I'm a little confused. Someone please explain to me how we are not guilty of tanking, yet CC and DB are expelled from the AFL hence rendered tarnished and unemployed, the club is fined $500,000.00 when we are NOT GUILTY?

Half a million bucks for a bad joke, 2 careers ruined. Conduct Unbecoming? What the f is that? How are we the scapegoat yet again??

Do we fight this on principal or do we just cop the whack on the chin? I really don't know.

At this moment I am conflicted between my love of the MFC and my hatred of the AFL. Love the team, hate the organization. I feel relieved and also victimized. Bitter sweet.

Connolly will be back. From McLardy:

After similar consideration, Chris Connolly has also accepted his
sanction in the best interests of the Club. Chris is an outstanding
football person whose contribution to the game and our club over many
years has been immense. Chris will continue as a Melbourne Football
Club employee following his suspension.

Ed: spelling

AFL somehow manage to anger all the parties

Other supporters are angry we got away with just a fine

Melbourne Supporters are angry we end up getting a fine

Thank goodness that is over. I was hoping that CC or DB weren't thrown under the bus in this case but the ink is dry on the suspension and it is what it is. It's very sad that that the club has yet again failed to show the loyalty to our people that they expect from them. I could have accepted the 500k fine on it's own but I hate to see those blokes railroaded out. Caro was right to an extent that this was a negotiated outcome and CC and DB were the sacrificial lambs.

Where to from now? The AFL now needs to investigate Carlton (2007), Collingwood (2005) and Richmond (2007) though I doubt this will happen. The AFL now also needs to get together and make guidelines very clear as to how teams need to select players and in what positions they can be played in. Upon realizing that I am a sentient being who posesses problem solving abilities, I take that back... How the bloody hell can you legislate that?!!

What needs to be fixed is the draft system. Bring in the lottery and a lot of this will go away. I hear AD mention how that 'a lottery could never work for the AFL'. I ask 'Why?'. When this has been bought up, the brass at AFL headquarters poo poo it without giving us an actual reason as to why it can't work. Look at the 1992/1993 NBA drafts. After a horrible 1992 season, the Orlando Magic, with the league's 2nd worst record of 21-61, won the lottery and drafted Shaquille O'Neal. They improved dramatically the next year, winning 41 games and barely missing out on the playoffs. The next year they amazingly won it again by virtue of missing the playoffs, even though they had a superior record to the 39-43 LA Lakers in the West who had made the Western Conference playoffs.

Now where does this all lead? The system has some flaws as outlined above (a team on the verge of contending like Orlando getting another number one pick seems a bit unfair) but a lottery system clearly shows that teams participating within it aren't just going to 'lie down'. The weak get the most number of balls but that is no guarantee that they will win it.

Please AFL please explain why this logic isn't sound?

I feel sad for him and DB. They love this club and are the sacrificial lambs for the AFL to save face.

No more of my money goes to the AFL- that means no more records and I'm not sure what else I have to sacrifice- someone tell me.

Speaking out of school? I tell you what, I have worked for a number of bosses, some I would still protect to this day. On the other hand, there are some that I would have no hesitation opening up if I was invovled in an investigation.

Perhaps we should look at why these people felt that spilling the beans was the best option over keeping your mouth shut.

I would as well, & as a passed union representative, I had both business people look out for me & workers look out for my interests out of genuine respect & appreciation for doing the right thing. and Honesty.

But some have not done the right thing, & if there [censored] off there are channels like the coaches association & players association. and lawyers.

This had damaged everyone from the Journo's, to the club & the AFL itself, Vlad & AA, & the AFL Commission.

Really the game has taken a hit.

Who led this are in a tight spot.

Connolly will be back. From McLardy:

After similar consideration, Chris Connolly has also accepted his

sanction in the best interests of the Club. Chris is an outstanding

football person whose contribution to the game and our club over many

years has been immense. Chris will continue as a Melbourne Football

Club employee following his suspension.

Ed: spelling

Thank goodness Don has the 'balls of grinter'.

The decision of the Australian Farce League ...

Since Terry Wallace is no longer employed by an AFL club, he can escape investigation and suspension but the Richmond Football Club clearly was his employer when h admitted to not trying to win a game, Now that the precedent has been set, I suppose they will also cop a $500k fine for conduct unbecoming.

And the investigation of the Carlton Football Club for conduct unbecoming will also be announced shortly.

Oh ... and pigs can fly too!

Dumbfounded!!!

My desire for the AFL and by extension footy is really flagging, here is hoping seeing some actual footy may bring the flag up the pole.

I suggest CS sues Caroline Wilson and uses the settlement money to pay this disgraceful fine.

At least this [censored] is over and we can get on with the footy.

This idea has great merit if CS and the MFC team can pull it off. Maybe we can come out of it with a cost-neutral outcome and CC can take some long-service leave doing a management or marketing course somewhere in the USA for the next 12 months?

That was so confusing, I'm not even sure if my interpretation of the finding is correct.

My interpretation is they found Conolly made a comment in an FD meeting, Bails felt pressured and responded by making selection changes, but these changes were made for the purpose of appeasing Connolly and not actually trying to lose the match(es). Therefore, both acted in an way unbecoming etc, but there was no engineering of losses.

The other interpretation is that Bails responded by making selection changes with the aim of losing matches, but this did not carry through to decisions made on match day. This second interpretation means the AFL is effectively saying that pre-planning is immune from allegations of tanking, and it is only moves on match day that must come under scrutiny. This would be, frankly, a farcical position to hold.

Baffled by this, but our name in a technical sense is cleared so that's a good outcome I suppose. Bails deserves a bit better than this rubbish though, and the AFL still has alot to answer for in how it has handled this matter.

Bring on the Carlton investigation now, if indeed the integrity is of utmost importance. Me thinks sweeping under the rug will be the preferred course of action.

I feel sad for him and DB. They love this club and are the sacrificial lambs for the AFL to save face.

No more of my money goes to the AFL- that means no more records and I'm not sure what else I have to sacrifice- someone tell me.

How do we get into games without paying the AFL?

Connolly will be back. From McLardy:

After similar consideration, Chris Connolly has also accepted his

sanction in the best interests of the Club. Chris is an outstanding

football person whose contribution to the game and our club over many

years has been immense. Chris will continue as a Melbourne Football

Club employee following his suspension.

Ed: spelling

Probably won't come out and say that his employment will be terminated at the end of his suspension...

How do we get into games without paying the AFL?

Jump the fence?

And Bailey safe at the crows. From crows website:

Crows chairman Rob Chapman says Bailey will retain a behind-the-scenes
role at the club despite him being banned by the AFL from having any
match-day or one-on-one coaching involvement with any Adelaide player
until after round 16.

So, by definition now, any coach can lose games by moving or leaving out players, and the club will not be found guilty of tanking - as long as any directive has not been issued by the club! I'd like to know what their definition of "club" is, because I would have thought CC was acting on behalf of the club in his role as The FD manager....just sayin'

No.

Tanking according to what was said today.

Occurs only when things are specifically done on match days to deliberately lose games.

If you rest players at selection time then that is accepted, because betting doesn't really open for the game until the initial selection has been made.

Even moving players around in different positions is classed as player development.

Connollys singling out, revolved around his preconceived idea that doing it in advance for a priority pick was against the integrity of the game.

I've just been watching Fox Sports all afternoon. INTEGRITY has to be the buzz word in all sports at the moment

The Bad

Gillom - unconvincing & making stuff up as he went along. Particularly his answer to the Freo question. Total BS.

AFL - farcical. Sums them up really.

Andy - where was he?

Wilson - enough said about her.

The Good

MFC - stood up & dared them to find us guilty. Standing by Chris Connolly.

Chris Connolly - scapegoat. Fell on his sword for the good of the club.

Summary - not guilty of anything, but we have to pay for the 8 month investigation.

Well I feel for Bails. I commend CC for his selflessness in the current climate.

Im not sure right at this moment how I feel about the board. Seems theyre prepared to lets some out to dry. Otherwise ...wel Im not sure. We didnt " tank" but apparently did everything else and got massively fined. Im not sure I see the difference other than how some legalese might be attributed.

Everything McGillon uttered was essentially pre ordained garbage concocted to save face for Empire Vlad. its a crock, so many double standards and faulty logic. Where would you start in an effort to criticise. More holes than a colander.

Weve been scapegoated. Will we see equality of endeavour in chasing others efforts ? i doubt it.

Well as Old suggests Im just going to leave all this alone for a while.

Back after the footy begins.

Might go have a Daquiri ( or three, banana of course ) to try and get this foul taste out of my mouth

Probably won't come out and say that his employment will be terminated at the end of his suspension...

You really say some silly things some times......

No.

Tanking according to what was said today.

Occurs only when things are specifically done on match days to deliberately lose games.

If you rest players at selection time then that is accepted, because betting doesn't really open for the game until the initial selection has been made.

Even moving players around in different positions is classed as player development.

Connollys singling out, revolved around his preconceived idea that doing it in advance for a priority pick was against the integrity of the game.

I've just been watching Fox Sports all afternoon. INTEGRITY has to be the buzz word in all sports at the moment

And regardless of what we think should've happened, or what we think the AFL has done, this ^^ covers the whole situation.

We did it, others have done it, but such was the disaster and politics going on behind the scenes for a period at the MFC, we deserved a whack.

Sorry....but I can't see what we have been found guilty of, therefore why we have copped this heavy fine.

You really say some silly things some times......

Please Bossog, explain to me how this was silly?

Ok, so the MFC was fined $500,000, but what impact will it have on sponsors who don't want to be associated with a club who employed 2 people who have been found guilty?

For starters, i'd being suing CW and fairfax media for defamation, $500,000 minimum.

AFL 1.0

MFC 0.5

INTEGRITY 0.0

As long as Carltank, richmond, freo and collingwood chip in to pay the fine then its a fair outcome!

I'm fairly sure we've established that organisations cannot sue for defamation, only individuals.