How the hell would she know what the outcome is, what is she using her impeccable sources!!!

Please give me a break and to put the article out at 6 pm is a bit convenient. How can anyone believe what she says?

I would love it if I could make shite up in my job, would be great. The only problem is I wouldn't have a job for very long.

Another article full of fluff.

The AFL should have done everyone a favour and made a decision today as GM said they would.

Some random thoughts:

Gary Lyon completely blew it. Way too emotional and also too aggressive. Crossed the line by some margin and i think he knew it. CW was understandably in fight or flight and as she was stuck there was always going have defensive body language (eg crossing the arms). Also ensured there could be no intelligent discussion. Made for very uncomfortable viewing.

Couldn't disagree with this any more. Given the situation I think he conveyed the frustration of the Melbourne faithful without crossing the line. In fact the only time he really got his back up was when she decided to question his credibility.

"Made for uncomfortable viewing"? Sorry, but get real mate. Someone had to hold her to account, and I salute Garry for the way he did it.

Couldn't disagree with this any more. Given the situation I think he conveyed the frustration of the Melbourne faithful without crossing the line. In fact the only time he really got his back up was when she decided to question his credibility.

"Made for uncomfortable viewing"? Sorry, but get real mate. Someone had to hold her to account, and I salute Garry for the way he did it.

GL should have gone harder IMO.

Reality is its been the Kero articles that have provided commentary on this investigation over the 7 months. She writes an opinion piece; the opinion piece becomes a source for a commentary piece........and so on.

Jon Ralph provides a more "observer" piece: link

More to run on this issue yet. Ralph's article actually provides a different emphasis/slant to Kero's.

Ed. Push comes to shove, if MFC hold their ground, the whole issue may dissolve.

I find it interesting in this article she actually concedes for what I believe is the first time that "other teams did tank" but then goes on in her typical cavalier subjective unsubstantiated and pathetically biased fashion that those teams didn't do so "as blatantly or as systematically as Melbourne". What crap. Systematic. We were'nt systematic. It was all made up as we went along, I mean we nearly beat Richmond.

And blatant. No one was more blatant than Carlton in the Kreuzer Cup.

I never used to read her articles much and will quickly go back to that status but in her writings about our club I am left angry as a lot are but more so saddended that one of our cities newspapers has fallen to such depths that she is "chief writer" of anything. How is it so? What is wrong with us that has allowed her to rise to such a position?

Anyway, I vote we spend every last penny fighting the bastards.

GL should have gone harder IMO.

Not harder. Smarter. Didn't seem to have the quotes ready to show up her lack of credibility, consistency, and facts.

One of the few times I've missed Grant Thomas.

Not harder. Smarter. Didn't seem to have the quotes ready to show up her lack of credibility, consistency, and facts.

One of the few times I've missed Grant Thomas.

Ok harder and smarter would have made for even better viewing.

Ok harder and smarter would have made for even better viewing.

He really could have hit her out of the park if he'd done some research. So many inconsistencies and misleading comments (re: the whole official/unofficial thing). Old Gaz just seemed a bit lost once CW went into politician mode where she backed out of everything and changed the subject matter.

He really could have hit her out of the park if he'd done some research. So many inconsistencies and misleading comments (re: the whole official/unofficial thing). Old Gaz just seemed a bit lost once CW went into politician mode where she backed out of everything and changed the subject matter.

i think Garry did just fine...

i think Garry did just fine...

Don't get me wrong, I'm really happy he stood up for MFC, was just hoping he wasn't a frustrated mess like the rest of us and was able to destroy her flimsy work.

Not harder. Smarter. Didn't seem to have the quotes ready to show up her lack of credibility, consistency, and facts.

One of the few times I've missed Grant Thomas.

Exactly. Had months to prepare and if he had stayed calm could have completely shown up how illogical her arguments are/were. Particularly the issue of this unofficial business. CW clearly had implied in her article that this was what the club had put forward as a defence not what some random insiders and supporters were saying. Hence DM's completely reasonable response. She was being completely disingenuous on the FC (and again in her latest article).

But the clincher was that he missed the chance to completely show her up when she replied to his comment that players deliberately fumbling were raised in the report that it was never covered in the media. He must have known it had (and i would have assumed she would have been told after raising it the previous week).

​He also let her derail the conversation by asking the others if we deliberately lost games in 2009 (and they all agreed) and raising the conflict issue (when he lost it).

I get the passion and all that but jeez he had the chance to drive a truck through her logic and flat out missed it.

I am very concerned that she continues to try to destabilise the Club with her comments that the "Board and Staff have been declaring .. that the AFL might have something on Melbourne". What member of the Board or staff would talk to her unless they too were prepared to destabilise the Club for their own means. Her comments about a Board member telling her about the "unofficial" lines of defence were also devisive. If Garry had said yes tell me who the Board member was she would have come up with an excuse not to reveal the identity.For her to release the results of the investigation and AD says he knows nothing, wouldn't AD feel aggreived.

I don't believe that the GMc has released the information early to CW but I unfortunately have a feeling that there is a rat amongst us.

Binman - I don't care about perception, I am happy to take a settlement on any issue if it is in the best interests of the club. Sometimes we can hang ourselves with our own pride.

Having said that, I am worried about the size of any fine, the wording of our culpability, and the repercussions of guilt.

That is the sum of my concerns, honour and righteousness is on the periphery.

I don't think my position not to take this unconfirmed deal is that fanciful.

If this penalty is what the AFL is actually putting forward; we SHOULD take them to court.

It's a watered down sanction that reeks of "we'll be able to make them accept this".

Take them to court; lets get some good old fashion Demon Fury going.

Gaz was a bit flustered and got a bit emotional largely because he has always shied from wearing his heart on his sleeve as host. but gaz did come out with the killer line about her crossed arms. Cw's no credibility line was an open taunt and will come back to haunt her. Chief football writer but never actually comments on football, only its by products.

Come on binman one more comment for a 1000.

Exactly. Had months to prepare and if he had stayed calm could have completely shown up how illogical her arguments are/were. Particularly the issue of this unofficial business. CW clearly had implied in her article that this was what the club had put forward as a defence not what some random insiders and supporters were saying. Hence DM's completely reasonable response. She was being completely disingenuous on the FC (and again in her latest article).

But the clincher was that he missed the chance to completely show her up when she replied to his comment that players deliberately fumbling were raised in the report that it was never covered in the media. He must have known it had (and i would have assumed she would have been told after raising it the previous week).

​He also let her derail the conversation by asking the others if we deliberately lost games in 2009 (and they all agreed) and raising the conflict issue (when he lost it).

I get the passion and all that but jeez he had the chance to drive a truck through her logic and flat out missed it.

Binman. That is EXACTLY how I saw the whole exchange also.

Missed opportunity for a captain's goal.

How's this for a line within the article on the supposedly 'independent' afl.com.au website:

The investigation into Melbourne was sparked when former Demon Brock McLean made comments on Fox Footy's On the Couch alleging Melbourne deliberately lost games in 2009 to secure a priority pick in that season's draft.

What a load of rot.

Garry is still on The Age's payroll as a footy writer.... Sit down, take your time Gaz, and pull apart the flimsy ramblings of those trying to destroy us. Gotta be good for selling papers, so surely Fairfax wouldn't have a problem with it?

If it ends up being a suspended fine then this may be the league's face saving formula to appear macho but not actually make a finding on its massive investigation.

Binman - I don't care about perception, I am happy to take a settlement on any issue if it is in the best interests of the club. Sometimes we can hang ourselves with our own pride.

Having said that, I am worried about the size of any fine, the wording of our culpability, and the repercussions of guilt.

Fair call. I suspect that the negotiations around these issues are what are holding things up. We need to be able to maintain we never tanked and they need to to find a way to penalise us without suggesting we tanked. Tricky.

Gaz was a bit flustered and got a bit emotional largely because he has shyed from wearing his heart on his sleeve as host. but gaz did come out with the killer line about her crossed arms. Cw's no credibility line was an open taunt and will come back to haunt her. Chief football writer but never actually comments on football, only it's by products.

I like it that he showed his emotions. We saw that at Jim's funeral but we do not see it very much out in the open because of his stated need in his position to stay neutral. What he showed was his passion for the Club despite maybe missing the opportunity for that killer punch. Someone in the media has to stand up for us whilst we are being battered and bruised by rest of the written media.

If it ends up being a suspended fine then this may be the league's face saving formula to appear macho but not actually make a finding on its massive investigation.

You can't fine someone unless you've made a guilty finding against them for something..defies all logic. Then again so does this whole investigation.

For mine I hope the club continues to defend itself in the strongest possible way, including going to court if need be. We didn't break any rules and I'd love to see what findings they come up with to prove otherwise. Even in their own judicial system where not only does the club have to prove innocence (as opposed to being proven guilty) but where they can act as judge, jury and executioner.

The strategy of kite flying with the fine is just a strategy to test the reaction of the various parties.

If we end up getting a fine the AFL will pay for it cause we will go to them requesting more money.

It doesn't make sense for them to fine us.