CONDUCT UNBECOMING

[Satyriconhome 10,871]

Please Bossog, explain to me how this was silly?

It says CC will be employed, or can you read between the lines? or is this what you want personally, if so then say that

[The Chazz 4,077]

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

B59 - you feel for Bails? He's obviously the one that put CC in the most sh!t. He obviously said that he picked a team that would not win because CC told him his job wasn't safe if they won. Bailey is obviously the one that took the "joke" the wrong way.

I will never agree with what you say on this matter, as you are using arguments that can not be backed up with any facts at all. The fact is, the AFL have decided the outcome, and we accepted it. Anything you say different to that is irrelevant and will never be proved.

[iv'a worn smith 1,979]

if mcdonalds employed someone who was terribly unclean and gave mcdonalds customers food poisoning they would be punished. same thing here. time to cop it.

questions need to be made as to why carlton and richmond have not been charged though.

Hardly a relevant comparison. The facts as they stand are that, none of the executive or the board were found culpable in relation to bringing the game into disrepute, that Dean Bailey coached to the best of his ability on game day. The finding, if distilled, comes down to a supposed directive, given by Chris Connolly, in what the AFL claim to be an earnest manner and thereby, DB felt pressure.

Simply put, the findings contradict themselves. Whether people on here like them or not, 2 peoples' careers have been destroyed and I would respectfully suggest, such a punishment is not commensurate with the "crime". Unlike your McDonalds food poisoning analogy, the only people to suffer here are DB and CC.

This is no more than a face saving exercise by the AFL, for which the end result was manufactured.

[edited for typos]

Edited February 19, 2013 by iv'a worn smith

[The Chazz 4,077]

It says CC will be employed, or can you read between the lines? or is this what you want personally, if so then say that

And I questioned if it would say anything other than that. Don't think it was that silly was it? I didn't suggest that he was going to be sacked (I'm not letting that get in the way of my personal opinion). But feel free to make it something that I didn't.

[old dee 23,788]

How do we get into games without paying the AFL?

Buy a membership all the money goes to the MFC

[sue 9,102]

They were playing (losing) to get a home final. They weren't losing to have an impact of the draft order. There is a difference if you want to see it, but most won't, and I can appreciate that.

Brilliant - we do see the difference. But could you explain why the draft order is holier than getting a home final? I can understand McLachlan's distinction between what we 'did' and resting players, experimenting with no draft pick in mind, but not how what Freo did is OK. Unfortunately he wasn't pressed on that.

So the fine against MFC is because we are responsible for our employees. Clearly we just accepted that garbage to close the issue, hopefully with a few extra $ to help pay the fine. But if one of my staff murders someone I don't see why my organization should be in the poo UNLESS my company was negligent in some way that contributed to the murder.

Edited February 19, 2013 by sue

[Jesse Christ 2,884]

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

500k for a bad joke

If my old man worked for the AFL we would be out on the street!

[mauriesy 7,287]

My interpretation is they found Connolly made a comment in a FD meeting

You would have to think from the outcome that this is not correct. People keep referring to Connolly's input as a 'joke', but I think it was more than that. It seems to me that the 'staying the course' comment was indicative of a more concerted course of action over time than one flippant remark in a single meeting.

[old dee 23,788]

Perhaps McLardy got advice from our legal team that we wouldn't win, regardless of how high we took it?

Nah, that wouldn't be the case would it? I'm too "dim" to come up with that sort of solution.

1 hr 40 mins down the track I have come to the same conclusion billy.

[farmerwiz 60]

we have alot of supporters who are lawyers and would have helped in this case..............and as with lawyers they love an agreed settlement

reckon its a big win for the dees considering what could have been

[The Chazz 4,077]

Brilliant - we do see the difference. But could you explain why the draft order is holier than getting a home final? I can understand McLachlan's distinction between what we 'did' and resting players, experimenting with no draft pick in mind, but not how what Freo did is OK. Unfortunately he wasn't pressed on that.

So the fine against MFC is because we are responsible for our employees. Clearly we just accepted that garbage to close the issue, hopefully with a few extra $ to help pay the fine. But if one of my staff murders someone I don't see why my organization should be in the poo UNLESS my company was negligent in some way that contributed to the murder.

Sue, I will give your post the respect and respond, but probably won't answer your initial question, and apologies in advance. From memory, Geelong did the "Freo" thing when they played Brisbane at Brisbane a few seasons back. The only solution I can offer is that the AFL look at the end result of such actions, and no doubt believe aiming to win better draft picks is far worse than aiming to "win" a home final. Not a great response, but I don't work for the AFL, so that's all you're getting!

In regards to the fine, the McDonald's food poisoning example was far btter than the "employee murdering someone" example. But, you can come up with any examples like that for the sake of your argument.

[Webber 10,465]

He is the one taking the grenade you ingrate.

Absolutely right. He is one of the most loved people within the club, and has been scapegoated by an organisation that can't admit it's fault in creating a drafting system that lead to a disincentive to winning. A system which has now been abandoned for that reason, which they still can't be honest about. Leave CC alone, he has now and had then nothing but the best interests of the club at heart.

[Longsufferingnomore 1,631]

Just on SEN it was said that there was either documentary or oral evidence (tape) that proved what Connoly said. Maybe why we have accepted the $500,000. If it is true that it can be paid in installments then we pay it over 5 -10 years and at the same time pleading for more money from the AFL being "financially precarious".

CC will continue to be employed by the Club.

Language used by GMc was totall to protect our gaming licence. I suppose we can be thankful for small mercies.

McLardy speaking now. The Club did not deliberately set out to lose matches and that the Board did not make any direction to lose matches.

He said the Club is not happy with what happened with the investigation but respects the AFL's right to investigate.Happy with way the AFL handled this final part of the investigation???

Enormous price the Club has paid but has now cleared the Club.

Made a remark about people making assumptions about personnel before all the evidence had been given.

CW just asked about the severity of CC ban. McLardy said that CC oustanding contributor to MCC and football and that he believes that the Club can continue to pay him?

Financially McLardy said they raised that with the Club but AFL were strong on the fine. It will make it tough over the next year financially but once we start winning games we will regain some of that money.

He said that we dont feel like we have singled out but we dont hold the AFL to account. AFL has right to protect integrity of the game.

No comment on Brock McLean.

Internal damage has been significant but we have great staff including CS and there is a real sense of positivity and he expects supporters to stay with the Club.

McLardy has spoken with our sponsors and will see them tomorrow.

No problems with communications with the AFL.

Language =there is documented evidence. We had to roll over

Legal avenue last resort not first resort.

[Dee Fan 3,247]

Gild the lily all you like, the basics of it is that there is strong evidence that Chris Connolly pressured people not to win, and Dean Bailey succumbed to the pressure.

In regard to the club fine, it is imposed because of the actions of these two, as employees of the club. I'd liken it to, say, a manager of a business breaking Workplace safety laws that resulted in an accident and injury, for example. The business would still get fined because of the actions of its employees.

The finding that Melbourne FC as an entity, or the board, did not direct to lose games keeps the gaming licences issue off the boiler and is no doubt part of the negotiated settlement.

Occupational Health and Safety laws are in fact that, Laws, what we are talking about now are the rules of a competition. There was no one injured and no lives put at risk so i think your analogy is totally incorrect.

It's up to the management and owners of the business to provide a safe workplace and if they don't they are subject to fines and even jail in the event of a worker being injured or killed. This was the attempted manipulation of draft selections and if in fact the club's Board were unaware of it, they shouldn't be found guilty.

[mjt 640]

Just on SEN it was said that there was either documentary or oral evidence (tape) that proved what Connoly said. Maybe why we have accepted the $500,000. If it is true that it can be paid in installments then we pay it over 5 -10 years and at the same time pleading for more money from the AFL being "financially precarious".

CC will continue to be employed by the Club.

Language used by GMc was totall to protect our gaming licence. I suppose we can be thankful for small mercies.

McLardy speaking now. The Club did not deliberately set out to lose matches and that the Board did not make any direction to lose matches.

He said the Club is not happy with what happened with the investigation but respects the AFL's right to investigate.Happy with way the AFL handled this final part of the investigation???

Enormous price the Club has paid but has now cleared the Club.

Made a remark about people making assumptions about personnel before all the evidence had been given.

CW just asked about the severity of CC ban. McLardy said that CC oustanding contributor to MCC and football and that he believes that the Club can continue to pay him?

Financially McLardy said they raised that with the Club but AFL were strong on the fine. It will make it tough over the next year financially but once we start winning games we will regain some of that money.

He said that we dont feel like we have singled out but we dont hold the AFL to account. AFL has right to protect integrity of the game.

No comment on Brock McLean.

Internal damage has been significant but we have great staff including CS and there is a real sense of positivity and he expects supporters to stay with the Club.

McLardy has spoken with our sponsors and will see them tomorrow.

No problems with communications with the AFL.

Language =there is documented evidence. We had to roll over

Legal avenue last resort not first resort.

I hope those sponsors stick fat, imagine going through that [censored] again.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,209]

Yeah for his stupid dumb ass comments, watch the presser, CC should never work for OUR club again, 7 months of [censored] and 500,000 in the hole, if you cost the company you work for that grief would you expect your job when your time was up

Don't be daft - he is the fall guy you really think all that happened during that period was a comment made by Connolly? If we didn't get the PP in 2009 the supporters would have rioted.

[McQueen 17,864]

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

So the question is has Cameron Schwab been 'defamed' by Caro in her relentless diatribe about this issue enough to constitute a case???

[Pennant St Dee 13,172]

The Tanking investigation is over, despite what others think the club has shown balls and dared the AFL to find us guilty, I respect Chris for taking a bullet for the club whatever about his comments playing a role in getting us here (which I don't belive is anything other than a conveniant AFL manipulated outcome).

All I want to know now is who those Rats/ex board members were who stabbed the club in the back.

I have just called up the wife and told her to buy some more memberships for the house to help cover the costs.

Time to look towards the footy

Go Dees!

[The Chazz 4,077]

Occupational Health and Safety laws are in fact that, Laws, what we are talking about now are the rules of a competition. There was no one injured and no lives put at risk so i think your analogy is totally incorrect.

It's up to the management and owners of the business to provide a safe workplace and if they don't they are subject to fines and even jail in the event of a worker being injured or killed. This was the attempted manipulation of draft selections and if in fact the club's Board were unaware of it, they shouldn't be found guilty.

Would Workplace Bullying in the form of a manager saying "do this or you're sacked" count as a potential fine for an employer as well as sanctions for said manager?

[Longsufferingnomore 1,631]

Don said that we should look back on these comments (about comments made against specific club personnel) and ensure that they are not made again in the future. Get stuck into her Don.

[Vagg 2,439]

The penalties on DB and CC are too harsh, IMHO. A year out of football for a misinterpreted joke? Even if it is loose lips, it seems to be very harsh for one comment at one meeting, even if some did misinterpret it (I don't believe that, but it seems some in the media do). The penalty on DB is way too harsh --- if we didn't tank, why is he being punished at all? What exactly did he do? The comments at his final presser after being sacked? How do you spell scapegoat? Why is DB punished more harshly than Trigg? (ironically at the same club!).

If I were DB, I would probably take this to court ...

Excellent comment. I agree 100%. I am totally gobsmacked by the entire farce!

[Longsufferingnomore 1,631]

Of course there are leaks at Melbourne just ask Fanbob, he knows who they are.

Maybe not so much who is still there but who is working at Carlton now etc etc.

[Bossdog 2,002]

I believe Don insinuated that in his presser that it would be looked at....

[Demon Stalwart 255]

THERE will be no investigation by the AFL into a series of allegations against the Brisbane Lions involving drugs and match-fixing until they have substantiated evidence to do so.

Stories run by The Courier Mail over the past two days have alleged a number of behavioural issues at the Lions including illicit drug taking, illegal gambling and match fixing between 2002 and 2009.

The newspaper alleges Jason McGrath, a self confessed drug dealer and cousin of Lions' premiership player Ashley McGrath, claims to have supplied six players with speed, ecstasy and marijuana during that
period.

It also alleges the reason for a Lions' player's absence from the team was fabricated to cover up an issue with the illicit drug policy.

The AFL will not be investigating at this stage, however.

"The AFL and its integrity unit are aware of recent claims made to the media regarding the Brisbane Lions between 2002 and 2009," an AFL statement said.

"These claims are unsubstantiated and no evidence has been produced to support them.

"No formal AFL investigation will be undertaken in the absence of credible information or evidence."

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-02-19/afl-to-leave-lions-untouched

I have but one Question Why ??

Based on the above I can only assume Melbourne must have done a real sweetheart deal with the AFL regarding the payment of the $500,000.00

Otherwise surely they would Rally against this fine in light of this report ?

Why does it seem are we always the bunny!

[pitchfork 181]

Anyone notice that round 23 is the likely "number 1 pick" cup...GCS vs GWS?

The league just can't help itself.