2 minutes ago, drysdale demon said:

I don't think I will comment on that, my intelligence will not allow it.

So why did you?

5 hours ago, Lucifers Hero said:

And on it goes...

"AFL chief executive Gillon McLachlan said on Friday the league had intervened on Thursday because of new information.

“I think they [the integrity unit] are always looking at stuff and when more information comes to hand, then I think there’s always an open book and that’s what’s happened here, that there more information has come to hand than earlier in the week and that’s why they’re having a look at it,” McLachlan said on 3AW.

McLachlan did not rule out the possibility that May and Melksham could face more sanctions."

Asked if the AFL had CCTV footage of the incident, McLachlan replied: “The integrity unit will be working through that process and so whatever information is available, and there’ll, obviously, be interviews, and if there’s other information, they’ll be working through it.”

broken-some-trusts-goodwin-says-may-melksham-fight-was-embarrassing

New information doesn't mean players or the club withheld it but I sure hope they didn't.  New info could come from anywhere or anyone.

 

2 hours ago, binman said:

Exactly. 

I'm happy for the AFL integrity department to investigate.

If any of the players have gold porkies to the club then they deserve their right wack.

The problem with picking and choosing which incident they investigate is they open themselves up to accusations of selective investigations and/or having an agenda.

And if every incident was investigated the players involved in any incident would be less likely to withhold key information.

The AFL "Integrity Unit" should

1/ investigate the MRO/MRP

2/ investigate the state of umpiring

3/ investigate the Integrity Unit

4/ disband

Absolutely a misnomer - very very selectively investigates who it like and ignores what it doesn't want to know - like the FBI snd the Hunter Biden laptop.

3 hours ago, willmoy said:

Based on what has been said and what I have read so far, I have no problem whatsoever about Melksham taking a swing at May.

Any player drunk or sober would have been quite within his right to do the same, and to actually say that, the person who copped it should have been aware of what might have been coming, drunk or sober as well

I regard this comment as tantamount to calling someone somewhat inadvertently a coward, and I presume Melksham took it that way as well.

I may be wrong with this so be it but no one is perfect

 

Electing to physically assault someone, let alone someone recovering from concussion, let alone your teammate should be the absolute last resort. If you are defending yourself for example. Punching someone in the head because they said some mean things is not on.

That's not to excuse May's behaviour but there are other ways to resolve conflicts.

What happens if the AFL investigation finds that the CCTV reveals a long and harmonious group involved in deep and meaningful discussion supporting diverse opinions and supporting world peace, climate change and the actions of the new government until one member indicated that there were obviously things more important than playing in a grand final. Spirited debate on this issue led to some role playing about structures and positioning including a discussion on legitimate holding and tackling techniques and there effectiveness in a match day scanario. During this training session a player lost footing on the Enugu all surface and was propelled into the trailing fist of a teammate. Having then caused some disturbance in the restaurant apologies were made and players left discussing the need to ensure when structures were threatened there needed to be a consolidation of presence and an ability to have alternative exits and patterns available.

Should the Pies try to exploit any unexpected structural disturbances a more robust physical presence may provide an alternative practice. These tactics will be discussed at the formal training session following day. 

Players all pat each other on the back and retire in a satisfied state having recognised and acknowledged hierarchy.

it was confirmed that May with concussion should not play this week. Lever was to be given more respect and an opportunity to improve his communication in Mays absence and a further defender needed to be included in the team to consolidate the learnings from match day experience.

The next meeting would be held at a date and venue to be notified after discussion with the coaches and club.

Maybe a lesson to May in getting drunk and lippy…

 

Usually with something like this fiasco I get less annoyed with the passing of time however with this one I am getting more annoyed. I will be really annoyed if we lose by a small margin on Monday. 

7 minutes ago, old dee said:

Usually with something like this fiasco I get less annoyed with the passing of time however with this one I am getting more annoyed. I will be really annoyed if we lose by a small margin on Monday. 

I wouldn’t say I’m getting more annoyed but it hasn’t passed like it has before. This was such an avoidable situation and for May as a leader to stuff up like this is so embarrassing and potentially costly for our season. 

AFL is going to be busy with their investigations this week.

What's that noise? It's the media scuffle leaving the MFC racing to Footscay. Apparently been a crash with another grand finalist. Oh the blood-lust!

14 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Electing to physically assault someone, let alone someone recovering from concussion, let alone your teammate should be the absolute last resort. If you are defending yourself for example. Punching someone in the head because they said some mean things is not on.

That's not to excuse May's behaviour but there are other ways to resolve conflicts.

I do agree, but I don't think honestly that I would have, then, at that age, and in those circumstances.I must relate it to then, or else I wouldn't be being honest with myself.

14 minutes ago, willmoy said:

I do agree, but I don't think honestly that I would have, then, at that age, and in those circumstances.I must relate it to then, or else I wouldn't be being honest with myself.

What, when you were 30? You must have matured at a different rate because most guys I know knew this by the time they were 20 if not earlier.

15 hours ago, monoccular said:

 

The AFL "Integrity Unit" should

1/ investigate the MRO/MRP

2/ investigate the state of umpiring

3/ investigate the Integrity Unit

4/ disband

Absolutely a misnomer - very very selectively investigates who it like and ignores what it doesn't want to know - like the FBI snd the Hunter Biden laptop.

Agree monoccular. How about investigating something worthwhile:

1. Oppo players holding and blocking Max 100 yards off the ball,
2. Footscray throwing the ball for the last seven years,
3. Horethorn's draft tampering in 2005/6 that delivered four flags,
4. Carltank's brown paper bag dealings of the 70s, 80s, 90s and 00s,
5. Matthews knocking-out Giles, Ellingworth and Steven Smith off the ball in the 70s and 80s,
6. Everything Essendrugs did and said during the Sheedy years,
7. Noel Gordon's back-dooring of Fitzroy,
8. How Franklin made it to South Melbourne at the 11th hour after all but being signed, sealed and delivered to Greater Waste of Resources,
9. How McGuire was allowed to talk shiiiiiiiiit non-stop and uninterrupted for the last 25 years, and
10. Every decision made by Ross Oakley.

 

Edited June 11, 20222 yr by Queanbeyan Demon
Typo

If Steven May had suffered a significant injury, the criminal law might even have come into play. It is difficult to see how bridges can ever be fully mended when one experienced player shows open contempt for some of his team mates and for concussion recovery rules, and another has responded in a manner which in a domestic violence situation  would result in serious charges. And as Luke Jackson ponders his future, what will he make of this fiasco?

Unlawful Assault and Common Assault

Section 23 of the Summary Offences Act 1966 (Vic) provides a summary statutory offence for ‘unlawful assault’. Unlawful assault charges are heard before the Magistrates’ Court and carry a maximum penalty of 15 penalty units (around $165 per unit) or 3 months imprisonment.

However, in the most serious cases of unlawful assault, a person may be charged with ‘common assault’. Common assault is a criminal offence that arises at common law in Victoria (R v Patton [1998] 1 VR 7). These matters are heard before the County Court and carry a maximum penalty of 5 years imprisonment.

A person may be charged with unlawful assault if they “unlawfully assaulted or beat another person”. Examples might include threatening to punch someone, hitting another person or spitting at another person. Charges of unlawful assault can be laid even if the victim wasn’t injured.

 

Why TF are the AFL investigating a small fight between teammates in public with multiple witnesses. Serves no purpose

56 minutes ago, Queanbeyan Demon said:

Agree monoccular. How about investigating something worthwhile:

1. Oppo players holding and blocking Max 100 yards off the ball,
2. Footscray throwing the ball for the last seven years,
3. Horethorn's draft tampering in 2005/6 that delivered four flags,
4. Carltank's brown paper bag dealings of the 70s, 80s, 90s and 00s,
5. Matthews knocking-out Giles, Ellingworth and Steven Smith off the ball in the 70s and 80s,
6. Everything Essendrugs did and said during the Sheedy years,
7. Noel Gordon's back-dooring of Fitzroy,
8. How Franklin made it to South Melbourne at the 11th hour after all but being signed, sealed and delivered to Greater Waste of Resources,
9. How McGuire was allowed to talk shiiiiiiiiit non-stop and uninterrupted for the last 25 years, and
10. Every decision made by Ross Oakley.

 

This week’s post of the week winner. Congratulations!

1 hour ago, Queanbeyan Demon said:

Agree monoccular. How about investigating something worthwhile:

1. Oppo players holding and blocking Max 100 yards off the ball,
2. Footscray throwing the ball for the last seven years,
3. Horethorn's draft tampering in 2005/6 that delivered four flags,
4. Carltank's brown paper bag dealings of the 70s, 80s, 90s and 00s,
5. Matthews knocking-out Giles, Ellingworth and Steven Smith off the ball in the 70s and 80s,
6. Everything Essendrugs did and said during the Sheedy years,
7. Noel Gordon's back-dooring of Fitzroy,
8. How Franklin made it to South Melbourne at the 11th hour after all but being signed, sealed and delivered to Greater Waste of Resources,
9. How McGuire was allowed to talk shiiiiiiiiit non-stop and uninterrupted for the last 25 years, and
10. Every decision made by Ross Oakley.

 

Hallelujah Brother 100%

 

1 hour ago, Dee-monic said:

If Steven May had suffered a significant injury, the criminal law might even have come into play. It is difficult to see how bridges can ever be fully mended when one experienced player shows open contempt for some of his team mates and for concussion recovery rules, and another has responded in a manner which in a domestic violence situation  would result in serious charges. And as Luke Jackson ponders his future, what will he make of this fiasco?

Unlawful Assault and Common Assault

Section 23 of the Summary Offences Act 1966 (Vic) provides a summary statutory offence for ‘unlawful assault’. Unlawful assault charges are heard before the Magistrates’ Court and carry a maximum penalty of 15 penalty units (around $165 per unit) or 3 months imprisonment.

However, in the most serious cases of unlawful assault, a person may be charged with ‘common assault’. Common assault is a criminal offence that arises at common law in Victoria (R v Patton [1998] 1 VR 7). These matters are heard before the County Court and carry a maximum penalty of 5 years imprisonment.

A person may be charged with unlawful assault if they “unlawfully assaulted or beat another person”. Examples might include threatening to punch someone, hitting another person or spitting at another person. Charges of unlawful assault can be laid even if the victim wasn’t injured.

 

The law is always selectively applied Dee-monic. I take your point, but it would take a major departure from the 'normal way of proceeding' for this law to be applied in this instance IMHO.

And as for Jacko . . . if he thinks playing with law breakers Gaff, Luke Ryan, Michael Frederick and Jason Carter, then he's in for a severe reality adjustment. 

https://au.sports.yahoo.com/afl-2020-fremantle-dockers-avoid-police-action-party-040039536.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAFNdjbqHn5l4EsjRGgLKn-QWiOVyvGo2hV303r7UVCOIPtyfHU27C88m8MgiDj58ZfLXPn1vggbPKex9ATMDwtTmpn-Ykkq9umRU0Ca10-gcAHU276qHSkQjS3gLZjg1wb30ym2PqYQ2tlVD0ijDoDeceblVWCIbfzAGMYQZkogT

7 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

 

Sounds like he is commenting on one of the early (and many) versions of what was said. If so, that’s not wise. 

16 minutes ago, Queanbeyan Demon said:

The law is always selectively applied Dee-monic. I take your point, but it would take a major departure from the 'normal way of proceeding' for this law to be applied in this instance IMHO.

And as for Jacko . . . if he thinks playing with law breakers Gaff, Luke Ryan, Michael Frederick and Jason Carter, then he's in for a severe reality adjustment. 

https://au.sports.yahoo.com/afl-2020-fremantle-dockers-avoid-police-action-party-040039536.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAFNdjbqHn5l4EsjRGgLKn-QWiOVyvGo2hV303r7UVCOIPtyfHU27C88m8MgiDj58ZfLXPn1vggbPKex9ATMDwtTmpn-Ykkq9umRU0Ca10-gcAHU276qHSkQjS3gLZjg1wb30ym2PqYQ2tlVD0ijDoDeceblVWCIbfzAGMYQZkogT

I must have missed the AFL “Integrity Commission” 🤗😱🤮 report into that incident. 

22 hours ago, Clint Bizkit said:

I’ve refrained from commenting on this debacle but I just cannot for the life of me believe that we have a situation where a fight occurred because one player bad mouthed another when respect for each other was the key to the 2021 success.

Top four is far from certainty now, massive danger signs and if somehow we do get to a 25-30 point lead on Monday it will be fascinating to see if the team has the willingness and desire to go on with it or will they just shut up shop like the past two weeks.

This - 100% this.

The big issue is blowing up what seemed to be (and what we were told was) pivotal to our success. 

Not that he would give a continental... but May has lost me. I still want him to play for us, because he's a gun. I hope this doesn't happen again

2 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

What, when you were 30? You must have matured at a different rate because most guys I know knew this by the time they were 20 if not earlier.

It was pretty hard times for some people I stood with, and they had codes of co existence that might not have been normal accepted practice in society.

Move onto Monday arvo, win by eight goals and shut everyone up!

Then by Tuesday, reflection will be:

The team has cone together United and back in business!

error above cone would be for Dogs come for Demons!

2 hours ago, sue said:

Sounds like he is commenting on one of the early (and many) versions of what was said. If so, that’s not wise. 

Whatever version it was, all of them are around not playing in a grand final.

Bailey Smith is "deeply ashamed" and will likely have a "doona day" or two in the next few weeks, so I'm sure AFL will rubber stamp a nothing penalty

So be prepared for Steven May to get 6 weeks for mouthing off and getting clipped while (perfectly legally) drinking too much