13 minutes ago, Redleg said:

The boss of one of them.

We were lucky to be investigated 

Christ imagine if certain people from that period were still running the joint...!

1 minute ago, Redleg said:

And he was as [censored] as hell that it happened while he was overseas.

Somebody also left the AFL after it was over.

My issue was that so many other clubs had blatantly tanked on numerous occasions yet the media and the footy public turned a blind eye.  Most people I know happily admitted that they were glad that it wasn't their club being investigated ... the consensus was that we'd be the only club to be investigated.  Once it was done, that was going to be it.

We were the 'story' and the golden rule is that you never spoil a good story with the truth.  Ironically, Kennett was the loudest with his condemnation of what we'd allegedly done but he went quiet after a time too - someone from his own club probably worded him up. 

 

1 minute ago, Macca said:

My issue was that so many other clubs had blatantly tanked on numerous occasions yet the media and the footy public turned a blind eye.  Most people I know happily admitted that they were glad that it wasn't their club being investigated ... the consensus was that we'd be the only club to be investigated.  Once it was done, that was going to be it.

We were the 'story' and the golden rule is that you never spoil a good story with the truth.  Ironically, Kennett was the loudest with his condemnation of what we'd allegedly done but he went quiet after a time too - someone from his own club probably worded him up. 

 

We were the weak patsies.

11 minutes ago, Macca said:

My issue was that so many other clubs had blatantly tanked on numerous occasions yet the media and the footy public turned a blind eye.  Most people I know happily admitted that they were glad that it wasn't their club being investigated ... the consensus was that we'd be the only club to be investigated.  Once it was done, that was going to be it.

We were the 'story' and the golden rule is that you never spoil a good story with the truth.  Ironically, Kennett was the loudest with his condemnation of what we'd allegedly done but he went quiet after a time too - someone from his own club probably worded him up. 

 

Macca we were the most public about it though. It was childish to the extreme. 

If you are are going to "push the rules" and Tank do it quietly with some discretion

Edited September 6, 20169 yr by Sir Why You Little

13 minutes ago, ProDee said:

I was discussing our club, not Carlton.

You brought up Carlton.  

Carlton is irrelevant to me.  Why would I reference Carlton to mitigate Melbourne's embarrassing efforts ?  

You can, but it's just a lazy deflection. 

your comprehension meter needs adjustment pro

you said "we took it to comical levels". i just corrected you. nothing mitigating or deflecting about that

something that is already at comical levels can't then be "taken" to comical levels - capisce?

5 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

your comprehension meter needs adjustment pro

you said "we took it to comical levels". i just corrected you. nothing mitigating or deflecting about that

something that is already at comical levels can't then be "taken" to comical levels - capisce?

We were worse than Carlton.  Do you need reminding of Hightower on Nathan Brown, Newton on a wing, Junior in defence, Frawley up forward (needs perspective when considering the timeline) ... and the list goes on.

But, as I said, don't deflect.

We were an embarrassing basket case. 

There's tanking and then there was Melbourne. 

Just now, Sir Why You Little said:

Macca we were the public about it though. It was childish to the extreme. 

If you are are going to "push the rules" and Tank do it quietly with some discretion

The stuff that came out (the Connolly 'joke' and the mysterious 'vault' nonsense) was revealed after the investigation begun.

Most of the talk that surrounded tanking was previously directed at Carlton ... we weren't saying anything.   There was virtually nothing then McLean opened his trap. 

And the tanking surrounded the 2009 season ... McLean spoke out in late 2012.  3 years had passed and in that time what we'd allegedly done was not even a topic of conversation.  That's how I remember things.

 

3 minutes ago, ProDee said:

We were worse than Carlton.  Do you need reminding of Hightower on Nathan Brown, Newton on a wing, Junior in defence, Frawley up forward (needs perspective when considering the timeline) ... and the list goes on.

But, as I said, don't deflect.

We were an embarrassing basket case. 

There's tanking and then there was Melbourne. 

no need to drag it out like stuie, pro. just accept a graceful defeat 

4 minutes ago, ProDee said:

We were worse than Carlton.  Do you need reminding of Hightower on Nathan Brown, Newton on a wing, Junior in defence, Frawley up forward (needs perspective when considering the timeline) ... and the list goes on.

But, as I said, don't deflect.

We were an embarrassing basket case. 

There's tanking and then there was Melbourne. 

Do you remember Fevola being taken off when Carlton started getting too close ? We weren't that far in front of them in the clown shoes department, if at all

Just now, Go the Biff said:

Do you remember Fevola being taken off when Carlton started getting too close ? We weren't that far in front of them in the clown shoes department, if at all

They were blatant, we were blatanter.

 

But who cares about Carlton ?  Why measure stupidity against stupidity ?

Just now, ProDee said:

They were blatant, we were blatanter.

 

But who cares about Carlton ?  Why measure stupidity against stupidity ?

Fair call. Although if we're going to do it we've got plenty to work with around here

10 minutes ago, Macca said:

The stuff that came out (the Connolly 'joke' and the mysterious 'vault' nonsense) was revealed after the investigation begun.

Most of the talk that surrounded tanking was previously directed at Carlton ... we weren't saying anything.   There was virtually nothing then McLean opened his trap. 

And the tanking surrounded the 2009 season ... McLean spoke out in late 2012.  3 years had passed and in that time what we'd allegedly done was not even a topic of conversation.  That's how I remember things.

 

Well i knew what was going on in 2009 and i am just a Member on the outside. Tanking was being hinted about at Public Functions like it was a celebration. 

It was a joke...The investigation saved us

I'm just glad we don't have to deal with this rubbish anymore and appear to be a well-run club.

Just now, Sir Why You Little said:

Well i knew what was going on in 2009 and i am just a Member on the outside. Tanking was being hinted about at Public Functions like it was a celebration. 

It was a joke...The investigation saved us

I reckon hitting rock bottom saved us in an indirect way.  We worked our way towards having a terrible list of players and we succeeded.  We could argue the point about how we got there but it's all academic now ... PJ and then Roos have made a profound difference. 

Roos has shown the club how to build a list properly and whilst he needed another 2 off-seasons to finish the job, hopefully we've got others who can continue on the path that we're on.  This next off-season is as important as the previous 3 off seasons.

I know we've heard it all before but I see the club as entering it's 4th year of a 5 year plan (ducks for cover)

1 hour ago, Macca said:

I reckon hitting rock bottom saved us in an indirect way.  We worked our way towards having a terrible list of players and we succeeded.  We could argue the point about how we got there but it's all academic now ... PJ and then Roos have made a profound difference. 

Roos has shown the club how to build a list properly and whilst he needed another 2 off-seasons to finish the job, hopefully we've got others who can continue on the path that we're on.  This next off-season is as important as the previous 3 off seasons.

I know we've heard it all before but I see the club as entering it's 4th year of a 5 year plan (ducks for cover)

Agreed. If we weren't "Done & Exposed" we would still be a cot case. 

2009-13 are a period that we should NEVER go near again

15 hours ago, ProDee said:

They were blatant, we were blatanter.

 

But who cares about Carlton ?  Why measure stupidity against stupidity ?

The relevance of Carlton is to illustrate that another club engaged in similar conduct yet were never investigated like we were.

I think your suggestion was that we took it to comical levels - but the argument is that Carlton already did this and they were not investigated, so why were we?

2 hours ago, Scoop Junior said:

The relevance of Carlton is to illustrate that another club engaged in similar conduct yet were never investigated like we were.

I think your suggestion was that we took it to comical levels - but the argument is that Carlton already did this and they were not investigated, so why were we?

Probably because Fitzpatrick sits on the Commission. 

But remember if we were not investigated and opened up would Schwab still be sitting in the chair?

Edited September 7, 20169 yr by Sir Why You Little

It should also be noted that tanking is not illegal nor inlawful.  

If it was then any number of sporting clubs across a number of sports would have had action taken against them. 

Throwing games deliberately or bribing referees is a different story ... Juventus,  Chicago White Sox etc etc. 

Tanking happens quite frequently in US sports ... notably Basketball (sixers) and the NFL (Raiders) When there is drafting in the current set-up there will be tanking.

4 hours ago, Scoop Junior said:

The relevance of Carlton is to illustrate that another club engaged in similar conduct yet were never investigated like we were.

I think your suggestion was that we took it to comical levels - but the argument is that Carlton already did this and they were not investigated, so why were we?

The AFL never wanted to investigate Carlton or us.

In the end I think they felt they had to.  The publicity generated from that infamous OTC forced their hand.

47 minutes ago, ProDee said:

The AFL never wanted to investigate Carlton or us.

In the end I think they felt they had to.  The publicity generated from that infamous OTC forced their hand.

So trial in the court of public opinion, generated by media beat ups?

Terry Wallace Admits he did not try.......but did not tank

59 minutes ago, iv'a worn smith said:

So trial in the court of public opinion, generated by media beat ups?

There was no media beat up.

We tanked.

Live with it.

As long as people think the saga was predominantly about tanking, then they're not getting what it was really about.

The reality is that Chris Connolly was a good servant of the club and he doesn't deserve the rubbish being heaped on him here and elsewhere.

13 minutes ago, Whispering_Jack said:

As long as people think the saga was predominantly about tanking, then they're not getting what it was really about.

The reality is that Chris Connolly was a good servant of the club and he doesn't deserve the rubbish being heaped on him here and elsewhere.

What saga ?

44 minutes ago, ProDee said:

There was no media beat up.

We tanked.

Live with it.

We did what the rules permitted art the time.  The is no "legislative" framework which proscribes 'tanking'.  We did it, as others did.  If you want to debate the degree of it, then that is an entirely different argument.  By the way, we were not found guilty of "tanking'.  The result was a bit like having your cake and eating too.