GAMBLING PROBE [update MFC cleared]

[bing181 8,318]

Could someone please name the rats who snitched?

I've heard Bailey, Flack, Prendergast and one other but please forgive me if I'm wrong.

I don't know that I would include Bailey in that. He was always going to be in the crosshairs, and probably didn't have much wriggle room. But you would presume that the other two could have pretty well said as much or as little as they wanted, and taken it as far as they wanted.

Which, it seems, they did.

[bing181 8,318]

The evidence is the resentment that we have seen in past employees.

All two of them.

[rpfc 27,662]

All two of them.

Few more than that.

[dee-luded 2,958]

we have to stop talking about success being next year. That's what kills this club.

Demand and expect some THIS YEAR.

Its to easy to put it off.

I have been on here for 10 years, and without fail next year has always been the one.

I want some serious improvement this year.

Yes WYL, but some can't cope when the over optimism isn't met on the ladder.

We have to be mature enough to be able to comprehend the ups & the downs of a season.

[nutbean 8,837]

Dose anybody know how much it would have cost the club, to take action against the AFL fine? Maybe half a mil was the cheaper option.....

therein lies my problem - we have to continually stomach the club taking a cheaper or easier option and to do this you have to compromise. So lots on here are happy with the compromise or accomodation - I, for one, am not.

I will ask a hypothetical that everyone will have their opinion on

1/ Would the AFL go hard at Collingwood with what the same stuff as they had on us ?

2/ Would Collingwood cop the penalty we have been given

Just a thought

Edited February 22, 2013 by nutbean

[Dee Fan 3,247]

Absorb what message? Forgive me for letting the last 48 years of shite cloud my vision. I’m old enough to remember when the MFC was the powerhouse of the competition, feared by one and all . Hell we were the competition! I’ve seen all this before and it does get to be a bit like ground hog day. Mergers, Tanking , White knights a conga line of sacked coaches and administrators take your pick. The history of the MFC over the last forty years makes fascinating reading. A once great power in a free fall decline. Yes I wanted us to stand and fight because I can remember when the demons always fought and guess what we Won. Now we are simply satisfied to exist because we have forgotten how to fight. We have become the whipping boy of the AFL and now the press. We constantly [censored] and moan to one and all about how unfair the competition and yet when it's our turn to stand firm we again negotiate an outcome that in the eyes of the public all but admits guilt. You can kid yourself all you like about standing tall but in the end we complied when directed too. As for suicide? Well personally I’d rather die on my feet than live on my knees. In the end I guess that’s the difference between appeasers and fighters. The prospect of being there just to make up the numbers doesn’t appeal to me so much these days. But hey don’t let my feeling of disillusionment spoil your party, you should be happy, you won and I lost. We capitulated again.

I agree with a lot of what you've said there and I too remember the crowds of Demon supporters at the G on a Saturday afternoon, we owned footy. We have slowly declined over the years and you have to ask the question, "will we ever become a power club again?"

I think our future rests in the main with Neeld, he has altered the way we work, he has put a degree of professionalism in to the club and he may be the man to lead us out of the dark. I often wonder how we would have been if we never were attached to the MCC and didn't have their "amateur influence" with us all these years. I know they give us a lot of money now but does that make up for the way we have been held back for the many years we've been associated. As the other clubs went forward we slipped backwards and now we are at the bottom of the heap.

This is the first time since Norm Smith that I've felt that we are in the right hands; the Board and the Administration need to lift a bit, in my view, but they are getting there. Hopefully this has been a wake up call to all of them.

[dee-luded 2,958]

You have done it again Bbo

I do but in relative terms I am ancient

you've got to put those relatives back in their box OD...

[dee-luded 2,958]

I agree with a lot of what you've said there and I too remember the crowds of Demon supporters at the G on a Saturday afternoon, we owned footy. We have slowly declined over the years and you have to ask the question, "will we ever become a power club again?"

I think our future rests in the main with Neeld, he has

altered the way we work, he has put a degree of professionalism in to the club and he may be the man to lead us out of the dark. I often wonder how we would have been if we never were attached to the MCC and didn't have their "amateur influence" with us all these years. I know they give us a lot of money now but does that make up for the way we have been held back for the many years we've been associated. As the other clubs went forward we slipped backwards and now we are at the bottom of the heap.

This is the first time since Norm Smith that I've felt that we are in the right hands; the Board and the Administration need to lift a bit, in my view, but they are getting there. Hopefully this has been a wake up call to all of them.

...the future of our success isn't with Neeld, its with all of us maintaining the rage.

It's Our Hunger for success, & not turning on our own but getting fierce with the rest of the competition thats what will reflect thru our players & coaching staff...

...if we recline back into that slumber chair of complacent comfort zones, & well rounded thoughts, whilst at the Footy, then we will be treated like rag dolls out on the Field of battle.

Leave the Jason Recliners @ home for the day.

[Dee*ceiving 1,216]

The more I think about the VCGLR investigation the angrier I get. There would be countless nightclubs, bars and strip joints right across town that are owned, operated and shaken down by underworld, bikie gangs and crooks. They would no doubt use these facilities to sell drugs, promote prostitution, illegal tobacco and alcohol and god knows what else. They are violent, shady, despicable people who dodge tax by dealing in cash and ruin lives for their own benefit. Yet is there any evidence that the VCGLR are doing anything to proactively address what we all know is out there? Are they moving to revoke liquor and gambling licenses from these venues and people?

No. instead they’ll pick off an easy target. A high profile target. A Not for profit football club that exists through nothing more than the good graces of it’s members, members who are prepared to fork out several hundred dollars a year just in the hope that the teams performance gives them some semblance of joy and excitement despite have very little control over what and how the club operates.

It’s a disgrace, whether is fizzles out to nothing or not I am fuming…

[H_T 2,941]

The more I think about the VCGLR investigation the angrier I get. There would be countless nightclubs, bars and strip joints right across town that are owned, operated and shaken down by underworld, bikie gangs and crooks.

CAse in point: Spearmint Rhino.

[nutbean 8,837]

CAse in point: Spearmint Rhino.

spearmint rhino richards ? i wonder if we can all get the 'land discount ?

[Outside fifty 967]

spearmint rhino richards ? i wonder if we can all get the 'land discount ?

Thanks for that nightmare nutbean. Rhino working the dance floor is a vision I didn't need in my head.

[Sir Why You Little 35,223]

Thanks for that nightmare nutbean. Rhino working the dance floor is a vision I didn't need in my head.

it's almost as bad as Ned Flanders as the Devil

[Nascent 7,560]

Bump.

State-government-investigation-reveals-afl-can-do-more-to-protect-punters/

While there were no adverse findings against Melbourne, the commission said in a statement: "The VCGLR identified measures where the AFL could enhance its current policies and procedures to strengthen its integrity framework and provide further assurances to betting patrons."

I remember this investigation (a by-product of the tanking fiasco) by the Victorian Commission for Gambling and Liquor Regulation caused quite a stir on here, with some fearing for we could potentially lose our gaming license which would have financially crippled our club. It seemed the investigation largely focused on AFL policy rather than our club itself. As the last post was in February, I don't think 'landers were too concerned (or had forgotten), but for those that were you can now rest easy.

Edited November 14, 2013 by Nascent

[Dees2014 2,377]

As a lifetime Melbourne supporter, I have got used to us rolling straight out of one disaster into another. Perhaps that is why I tend to agree with you. The VCGR is a conservative box-ticking bureaucracy which would love to upstage the AFL. It is answerable only to the Minister (Michael O'Brien) who ( for all we know) might drink at the same water cooler as Ms Wilson.

In our favour is the fact that if they overrule the AFL on us then they will be duty bound to look at the whole AFL competition. They will also have to factor into their findings the effect of the priority pick system which has now disappeared.Thinking it all through - I think you are probably drawing too much of a long bow. But you are right in alerting us to the potential seriousness of the development.

It is not something we should dismiss lightly

I think some on here are going way over the top about their persecution complexes re the MFC. if we are found guilty, then logically they will need to look at the whole of the competition AND the AFL rules which govern it. Everyone knows that most of these rules would not stand up in a court of law, particularly anti-competitive law of the Trade Practices Act. That is why the AFL caves in at the last minute whenever they get close to Court (as does almost all other major sporting bodies throughout the world incidentally, for exactly the same reasons). The AFL will not persecute us over this. If this goes to court, it will be a fight to the death, not for us, but the AFL itself. It won't of course (go to court that is). The AFL will find a way to facilitate a settlement. We just have to make sure we are not adversely affected by any settlement. Based on the activities of the MFC last time, where they hired a bevy of QCs to rattle the cage about threatening to take the whole thing down by going to court, I think we are more than capable of defending this. I just hope it doesn't become our very own peptide scandal to disrupt what is looking like a very promising season. It is different though ie largely effecting executive management which does not effect the players (unlike Essendon).

If there is anything in this report (which I doubt) after all this time, I'd be very confident we will be OK.

Oh, and by the way guys, the world is not out to get us. I'm sure our very competent new management will deal with this resolutely and systematically, as they have done with every other difficult issue which has arisen over the last six months, and we will win, if that indeed is what we are required to do.

Edited November 14, 2013 by Dees2014

[Undeeterred 2,896]

Can't believe I read two pages of this garbage before I checked the dates on the posts...

[Whispering_Jack 28,097]

I think some on here are going way over the top about their persecution complexes re the MFC. if we are found guilty, then logically they will need to look at the whole of the competition AND the AFL rules which govern it. Everyone knows that most of these rules would not stand up in a court of law, particularly anti-competitive law of the Trade Practices Act. That is why the AFL caves in at the last minute whenever they get close to Court (as does almost all other major sporting bodies throughout the world incidentally, for exactly the same reasons). The AFL will not persecute us over this. If this goes to court, it will be a fight to the death, not for us, but the AFL itself. It won't of course (go to court that is). The AFL will find a way to facilitate a settlement. We just have to make sure we are not adversely affected by any settlement. Based on the activities of the MFC last time, where they hired a bevy of QCs to rattle the cage about threatening to take the whole thing down by going to court, I think we are more than capable of defending this. I just hope it doesn't become our very own peptide scandal to disrupt what is looking like a very promising season. It is different though ie largely effecting executive management which does not effect the players (unlike Essendon).

I'd be very confident we will be OK.

Oh, and by the way guys, the world is not out to get us. I'm sure our very competent new management will deal with this resolutely and systematically, as they have done with every other difficult issue which has arisen over the last six months, and we will win, if that indeed is what we are required to do.

I think you're definitely onto something here in a way. While the AFL can please itself and chose to be selective about who it takes on and who it doesn't, public bodies don't have that luxury and would be subjected to far greater scrutiny and higher standards of integrity.

I will no doubt be shot down for saying this by those who don't understand how the system works, but Don McLardy and the team that defended our club deserve credit for the way they conducted the difficult process that led to the rather contrived settlement with the AFL over the so called "tanking investigation." We know now that the strain of that period had a role in destabilising the club and our team and ultimately brought down many of the board and officials. One hopes that at some stage in the future, history will record the truth about how it all happened.

[Dees2014 2,377]

Can't believe I read two pages of this garbage before I checked the dates on the posts...

I should have too, before i posted. I suspect a lot of others did as well. Still the points about the possible Defence remain. Personally, I think it is a bit of a non issue, and we can now get on with re-building the Club.

Edited November 14, 2013 by Dees2014

[DemonOX 8,551]

I had forgotten it was even happening tbh.

[Sir Why You Little 35,223]

I think you're definitely onto something here in a way. While the AFL can please itself and chose to be selective about who it takes on and who it doesn't, public bodies don't have that luxury and would be subjected to far greater scrutiny and higher standards of integrity.

I will no doubt be shot down for saying this by those who don't understand how the system works, but Don McLardy and the team that defended our club deserve credit for the way they conducted the difficult process that led to the rather contrived settlement with the AFL over the so called "tanking investigation." We know now that the strain of that period had a role in destabilising the club and our team and ultimately brought down many of the board and officials. One hopes that at some stage in the future, history will record the truth about how it all happened.

I don't think Mclardy or the Board understood the system at all.

Otherwise the whole Tanking template would have never been used as a strategy to "improve"

[Redleg 38,195]

I don't think Mclardy or the Board understood the system at all.

Otherwise the whole Tanking template would have never been used as a strategy to "improve"

Seems you disagree with every AFL team then.

[Sir Why You Little 35,223]

Seems you disagree with every AFL team then.

It did us no good.

Hard work is always a better option Red.

[Guest]

The big difference between tanking and list management.

List management: you play kids but you don't put a ceiling on what they are allowed to achieve. Sure, you will probably expect them to struggle initially but if they do win then it's onwards and upwards from there (see Essendon 1993 or to a lesser extent Melbourne 1998 for more info).

Tanking: Playing kids but putting a limit on their development so you can get X pick. The kids can develop but because we want pick 1, 2 etc, they aren't allowed to develop too much.
History shows which approach works and which one was a disaster.

[jayceebee31 692]

I think you're definitely onto something here in a way. While the AFL can please itself and chose to be selective about who it takes on and who it doesn't, public bodies don't have that luxury and would be subjected to far greater scrutiny and higher standards of integrity.

I will no doubt be shot down for saying this by those who don't understand how the system works, but Don McLardy and the team that defended our club deserve credit for the way they conducted the difficult process that led to the rather contrived settlement with the AFL over the so called "tanking investigation." We know now that the strain of that period had a role in destabilising the club and our team and ultimately brought down many of the board and officials. One hopes that at some stage in the future, history will record the truth about how it all happened.

I concur, your thoughts I agree with.

Don and the board did an almighty job overall. However, sadly they supported the wrong man in the job as CEO,CS.Cam, is a looser whom should have not accepted a new contract,when he did..shoud have resigned..He put himself first before the club...and whilst he preached on Wednesdays whiteboard ..he could not put into place what he proposed should be done in principal.

Could not put in place the talk & in the end IMO, not walk the walk....very very disappointing..he let himself down and all of us...

[Jesse Christ 2,884]

Bump.

State-government-investigation-reveals-afl-can-do-more-to-protect-punters/

While there were no adverse findings against Melbourne, the commission said in a statement: "The VCGLR identified measures where the AFL could enhance its current policies and procedures to strengthen its integrity framework and provide further assurances to betting patrons."

I remember this investigation (a by-product of the tanking fiasco) by the Victorian Commission for Gambling and Liquor Regulation caused quite a stir on here, with some fearing for we could potentially lose our gaming license which would have financially crippled our club. It seemed the investigation largely focused on AFL policy rather than our club itself. As the last post was in February, I don't think 'landers were too concerned (or had forgotten), but for those that were you can now rest easy.

My favorite part is where they talk about integrity framework. Please, VCGLR, tell me more about integrity while you rob pensioners of their pension and serve alcoholic drinks to alcoholics.

I forgot all about this "investigation" which was clearly just a publicity stunt, which was always going to go nowhere.