1 minute ago, Ouch! said:

Holy crap people are going off over nothing... again!

He 'Misled' the AFL over his betting account last year, he didn't use it, he let someone else use it. FFS you would think that the AFL are so bloody pristine in the way they do business, with WCE drug scandal, the 'Tanking' and Essendon Drug issues, the AFL has painted themselves in a pathetic light in terms of how they have handled any of this.

What Melksham did last year in his suspended year, and how he has played for us in the first 4 weeks have absolutely no correlation.

He hasn't been great so far, and TBH there is a good chance he might get dropped for another player, but for all of the Chicken Littles out there pecking away at their keyboards, this is no more likely to cause the sky to fall than Hogan's indiscretion last week.

AFL has to fine him a large amount purely due to it being a betting infringement. Nothing more to see here...

The obvious message is if you're involved in the game don't touch betting in any form. Simple really.

2 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

This is year 2. The club signed him to 4 years knowing he would likely sit out the first one. He's best 22 at the moment despite a down game on the weekend. People have a preconceived view of him and unfortunately that probably won't change. 

Seems like it's a scandal every week so far this year. Really hope the coaching staff can get a hold of this group. They seem slightly ahead of themselves!

I have a few Essendrug mates, all said no big loss he is average.

2 minutes ago, chook fowler said:

The obvious message is if you're involved in the game don't touch betting in any form. Simple really.

Not rocket science is it Chook!

2 minutes ago, old dee said:

I have a few Essendrug mates, all said no big loss he is average.

Congratulations. I'll bet you say the same about Frawley and Howe? Both decent footballers, like Melksham. While he's no world beater, he gets a bad wrap from people with a preconceived view of him and it's annoying to hear supporters having a go at him, usually for nothing. We need to support these guys and hope they grow together into something great!

3 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

Congratulations. I'll bet you say the same about Frawley and Howe? Both decent footballers, like Melksham. While he's no world beater, he gets a bad wrap from people with a preconceived view of him and it's annoying to hear supporters having a go at him, usually for nothing. We need to support these guys and hope they grow together into something great!

No actually I supported Frawley when many were having a go at him and was sorry to see Howe leave.

As for Milkshake I have never been comfortable with us recruiting him.

Twice he has been found out telling pork pies for Drug taking and now gambling.

So far I have  seen nothing to prove my Essendrug friends incorrect.

3 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

Congratulations. I'll bet you say the same about Frawley and Howe? Both decent footballers, like Melksham. While he's no world beater, he gets a bad wrap from people with a preconceived view of him and it's annoying to hear supporters having a go at him, usually for nothing. We need to support these guys and hope they grow together into something great!

As a reluctant expert @Lord Travis do you think Melksham gets on Demonland a bit and frets about what us up in the bleachers think about him... our voices on here to the players are like yelling into a howling Antarctic wind. To quote a Super Furry Animals song - 

 

50 minutes ago, monoccular said:

Hard to see what the fuss is?!  Serial failure to tell the truth to AFL investigations!  What next?

 

was only making the point of why he was being questioned in the first place. He wasn't playing football and not allowed any sporting contact with clubs, so why couldn't he bet on afl (which he didn't)

of course he should not have misled them, but why being questioned in the first place? That was all I was alluding to 

1 minute ago, daisycutter said:

was only making the point of why he was being questioned in the first place. He wasn't playing football and not allowed any sporting contact with clubs, so why couldn't he bet on afl (which he didn't)

of course he should not have misled them, but why being questioned in the first place? That was all I was alluding to 

It's the AFL dc they are never consistent.

22 minutes ago, Ouch! said:

Holy crap people are going off over nothing... again!

He 'Misled' the AFL over his betting account last year, he didn't use it, he let someone else use it. FFS you would think that the AFL are so bloody pristine in the way they do business, with WCE drug scandal, the 'Tanking' and Essendon Drug issues, the AFL has painted themselves in a pathetic light in terms of how they have handled any of this.

What Melksham did last year in his suspended year, and how he has played for us in the first 4 weeks have absolutely no correlation.

He hasn't been great so far, and TBH there is a good chance he might get dropped for another player, but for all of the Chicken Littles out there pecking away at their keyboards, this is no more likely to cause the sky to fall than Hogan's indiscretion last week.

AFL has to fine him a large amount purely due to it being a betting infringement. Nothing more to see here...

Tut-tutting is alive and well.

7 minutes ago, Danelska said:

As a reluctant expert @Lord Travis do you think Melksham gets on Demonland a bit and frets about what us up in the bleachers think about him... our voices on here to the players are like yelling into a howling Antarctic wind. To quote a Super Furry Animals song - 

 

Haha good post!

And no, he wouldn't be on here getting worked up at what some keyboard warriors think of him. I just get annoyed when I'm at the game, sitting amongst Melbourne supporters, and they're hurling insults at him. It shits me. Complain at the umpires all you want, but don't yell insults at your own team.

2 hours ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

Aside from Gary Moorcroft, can anyone recall a more disliked import than Melksham?

Tom Gillies doesn't count as he was just handicapped at football.

Heffernan was like a playing spectator as I recall.

Another Bomber dud.

 

1 minute ago, Lord Travis said:

Haha good post!

And no, he wouldn't be on here getting worked up at what some keyboard warriors think of him. I just get annoyed when I'm at the game, sitting amongst Melbourne supporters, and they're hurling insults at him. It shits me. Complain at the umpires all you want, but don't yell insults at your own team.

Agreed entirely...mind I used to have a pop at Trapper when I was young and he'd miss targets non stop...thought he was meant to be smooth like a Rolls???

If this is the worst of our problems at the minute, then we're going alright.  

5 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

If this is the worst of our problems at the minute, then we're going alright.  

Mr Gawns now 12 week hammy is  the real downer but it's up to big Jake to grab his opportunity now.

In a way it's lucky we lost him now and not before the finals as the mids will not be spoon fed all year.

 

39 minutes ago, Ouch! said:

Holy crap people are going off over nothing... again!

He 'Misled' the AFL over his betting account last year, he didn't use it, he let someone else use it. FFS you would think that the AFL are so bloody pristine in the way they do business, with WCE drug scandal, the 'Tanking' and Essendon Drug issues, the AFL has painted themselves in a pathetic light in terms of how they have handled any of this.

What Melksham did last year in his suspended year, and how he has played for us in the first 4 weeks have absolutely no correlation.

He hasn't been great so far, and TBH there is a good chance he might get dropped for another player, but for all of the Chicken Littles out there pecking away at their keyboards, this is no more likely to cause the sky to fall than Hogan's indiscretion last week.

AFL has to fine him a large amount purely due to it being a betting infringement. Nothing more to see here...

He let someone else use his own (Melksham's account), and he taken a cut. The guy who used Melksham's account was a profitable punter - to the point that he had been banned from having his own accounts. Melksham knew exactly what he was doing. If the AFL weren't so tangled - and compromised - with gambling, then Melksham would be copping more than a 10k fine. This isn't related to tanking - other than Melksham once again showing poor judgement. Hopefully the club takes the appropriate stance and suspends Melksham for a while.

6 minutes ago, KingDingAling said:

He let someone else use his own (Melksham's account), and he taken a cut. The guy who used Melksham's account was a profitable punter - to the point that he had been banned from having his own accounts. Melksham knew exactly what he was doing. If the AFL weren't so tangled - and compromised - with gambling, then Melksham would be copping more than a 10k fine. This isn't related to tanking - other than Melksham once again showing poor judgement. Hopefully the club takes the appropriate stance and suspends Melksham for a while.

Don't hold your breath KDA.

The next player who parks his car in front of a fire hydrant should be suspended. That is inexcusable.

Does anyone know the AFL's investigative powers and a player's disclosure responsibilities as to gambling? I'm curious why the AFL came looking in the first place. It reads like the actual breach was for allowing someone else to use his account - for not evidently nefarious purposes  -  and then covering this up for some reason? Wondering how the investigation was started and then concluded. 

Surely this has got a 62 week home and away (plus finals) club imposed ban written all over it?

11 minutes ago, Skuit said:

Does anyone know the AFL's investigative powers and a player's disclosure responsibilities as to gambling? I'm curious why the AFL came looking in the first place. It reads like the actual breach was for allowing someone else to use his account - for not evidently nefarious purposes  -  and then covering this up for some reason? Wondering how the investigation was started and then concluded. 

Someone working at a TAB maybe dobbed him in. Most footballers are well known and gambling organisations are sensitive with sporting types betting and maybe someone saw a short fat blob come in using his name. How may football people, players or minor officials have been caught out for very minor misdemeanours related to gambling?  The big fish are careful never to get caught.

Edited April 20, 20178 yr by america de cali

Storm in a tea cup again. Ho hum. 

I hear Chunk is facing a heafty fine for leaving the toilet seat up

3 minutes ago, america de cali said:

Someone working at a TAB maybe dobbed him in. Most footballers are well known and gambling organisations are sensitive with sporting types betting and maybe someone saw a short fat blob come in using his name. 

I knew of a Norf player who punted on the ebt  in a pub wearing a cap and long jacket,often with the Norf trackies below.

I wanted to dob him in the week before we played them but I am not really an informant by nature.

It would have been a major scandal and screwed their year , but I still prefer to mind my own business and remain morally perfect and a pillar of society.

3 minutes ago, Biffen said:

I knew of a Norf player who punted on the ebt  in a pub wearing a cap and long jacket,often with the Norf trackies below.

I wanted to dob him in the week before we played them but I am not really an informant by nature.

It would have been a major scandal and screwed their year , but I still prefer to mind my own business and remain morally perfect and a pillar of society.

That's worth at least a six month suspension on Demonland for you.

Edited April 20, 20178 yr by america de cali

1 hour ago, old dee said:

Not rocket science is it Chook!

It's rocket surgery

24 minutes ago, Skuit said:

Does anyone know the AFL's investigative powers and a player's disclosure responsibilities as to gambling? I'm curious why the AFL came looking in the first place. It reads like the actual breach was for allowing someone else to use his account - for not evidently nefarious purposes  -  and then covering this up for some reason? Wondering how the investigation was started and then concluded. 

I know being sports people they have extra responsibility, role models, integrity of the game bla bla, bla, but if the matter is/was unrealated to footy and the AFL don't have really good evidence of wrong doing, then you'd almost have to think these guys have the right to tell them to [censored] off and stop breaching their privacy.