On 19/02/2013 at 13:23, Macca said:

I just hope the club (and the AFL) were aware that this was on the cards and have covered themselves.

Will this thing never end?

I'm actually more worried about this new investigation than the one just finished.

  On 19/02/2013 at 13:07, DemonOX said:

This is an article in the HS

Victorian Commission for Gambling and Liquor Regulation announces own probe into Melbourne

Don't tell me it's going to continue to drag on and on, that will really do my head in.

Well what would anyone expect. If the AFL come out with this clever negotiated settlement with the MFC that the average man in the street thinks is a crock and anyone thinks it will avoid a closer look from the Gambling regulator you would have to have rocks in your head.

If I was heading up the commission the first question I would ask is what was the $500k for. The AFL whether they like it or not are not above the law of the land and the more they seek to grow the game and get involved with things like gambling then the more they will come to the attention of the regulators. There will be a lot more focus paid to things like late changes to teams or mass dropping of players ala GWS and Freo. the AFL think it's ok but I'm not so sure the regulators will view things like that in a good light.

I'm also not convinced the club has done the right thing here but time will tell.

It's great that its done before the season starts.

800 pages of evidence and by all account an incredibly exhaustive investigation (over half of the 2009 MFC staff!) and the only thing they had was CC's comment in one meeting? I simply don't understand how CW and several DL posters can then seriously maintain that yes other clubs did it but we did so much worse and that's why we got slugged.

If, like CW you believe we tanked in 2009 and and did so amateurishly then surely they would have turned up more evidence than one meeting. But as CW notes it hinged on the one meeting and comments made by CC. Does anyone seriously think that if say Carlton was as forensically (and allegedly under threat of heavy sanctions for those interviewed if inconsistencies were discovered) investigated a similar meeting or comment would not be dredged to the surface?

I'm with BBob on this one (at least partly). It wasn't the comments that CC made it was that there were people in that room that 4 years after the fact were prepared, for whatever motivation, to put a club who had employed them at serious peril and potentially ruin the career of at least CC but potentially others (not to mention potentially tarnishing the legacy of Jim).

BBob may well have a point that perhaps poor management practices perhaps created an environment where there would be some seriously disgruntled ex employees. However i tend to believe that this sort of behaviour is more symptomatic of a club culture that has long been characterised by divisive, dirty internal politics and factionalism - a culture that is at the heart our sustained lack of success.

A positive out of all of this is it seems great strides have been made to build a more united club and this drama may act as a further unifying force. Lets hope all with axes to grind or knives to plunge put their weapons down and get behind the club.

The Don, the board and CS have handled this drama extremely well and their positions are now cemented. Of course lessons can be learnt from what occurred 4 years ago and i hope they are. To be fair steps have already been taken to address some of the issues that have raised issues (CC being moved out of the footy dept, CS role being more clearly in admin, a strong well resourced coaching team that is left to get on with its business with a reasonable degree of autonomy etc etc). However we must now stand united and this might the watershed moment.

But a final comment. Whilst it is possible the four (?) Judases who were prepared to put our club at risk had legitimate reasons to be angry with the club it is still simply not on to drop us in it. 500k and two good men out of footy for a spell because four men couldn't find in them to say something like "look it is possible he was joking". You might argue that perhaps they felt strongly about the issue and were compelled to out CC but as Redleg (i think) pointed out they seemed not to have raised any concerns at the time so can't have been too morally outraged. What's the bet that one of these men was also one of CW's sources (or indeed continues to be).

I assume the club knows who they are and i guess so do others in the footy world. I wonder if it at some point their preparedness to rat out a colleague (which is ok in my book, but only if they have done something really wrong and you are acting as whistle-blower) will one day hurt their chances of employment at a footy club that perhaps knows about their treachery.

  On 19/02/2013 at 13:23, Macca said:

I just hope the club (and the AFL) were aware that this was on the cards and have covered themselves.

Will this thing never end?

Jeez Louise. Unlocked article here: http://www.perthnow.com.au/sport/afl/victorian-commission-for-gambling-and-liquor-regulation-announces-own-probe-into-melbourne/story-e6frg1xu-1226581447543

  On 19/02/2013 at 13:28, stuie said:

I'm actually more worried about this new investigation than the one just finished.

Yep, on the surface it looks rather serious, Stuie

There's a whole new bunch of questions - How long will this investigation take? What 'real' evidence is there? The 500k fine has probably attracted the attention of the VCGLR. Although they might have had us in their sights anyway ...

This is gonna do our heads in ... enough already.

Total exoneration in a court of law.

Opportunity lost maybe?

  On 19/02/2013 at 13:23, Macca said:

I just hope the club (and the AFL) were aware that this was on the cards and have covered themselves.

Will this thing never end?

To say I'm over this would be the understatement of the millennium. For about 10hrs I thought it was done, finished, over. But no, now there is a second investigation, one that has potentially a lot more serious repercussions.

AFL botched this when they didn't nip this in the bud 7-8 months ago, and now it's reaching boiling point. FFS LEAVE US ALONE!!!!! (Can anyone tell I'm a little frustrated!?)

  On 19/02/2013 at 13:56, Pates said:

To say I'm over this would be the understatement of the millennium. For about 10hrs I thought it was done, finished, over. But no, now there is a second investigation, one that has potentially a lot more serious repercussions.

AFL botched this when they didn't nip this in the bud 7-8 months ago, and now it's reaching boiling point. FFS LEAVE US ALONE!!!!! (Can anyone tell I'm a little frustrated!?)

We're all feeling it mate, as 'rjay' said on the VCGLR thread - too smart by half. The punishment in no way fits the crime. All too vague and in a lot of ways it draws attention to itself.

16 weeks for Bailey and a year for Connolly and we still have no idea what for (in actuality) . Then there's the 500k fine for being 'Not guilty' . Amateur hour by the AFL and they may well have really landed us in it.

Obviously I hope I'm wrong ...

  On 19/02/2013 at 13:56, Pates said:

To say I'm over this would be the understatement of the millennium. For about 10hrs I thought it was done, finished, over. But no, now there is a second investigation, one that has potentially a lot more serious repercussions.

AFL botched this when they didn't nip this in the bud 7-8 months ago, and now it's reaching boiling point. FFS LEAVE US ALONE!!!!! (Can anyone tell I'm a little frustrated!?)

I'm with you, Pates.

Frustration beyond belief.

This is where we may really need the Fink.

however and have to live within it

Come on leg that's weak as [censored]

Thanks for you thoughts. But mate that's bull dust all DB,CC & the MFC did was standard afl practice nothing more nothing less. To make our blokes and the dumb [censored] that put their money in to the club pay is a total disgrace.

And now Parkin weighs in ... with a confession if I'm reading it right:

""They (AFL) set up a competition where it encourages people to do exactly what they are criticising them for doing. I have been tempted and gone down that road, too."

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/more-news/penalty-harsh-on-dean-bailey-and-chris-connolly-says-david-parkin/story-e6frf9jf-1226581456101?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+HeraldSunAflMelbourne+%28Herald+Sun+%7C+AFL+-+Melbourne%29

And on other fronts, perhaps we're getting closer to having names named:

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/more-news/melbournes-payout-for-official-chris-connolly-may-come-later/story-e6frf9jf-1226581439004

"He believes four people confirmed his throwaway line about maximising losses late in the 2009 season - two recruiters, a welfare manager and coach Dean Bailey."

Two recruiters? BP and ??? Welfare manager I believe was: Ian Flack.

Perhaps that's confirming what's hinted at here:

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/toxic-culture-blamed-as-the-afls-tanking-probe-into-the-melbourne-demons-deepens/story-e6frf9io-1226507008112

"Bailey, recruiter Barry Prendergast and welfare manager Ian Flack were all pushed aside in the aftermath of the 2010 season."

(actually, it was the 2011 season ....)

Interesting, because Ian Flack was linked to the Davey/Nield/Mifsud story:

"The Demons yesterday maintained the rumours could have derived from a disgruntled former employee, as the club has undergone major change since Neeld arrived. Ian Flack, the former player welfare manager, was one casualty ...."

http://www.smh.com.au/afl/afl-news/circle-of-trust-may-claim-mifsud-20120404-1wd8d.html

and from another article on the same subject from our friend CW:

"A third party emerged in the mess, with the Demons wondering at the role of former welfare officer Ian Flack in the allegations."

and .... "Flack ... has told former colleagues he doesn’t know why he was forced out of the club ...."

http://www.smh.com.au/afl/afl-news/grand-old-stoush-demons-take-on-afl-20120404-1wd8f.html#ixzz2LN3UyTFE

One for Bagdad Bob perhaps ...

  On 19/02/2013 at 18:13, bing181 said:

And on other fronts, perhaps we're getting closer to having names named:

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/more-news/melbournes-payout-for-official-chris-connolly-may-come-later/story-e6frf9jf-1226581439004

"He believes four people confirmed his throwaway line about maximising losses late in the 2009 season - two recruiters, a welfare manager and coach Dean Bailey."

Two recruiters? BP and ??? Welfare manager I believe was: Ian Flack.

Perhaps that's confirming what's hinted at here:

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/toxic-culture-blamed-as-the-afls-tanking-probe-into-the-melbourne-demons-deepens/story-e6frf9io-1226507008112

"Bailey, recruiter Barry Prendergast and welfare manager Ian Flack were all pushed aside in the aftermath of the 2010 season."

(actually, it was the 2011 season ....)

Interesting, because Ian Flack was linked to the Davey/Nield/Mifsud story:

"The Demons yesterday maintained the rumours could have derived from a disgruntled former employee, as the club has undergone major change since Neeld arrived. Ian Flack, the former player welfare manager, was one casualty ...."

http://www.smh.com.au/afl/afl-news/circle-of-trust-may-claim-mifsud-20120404-1wd8d.html

and from another article on the same subject from our friend CW:

"A third party emerged in the mess, with the Demons wondering at the role of former welfare officer Ian Flack in the allegations."

and .... "Flack ... has told former colleagues he doesn’t know why he was forced out of the club ...."

http://www.smh.com.au/afl/afl-news/grand-old-stoush-demons-take-on-afl-20120404-1wd8f.html#ixzz2LN3UyTFE

One for Bagdad Bob perhaps ...

Well, we know that all four rats were disgruntled former employees (factors you need to take into account when weighing up their evidence) but the fact that two were recruiting officers and one was a welfare officer strengthens my view that Connolly's comments could not possibly have been made in seriousness. What influence would a welfare officer have on the outcome of a game? Really!

  On 19/02/2013 at 12:35, Macca said:

Yep, it's a bitter pill to swallow in that sense, JJC. But every dog has it's day.

What we need is wins to shut 'em all up. Lots of wins. We need a winning season asap. We desperately need Neeld to be a very good coach and our players need to develop a winning mentality and must detest losing. We've got a kind draw and if we start well then anything's possible. If ever a team has the perfect ingredients for an 'us against them' mentality, it's us.

By the way, I would have given that Carlton work colleague an earful. Reminding him/her that they 'cheated' to get Walker, Murphy, Kennedy (who they later traded) Gibbs, Kreuzer and Judd. Of course, I would have said it in a nice polite but pointed way Unbelievable what they got away with.

Then we wait for Caro to rear her ugly head again saying we are only winning because we cheated the system to get the draft picks...

  On 19/02/2013 at 20:04, Freddy Fuschia said:

Well,

we know that all four rats were disgruntled former employees (factors

you need to take into account when weighing up their evidence) but the

fact that two were recruiting officers and one was a welfare officer

strengthens my view that Connolly's comments could not possibly have

been made in seriousness. What influence would a welfare officer have on

the outcome of a game? Really!

My question is did another party direct the investigators to these people or put them up to coming forward and if there was such another party, what was the reason for doing so?

  On 19/02/2013 at 20:15, Whispering_Jack said:

My question is did another party direct the investigators to these people or put them up to coming forward and if there was such another party, what was the reason for doing so?

Probably, and I'll give you one guess.

I have been a Redlegs (x2) member for quite a number of years...dont get to every game but love being involved...however listening to both the AFL and the response from my club yesterday makes me shiver with rage. Firstly the AFL's feable attempt to whitewash and then my club for accepting the AFL's 'punishment'. I appreciate that we are not privy to the report from the AFL nor the response by Melbourne FC, but for my club to accept a $0.5mill fine for something we did not apparently do stinks of a backroom cover up. I would rather the board spend $1+ mill taking the AFL to court.

Makes me think of my membership for next year!!!!!!!!

Roger B

  On 19/02/2013 at 20:04, Freddy Fuschia said:

Well, we know that all four rats were disgruntled former employees ... but the fact that two were recruiting officers and one was a welfare officer

Flack was Player Development Manager in 2009 - 2010. He became Welfare Officer (perhaps the same thing?) in 2011, which is perhaps where the confusion crept in in the original articles.

Though doesn't really change what you're saying. Intriguing. Why would Connolly even be talking about match day strategies with them?

Key word in the articles re: the Gaming Commission thing is "inquiry". They want to be seen to do the right thing, get the run down on what happened and give it all a big tick.

I don't think it is a concern.

  On 19/02/2013 at 21:22, justamember said:

I have been a Redlegs (x2) member for quite a number of years...dont get to every game but love being involved...however listening to both the AFL and the response from my club yesterday makes me shiver with rage. Firstly the AFL's feable attempt to whitewash and then my club for accepting the AFL's 'punishment'. I appreciate that we are not privy to the report from the AFL nor the response by Melbourne FC, but for my club to accept a $0.5mill fine for something we did not apparently do stinks of a backroom cover up. I would rather the board spend $1+ mill taking the AFL to court.

Makes me think of my membership for next year!!!!!!!!

Roger B

I hope it makes you buy a membership.

What the club has done - after an unprecedented investigation into something that they never defined and could have levelled the club - is to clear our name in a finding that WILL affect how sponsors see the club and how the VCGLR views its own investigation.

We have a little more worrying to go but the worst is over.

Perception be damned, let's play some footy.

  On 19/02/2013 at 21:22, justamember said:

I appreciate that we are not privy to the report from the AFL nor the response by Melbourne FC, but for my club to accept a $0.5mill fine for something we did not apparently do stinks of a backroom cover up.

It's not really a backroom cover-up. It's a contrived outcome for an investigation that Demetriou probably wishes Anderson never started.

  On 19/02/2013 at 22:01, S_T said:

Key word in the articles re: the Gaming Commission thing is "inquiry".

Besides, it's a long stretch from an inquiry to a guilty verdict to a penalty.

There are other penalties available to the Gaming Commission other than taking away your licence.

  On 19/02/2013 at 21:22, justamember said:

I have been a Redlegs (x2) member for quite a number of years...dont get to every game but love being involved...however listening to both the AFL and the response from my club yesterday makes me shiver with rage. Firstly the AFL's feable attempt to whitewash and then my club for accepting the AFL's 'punishment'. I appreciate that we are not privy to the report from the AFL nor the response by Melbourne FC, but for my club to accept a $0.5mill fine for something we did not apparently do stinks of a backroom cover up. I would rather the board spend $1+ mill taking the AFL to court.

Makes me think of my membership for next year!!!!!!!!

Roger B

Yes we have been fined but I did not hear or see when or if we have to pay it. Was probably just a face saving exercise for the AFL.

Don't to be concerned about it.

Remember memberships are the life blood of the club.

Not only did Prendergast screw the playing list he's helped screw the club administratively.

I'd like to bump into him.