2) Another excuse by Melbourne is that staff and former staff were ''verballed'' or harassed by AFL investigators.

As much as you don't like it Caro, there are processes in place and trial by media hysteria or trial by coercion do not lead to natural justice. If the AFL had such a watertight case against the MFC, they should have been able to have stick to more orthodox interviewing/information gathering techniques without the bully boy tactics that Clothier and co. employed. Information given under duress is often unreliable information. Just ask the blokes waterboarded at Gitmo or Tim Anderson of Ananda Marga fame.

I think that the stuff on Conolly isn't a hanging offence but he was silly to be saying stuff like that. He must have known what kind of atmosphere he was in and that there were people out to get him. That being said, I think as a club we should support him. He has given a lot to the club and he shouldn't be thrown to the wolves.

3) And that Melbourne is too weak to be punished. And - finally - that the AFL has no proof. Certainly the whistleblower Brock McLean provided noevidence. It is understood that Melbourne will be charged in the coming days and almost certainly by Friday. One expected charge is bringing the game into disrepute. Connolly will be charged as will former coach Dean Bailey, but Fairfax Media could not confirm whether CEO Cameron Schwab would also be charged.

I loved this part the most of all. It was almost you could hear the dialogue going on inside her head.

* Caro: 'Now, the Dees say that there is no hard, documented evidence to come out of this that shows they tanked. I can't find any.... Whoops! I have written it down what do I do now?!! I know! I will just skip it like nothing happened and just move on to the talking points that suit me! '

Whatever may or may not have happened we haven't seen any hard evidence in the form of e-mail, memos, board minutes etc. that said the club was trying their best to lose. We have gotten hearsay and rumours. Justice isn't dispensed via moral crusades conducted by self appointed chest thumpers. It is conducted upon pre established laws and by proof that is quantifiable.

4) This is unlikely to happen. Neither Melbourne nor the AFL can afford a costly and protracted legal battle and it is clear now that not everyoneat the club is behind that fight-at-all-costs mentality.

You realize at this point Caro is grasping at straws. It's clear she is hoping that the club doesn't pursue this because if they do, and win, she and her paper may be in all sorts of trouble. I don't think the investigation will come out with the definitive conclusion that no dodgy dealing came out of the 2009 season but imagine if it did? What would happen then? I would hope that the Fairfax board listens to the Cruel Sea as they had 'better get a lawyer son You better get a reeeeeal good one'.

The honest truth is that the club probably did take a dive in 2009. I had my concerns about it but was open minded about it. It was a bad nor particularly moral but that was the system that was in place and we had to work within it. We saw what happened with the approach we took in 2009 during the 2012 season and we are wiser for it.

However, people of intelligence realize the difference between means and ends (and I am not talking about 2009 here. I am talking about Caro's approach to the issue). They realize there is a process in place and that whilst the law should reflect public sentiment (though Caro seems to think it should reflect her point of view exclusively as most people I know, Melbourne or not, seem to think this is a beat up), it should:

* look after the rights of the accused: keep the record button down at all times!

* be based on quantifiable and verified evidence: he said, she said doesn't count.

*be based on the rule of law: You want to talk about 'schoolyard'? The only other place where they make the rules up as they go along is the bloody schooyard something you seem to advocate quite well! There were no rules about how you should select your team and position your players in 2009. That was something that was verifiable to an extent but would be classed by most as too unreliable to form a judgement.However, just to suit your own miserable agenda, you have intmated that the people involved had devious agendas that you can't prove beyond scuttlebutt. On that point as well, maybe you should contact Essendon (who wouldn't need this now) and tell them that they need to give their 1984 Premiership back as Sheedy's positional changes made no sense. Maybe Billy Duckworth should give his Norm Smith back while he is at it?

Rant Off.

[dee-luded 2,959]

Thats the biggest load of [censored] i have read in the AGE for a long time, that vagrant CW should be a member of Demonland.

I would say he already is...

[Sir Why You Little 36,963]

I would say he already is...

that thought has crossed my mind to...

[Dee Fan 3,247]

The defence that "everyone was doing it" is valid; I doubt the AFL would want a situation where 5 or 6 clubs are all excluded from
the first two rounds of the draft for two years or more, especially if they include Collingwood, Carlton, Hawthorn, Richmond and West Coast. Despite what
some on here might believe, there are times when the old adage applies about "safety in numbers". This has got nothing to do with robbing banks, or
breaking the speed limit, or running red lights, this is about the interpretation of a competition’s rules that are somewhat confusing, and lacking in clarity.

[dee-luded 2,959]

Richmond tanked ( well we didnt try to win )-Wallace

Tanks for not winning

RETIRED Carlton great Anthony Koutoufides wants to see the Blues lose to Melbourne this week and secure the number one draft pick.

The former Carlton captain and dual best and fairest winner said it was in the club's best interest to lose on Sunday at the Melbourne Cricket Ground and collect promising Victorian ruckman Matthew Kreuzer.

But he denied new coach Brett Ratten and the players would tank.

"In all fairness, I would rather them lose because of the draft picks," Koutoufides said last night. "But I know their mentality is going to be to go out there and win.

"But in all truth, I think the majority of Carlton people would like to see them get the number one draft pick." If Carlton loses the "Kreuzer Cup" this week and St-Kilda beats Richmond, it secures picks one, three, 20, 36 and 52. If the Blues win, they lose the priority pick.

"Of course, I don't want them to win for the simple fact I want to see them get the draft picks," said Koutoufides, who retired after round17 because of injury.

------------------------------------

Several other high-profile Carlton identities said it would be better for the Blues to lose. Four-time premiership player David McKay said he had mixed feelings about the game.

"I don't want to lose, but I don't want to win. Players don't go out to lose and they'll be trying. For the long term future of the club we have to get the best possible picks," he said.

Former president John Elliott said winning was simply not an option. "We've got to lose. (Matthew) Kreuzer was best on the ground again at the weekend. I'll be going and I'll be sitting there quietly praying for Carlton to lose by less than three goals, knowing we could've kicked the three if we wanted to," he said.

Premiership coach Robert Walls said the number one draft picks should be the priority. "I don't want Carlton to win because, as a supporter, the benefits of losing are so great. But I think they will win because the players will be trying hard, and they're better than Melbourne," he said.

Carlton premiership player David Rhys Jones said he had already been barracking for the Blues to lose.

"Saturday week ago it looked like they were going to beat Essendon and it's the one and only time I've ever barracked for Essendon," he said.

"I think the league owes us a few draft picks so even if we tanked this week, so be it."

http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-premiership/tanks-for-not-winning/story-e6frf35u-1111114282657#.URrSSPI3vKE

AFL chief executive Andrew Demetriou will watch some of the "Kreuzer Cup", but won't bother searching for signs of tanking. Demetriou yesterday re-iterated tanking was a non-issue over-blown by the media.

"People have theories about which player went off at which particular time ... and all the nonsense and dribble that goes on.

"There's been lots of occasions over the past few weeks where Carlton could have won games and they were just beaten on the day."

[nutbean 8,838]

The defence that "everyone was doing it" is valid;

I dont see it as a defense - I see it more that if the AFL want to go us for our behaviors then no problem but dont be selective and look at other clubs that participated in similar behaviour. Whack us all or whack nobody.

(I just emailed Caro - I feel much better now)

[Sir Why You Little 36,963]

Tanks for not winning

RETIRED Carlton great Anthony Koutoufides wants to see the Blues lose to Melbourne this week and secure the number one draft pick.

The former Carlton captain and dual best and fairest winner said it was in the club's best interest to lose on Sunday at the Melbourne Cricket Ground and collect promising Victorian ruckman Matthew Kreuzer.

But he denied new coach Brett Ratten and the players would tank.

"In all fairness, I would rather them lose because of the draft picks," Koutoufides said last night. "But I know their mentality is going to be to go out there and win.

"But in all truth, I think the majority of Carlton people would like to see them get the number one draft pick." If Carlton loses the "Kreuzer Cup" this week and St-Kilda beats Richmond, it secures picks one, three, 20, 36 and 52. If the Blues win, they lose the priority pick.

"Of course, I don't want them to win for the simple fact I want to see them get the draft picks," said Koutoufides, who retired after round17 because of injury.

------------------------------------

Several other high-profile Carlton identities said it would be better for the Blues to lose. Four-time premiership player David McKay said he had mixed feelings about the game.

"I don't want to lose, but I don't want to win. Players don't go out to lose and they'll be trying. For the long term future of the club we have to get the best possible picks," he said.

Former president John Elliott said winning was simply not an option. "We've got to lose. (Matthew) Kreuzer was best on the ground again at the weekend. I'll be going and I'll be sitting there quietly praying for Carlton to lose by less than three goals, knowing we could've kicked the three if we wanted to," he said.

Premiership coach Robert Walls said the number one draft picks should be the priority. "I don't want Carlton to win because, as a supporter, the benefits of losing are so great. But I think they will win because the players will be trying hard, and they're better than Melbourne," he said.

Carlton premiership player David Rhys Jones said he had already been barracking for the Blues to lose.

"Saturday week ago it looked like they were going to beat Essendon and it's the one and only time I've ever barracked for Essendon," he said.

"I think the league owes us a few draft picks so even if we tanked this week, so be it."

http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-premiership/tanks-for-not-winning/story-e6frf35u-1111114282657#.URrSSPI3vKE

AFL chief executive Andrew Demetriou will watch some of the "Kreuzer Cup", but won't bother searching for signs of tanking. Demetriou yesterday re-iterated tanking was a non-issue over-blown by the media.

"People have theories about which player went off at which particular time ... and all the nonsense and dribble that goes on.

"There's been lots of occasions over the past few weeks where Carlton could have won games and they were just beaten on the day."

email that to the club. A reminder that should be top of the document file.

Red Hot.

[Hannibal 5,814]

She just calls it as she sees it and she's fed inside info from the AFL. She has no agenda against the club, she just doesn't like what she believes we attempted to do, i.e. deliberately manufacture losses.

She's also called for James Hird to resign even though it's yet to be proven that his players were outside WADA's guidelines. Does she have an agenda against Essendon too ?

I don't like the woman and reckon she knows SFA about the actual game, but I don't question her motives and I'm not offended by her articles, even though some have been hopelessly inaccurate. I acknowledge that we're being "investigated" for a reason and that journos prefer to paint a bleak and damning picture where possible. To expect otherwise is naive.

[nutbean 8,838]

Tanks for not winning

RETIRED Carlton great Anthony Koutoufides wants to see the Blues lose to Melbourne this week and secure the number one draft pick.

The former Carlton captain and dual best and fairest winner said it was in the club's best interest to lose on Sunday at the Melbourne Cricket Ground and collect promising Victorian ruckman Matthew Kreuzer.

But he denied new coach Brett Ratten and the players would tank.

"In all fairness, I would rather them lose because of the draft picks," Koutoufides said last night. "But I know their mentality is going to be to go out there and win.

"But in all truth, I think the majority of Carlton people would like to see them get the number one draft pick." If Carlton loses the "Kreuzer Cup" this week and St-Kilda beats Richmond, it secures picks one, three, 20, 36 and 52. If the Blues win, they lose the priority pick.

"Of course, I don't want them to win for the simple fact I want to see them get the draft picks," said Koutoufides, who retired after round17 because of injury.

------------------------------------

Several other high-profile Carlton identities said it would be better for the Blues to lose. Four-time premiership player David McKay said he had mixed feelings about the game.

"I don't want to lose, but I don't want to win. Players don't go out to lose and they'll be trying. For the long term future of the club we have to get the best possible picks," he said.

Former president John Elliott said winning was simply not an option. "We've got to lose. (Matthew) Kreuzer was best on the ground again at the weekend. I'll be going and I'll be sitting there quietly praying for Carlton to lose by less than three goals, knowing we could've kicked the three if we wanted to," he said.

Premiership coach Robert Walls said the number one draft picks should be the priority. "I don't want Carlton to win because, as a supporter, the benefits of losing are so great. But I think they will win because the players will be trying hard, and they're better than Melbourne," he said.

Carlton premiership player David Rhys Jones said he had already been barracking for the Blues to lose.

"Saturday week ago it looked like they were going to beat Essendon and it's the one and only time I've ever barracked for Essendon," he said.

"I think the league owes us a few draft picks so even if we tanked this week, so be it."

http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-premiership/tanks-for-not-winning/story-e6frf35u-1111114282657#.URrSSPI3vKE

AFL chief executive Andrew Demetriou will watch some of the "Kreuzer Cup", but won't bother searching for signs of tanking. Demetriou yesterday re-iterated tanking was a non-issue over-blown by the media.

"People have theories about which player went off at which particular time ... and all the nonsense and dribble that goes on.

"There's been lots of occasions over the past few weeks where Carlton could have won games and they were just beaten on the day."

It is interesting how 5 of the all time greatest Blues thought specifically about tanking and the positioning for draft picks re the Kruezer cup yet it never crossed the mind of the Carlton coaching staff that day.....obviously they were far too busy coaching to win to worry about silly little draft picks.

[Cards13 9,117]

Tanks for not winning

RETIRED Carlton great Anthony Koutoufides wants to see the Blues lose to Melbourne this week and secure the number one draft pick.

The former Carlton captain and dual best and fairest winner said it was in the club's best interest to lose on Sunday at the Melbourne Cricket Ground and collect promising Victorian ruckman Matthew Kreuzer.

But he denied new coach Brett Ratten and the players would tank.

"In all fairness, I would rather them lose because of the draft picks," Koutoufides said last night. "But I know their mentality is going to be to go out there and win.

"But in all truth, I think the majority of Carlton people would like to see them get the number one draft pick." If Carlton loses the "Kreuzer Cup" this week and St-Kilda beats Richmond, it secures picks one, three, 20, 36 and 52. If the Blues win, they lose the priority pick.

"Of course, I don't want them to win for the simple fact I want to see them get the draft picks," said Koutoufides, who retired after round17 because of injury.

------------------------------------

Several other high-profile Carlton identities said it would be better for the Blues to lose. Four-time premiership player David McKay said he had mixed feelings about the game.

"I don't want to lose, but I don't want to win. Players don't go out to lose and they'll be trying. For the long term future of the club we have to get the best possible picks," he said.

Former president John Elliott said winning was simply not an option. "We've got to lose. (Matthew) Kreuzer was best on the ground again at the weekend. I'll be going and I'll be sitting there quietly praying for Carlton to lose by less than three goals, knowing we could've kicked the three if we wanted to," he said.

Premiership coach Robert Walls said the number one draft picks should be the priority. "I don't want Carlton to win because, as a supporter, the benefits of losing are so great. But I think they will win because the players will be trying hard, and they're better than Melbourne," he said.

Carlton premiership player David Rhys Jones said he had already been barracking for the Blues to lose.

"Saturday week ago it looked like they were going to beat Essendon and it's the one and only time I've ever barracked for Essendon," he said.

"I think the league owes us a few draft picks so even if we tanked this week, so be it."

http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-premiership/tanks-for-not-winning/story-e6frf35u-1111114282657#.URrSSPI3vKE

AFL chief executive Andrew Demetriou will watch some of the "Kreuzer Cup", but won't bother searching for signs of tanking. Demetriou yesterday re-iterated tanking was a non-issue over-blown by the media.

"People have theories about which player went off at which particular time ... and all the nonsense and dribble that goes on.

"There's been lots of occasions over the past few weeks where Carlton could have won games and they were just beaten on the day."

That is amazing!!

[Jarka 767]

Caro just admitted that there isn't enough evidence to make the charges stick, even with all of her blind hatred she knows this.

I bloddy hope we take it to the courts if they charge us.

[QueensBirthday 186]

You realize at this point Caro is grasping at straws. It's clear she is hoping that the club doesn't pursue this because if they do, and win, she and her paper may be in all sorts of trouble. I don't think the investigation will come out with the definitive conclusion that no dodgy dealing came out of the 2009 season but imagine if it did? What would happen then? I would hope that the Fairfax board listens to the Cruel Sea as they had 'better get a lawyer son You better get a reeeeeal good one'.

The honest truth is that the club probably did take a dive in 2009. I had my concerns about it but was open minded about it. It was a bad nor particularly moral but that was the system that was in place and we had to work within it. We saw what happened with the approach we took in 2009 during the 2012 season and we are wiser for it.

This is very true. At this point, CW, after writing some very brave thoughts down on paper ('brave', as in, I wouldn't write that without sweating the consequences), is finally seeing that the result of the investigation will not tip her way. This does open the flood gates for DB, CS and CC to pursue her with an extremely pointed legal contest, that IS career threatening. Considering the job market, that's not an attractive thought. I hope she's not highly leveraged... On second thoughts... buwhahaha.

[nutbean 8,838]

Caro to me is like the below - She is a loathesome offensive brute, yet I cannot look away"

Edited February 13, 2013 by nutbean

[mauriesy 7,257]

The defence that "everyone was doing it" is valid; I doubt the AFL would want a situation where 5 or 6 clubs are all excluded from

the first two rounds of the draft for two years or more, especially if they include Collingwood, Carlton, Hawthorn, Richmond and West Coast. Despite what

some on here might believe, there are times when the old adage applies about "safety in numbers". This has got nothing to do with robbing banks, or

breaking the speed limit, or running red lights, this is about the interpretation of a competition’s rules that are somewhat confusing, and lacking in clarity.

But it's got everything to do with providing a relevant defence. The defence that 'everyone was doing it' is about as valid as an insider trader getting up in court and saying 'I'm not guilty because the ASC didn't chase/pursue/catch all the other insider traders.

You realize at this point Caro is grasping at straws. It's clear she is hoping that the club doesn't pursue this because if they do, and win, she and her paper may be in all sorts of trouble. I don't think the investigation will come out with the definitive conclusion that no dodgy dealing came out of the 2009 season but imagine if it did? What would happen then? I would hope that the Fairfax board listens to the Cruel Sea as they had 'better get a lawyer son You better get a reeeeeal good one'.

The honest truth is that the club probably did take a dive in 2009. I had my concerns about it but was open minded about it. It was a bad nor particularly moral but that was the system that was in place and we had to work within it. We saw what happened with the approach we took in 2009 during the 2012 season and we are wiser for it.

So you want it both ways ... you think we 'probably' tanked in 2009, but in response to possible charges, you want us to say adamantly that we didn't?

If Caro and Fairfax are that concerned about subsequent defamation litigation, there's no way they'd come out with this morning's piece reiterating all the things she's said earlier.

[Guest José Mourinho]

She just calls it as she sees it and she's fed inside info from the AFL. She has no agenda against the club, she just doesn't like what she believes we attempted to do, i.e. deliberately manufacture losses.

She's also called for James Hird to resign even though it's yet to be proven that his players were outside WADA's guidelines. Does she have an agenda against Essendon too ?

I don't like the woman and reckon she knows SFA about the actual game, but I don't question her motives and I'm not offended by her articles, even though some have been hopelessly inaccurate. I acknowledge that we're being "investigated" for a reason and that journos prefer to paint a bleak and damning picture where possible. To expect otherwise is naive.

I don't believe she does.

I think she deliberately over-exaggerates all of her points and only believes maybe a quarter of what she says about the club, and her agenda is not against MFC so much; it is to whip the media into a frenzy over this issue so she can continue to churn out these articles and be a leader of an artificial witch-hunt.