Media muckraking and in particular ,     G. Whateley, has forced their hand.

I know exactly where this is heading.

expect both players to get suspensions of 3 to 4 weeks plus as well as fines to the club.

The club’s response was fine. Let’s not start self flagellating.

Max spoke candidly yesterday and addressed the issue adequately. Talk of afl investigations is fugazi. Just optics and [censored] covering from HQ

time to move on and turn our attention to the game on Monday 

7 minutes ago, Jaded No More said:

Don’t think the AFL can investigate a police matter. Let alone one that occurs overseas and ends up in court. 
 

I think the club handled this poorly. They tried to sugarcoat the truth and instead each day the real truth came out in tiny morsels, making the entire thing sound so much worse. AFL probably wants to know what else we are hiding. 

The Club has suspended May. Both boys should pay costs to the restaurant, including loss of possible revenue and that should be thend of it. 
This is the Media extracting blood for their own gains

2 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

The Club has suspended May. Both boys should pay costs to the restaurant, including loss of possible revenue and that should be thend of it. 
This is the Media extracting blood for their own gains

At the expense of MND fund raising and Neale Daniher’s legacy :-  Not that I expected them to care about that 

7 minutes ago, 1964_2 said:

At the expense of MND fund raising and Neale Daniher’s legacy :-  Not that I expected them to care about that 

Good point. The Media should be real proud of themselves 

53 minutes ago, Older demon said:

Just seen the latest HS headlines. One could be mistaken for thinking there is a concerted effort to attack the club. 3 banner headlines all about Goody, AFL investigation and May having a dust up with Richetelli at Gold Coast. Thank god in cancelled my subscription years ago and wouldn't lower myself to pick up the paper and read. But they still damage the club with sensations headlines that are old news. 

Its time MFC, supporters and everyone else boycott this excuse for a newspaper.

What would I do when the tissue paper runs out in the bathroom OD?

Just now, Sir Why You Little said:

Good point. The Media should be real proud of themselves 

Good causes and good news stories don’t sell papers, it’s all about negative stories with clubs in turmoil. 

1 hour ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

Hasn't seemed to have worked.

Agree and i feel for him over this.

He called a whole of club meeting before freo game calling this issue out. He used genetal lack of knowledge by team members on alcohol rules to drive home his point.

Given Harmes and hibberd are back in and were at the incident maybe they escaped sanction due to attempt to address May on behaviours?

"It is believed May attended another Prahran nightspot after being hit by Melksham."

'Violence is never the answer': AFL to probe May-Melksham fight

Far out.

2 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

"It is believed May attended another Prahran nightspot after being hit by Melksham."

'Violence is never the answer': AFL to probe May-Melksham fight

Far out.

Drip. Drip. Drip. 

Well done Melbourne PR/Comms…

33 minutes ago, roy11 said:

What can the AFL do here, is it just a fine or a ban likely? Would hate to lose him for the Brisbane game

Dear AFL . . . can you at least, please, start using some lubricant? Blessings, QD.

42 minutes ago, spirit of norm smith said:

Did this happen for the Jordan DEGOEY incident in the USA?? 

This. 

29 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

The Club has suspended May. Both boys should pay costs to the restaurant, including loss of possible revenue and that should be thend of it. 
This is the Media extracting blood for their own gains

Ridiculous statement. For one, this would need to be a court matter. Second, the complainant needs to be able to prove that revenue loss. There is no such thing as "possible", only what can be proven. 

2 minutes ago, Smokey said:

Ridiculous statement. For one, this would need to be a court matter. Second, the complainant needs to be able to prove that revenue loss. There is no such thing as "possible", only what can be proven. 

Third, probably more chance if it had happened inside the restaurant...

2 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

Third, probably more chance if it had happened inside the restaurant...

Fourth, the restaurant will probably gain revenue out of this. May/melky should ask for a cut 

29 minutes ago, Pates said:

Good causes and good news stories don’t sell papers, it’s all about negative stories with clubs in turmoil. 

Craig Hutchison is a happy man tonight 

Apart from public nature of scuffle, what is the issue here?

Hurt feelings and unfriendliness is not an issue for AFL

Wasn't a news story Monday, so presumably limited/no inconvenience to other parties

Word that there is potential scratch on furniture at Restaurant, but that's not an AFL matter if handled maturely

AFL is reacting to media, who are reacting to Melbourne announcing the incident and actions, media then blowing up a storm about team dynamics (less about the actual scuffle), so AFL needs to be seen to be proactively acting on something that is really a non issue for them...

Edited June 9, 20223 yr by Graeme Yeats' Mullet

1 hour ago, Demonstone said:

This is a tweet from 'Age' journalist Peter Ryan today.  Anyone heard anything else about this?

NB:  I'm aware of the massive oxymoron that is "AFL integrity department".

 

The AFL integrity department have decided to take a further look at the May-Melksham incident to ensure there are no surprises beyond what has been established.@agerealfooty

AFL Integrity Department to investigate Melbourne Demons fight between Steven May and Jake Melksham

37 minutes ago, Smokey said:

Ridiculous statement. For one, this would need to be a court matter. Second, the complainant needs to be able to prove that revenue loss. There is no such thing as "possible", only what can be proven. 

Damages can be seen. Was the Restaurant forced to close a section of its tables? If so they are entitled to want some compensation. 
no need to go to court. If it happened outside it is not an issue 

Edited June 9, 20223 yr by Sir Why You Little

Only additional outcome I can see is warranted is a ban to Melksham (due to violence and the AFL wanting to ensure they're seen not to condone it) and potentially some fines. 

2 hours ago, Queanbeyan Demon said:

That's exactly what they say at AA meetings. 

Have you been QD?

1 minute ago, DemonWA said:

Only additional outcome I can see is warranted is a ban to Melksham (due to violence and the AFL wanting to ensure they're seen not to condone it) and potentially some fines. 

The " bringing the game into disrupted" catch all will be used here. And they have so watch for the club to be fined. If we're tigers or pies would they. Of course not.

3 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Damages can seen. Was the Restaurant forced to close a section of its tables? If so they are entitled to want some compensation. 
no need to go to court. If it happened outside it is not an issue 

In what world does a restaurant "close a table" instead of just removing the problem customers

2 hours ago, Queanbeyan Demon said:

That's exactly what they say at AA meetings. 

he wasn't talking about alcoholism, which is an addiction

he was talking about how some people turn nasty when inebriated whilst others become everyone's best friend

if you are the former you either moderate your drinking or just avoid it totally

1 hour ago, spirit of norm smith said:

Did this happen for the Jordan DEGOEY incident in the USA?? 

Yes. The AFL required he donate $10,000 to the Salvos along with whatever penalties the club gave him.

Edited June 9, 20223 yr by deva5610