40 minutes ago, demoncat said:

On the face of it this seems to be very unprofessional by the club

To conduct what essentially amounts to a welfare check without any HR or legal representatives present raises serious questions about the club’s practices and judgment, particularly given the topic of the meeting

Richardson also has a poor record as Football Manager of managing sensitive situations at the club (see the Petracca situation in 2024), so it doesn’t inspire much confidence that he’s handling these matters

Having said that, and as others have pointed out, we can only go on what Morris has reported, which clearly has a degree of bias given it’s been leaked almost two months after the fact and without any indication the leaker attempted to resolved this via the club first

I’ll reserve judgement until if/when more details come out, although the club’s statement seems to suggest they aren’t too worried, so perhaps there’s been a bit of mayo added to Morris report…

Isn't there always?

And who in their right mind has a 'private' meeting using Teams?

17 hours ago, Engorged Onion said:

That's just scuttlebutt 😂

Begs the question, keep what between ourselves? Something private that was shared by Richo or someone else from the club or the fact that the May situation was referenced on the call with the intent to make it clear it would be properly addressed?

Im not suggesting the club handled the whole thing perfectly but I'd argue not enough has been reported to prove they did something wrong.

My guess is they've sought to be transparent to hastily because of all the things we've not managed well previously. This administration wants to be seen as better, which is a sizeable relief.

Regardless of the content the mere concept of such a call is next level stupid. Much better to relay any message minus personal info, to players to discuss with their partners.

As to the reported content - if correct, I have no words for that level of stupidity and ignorance.

Edited 15 hours ago15 hr by Lucifers Hero

1 hour ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

I wonder whether that explains a mysterious omission in recent weeks 🤔

I hope not. A player isn't responsible for what his partner does or says.

Even if a player acted on his partner's behalf he is entitled to support her. And if there was a 'leak' it was most probably a player as a partner is unlikely to directly approach the club or the AFLPA.

I would be horrified if the club sanctioned a player in such circumstances.

Edited 15 hours ago15 hr by Lucifers Hero

1 hour ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Because the issue with May involved his partner and the club are trying to be inclusive of the players partners. They may have stuffed up in how they did it (uncertain without specific info) but I can understand their intent.

The club can be inclusive of player partners in an everyday, normal fashion

The way we've done it has led to a public apology with any number of questions being asked

1 hour ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

I wonder whether that explains a mysterious omission in recent weeks 🤔

That's drawing a long bow

And when considering the amount of people who had access to the hook-up, there might be more than one person voicing their concerns

There is so much emotion in footy, in life.

There are always two sides to a story. I recall one of my cousins getting divorced. My entire family immediately vilified her husband with wrath. But I got on well with him. So I called to say how sorry I was, as I did separately with my cousin. I just listened as he was in pain. I heard his side. I had empathy for him as I did my cousin. Emotive issues are never black and white.

Two other things:

One, there is never one truth. How each of us sees a situation is influenced by the life we have led, our current circumstances, our relationship to the situation and whether that morning we merrily skipped out of the house or kicked the cat.

Two, there are wives and girlfriends who are salt of the earth people, making their husbands/partners better footballers, better people and raising beautiful families. Then there are others who, given the fame of their partner, believe they're in a permanent reality TV show. The latter seek drama.

None of us is perfect. We all make mistakes. So far, Smith, Guerra, Richo and Kingy have produced an environment Cornes describes as a "lightness at the club, they're playing with freedom, they're having fun, they're changing their game style, social media. It's now cool to support Melbourne." Overall, they're doing a great job to date. Just look at the number of kids turning up to games these days - how good is that!

So I cut the leadership some slack knowing there is no perfection.

I see this as an emotional domestic situation where there are no winners, just life lessons for all involved, including the club. I have a moment sadness for Maysie who gave us his heart and soul to claim that '21 flag. Then turn my mind to the possibilities against the Suns.

1 hour ago, GM11 said:

And who in their right mind has a 'private' meeting using Teams?

Exactly

I sit quite comfortably with the so called 'Whistleblower' as we don't need this sort of stuff happening at the club

As for Morris, he's just doing his job so it's no good shooting the messenger

What might come out of it is that club gets another wake-up call

At the end of the day a group of people from the same organisation were venting rumours about a couple in the said organisation.

Imagine not going to a party and you overhear everyone sat around talking about you.

Guerra needs to own this, make a public apology to Steven, his family and his friends, and work through possible defamation claims from Steven.

15 hours ago, Macca said:

More to the point is that this sort of stuff should not be happening, BDA

With so many people involved, the info on the hook-up was bound to get out ... the 15 partners but what about all the players as well (they'd all know, even if it was 2nd hand)

It's not Morris' fault, he's just doing his job

I'm actually surprised that the story took close on 2 months to surface

And of course, those given the sensitive information and then not relaying the information to the 2 people involved is an issue in itself

If you were close to May and his partner you'd be tempted to report the matter to the 2 people involved (and that might have happened)

The club has apologised for it's involvement in the affair

So what else are we waiting for? We've admitted guilt but it doesn't end there

May and his partner would be perfectly entitled to engage a legal team if the allegations are in fact, true

Things could get quite messy but don't worry, it probably won't affect on field matters (maybe)

But King has blotted his copybook ... it pays not to ever get too infatuated with any individual. It's like meeting your favourite author

Richo is on borrowed time and not sure what to make of Guerra

Bush-league error, all the same. My god, we're a dumb-[censored] club sometimes

Admitting public fault is getting on the front foot with the ordeal and limits what further information is ‘rumoured’…it doesn’t tell the entire story - again, we have limited knowledge of what was said & in what context, that’s rather significant than making assumptions on what was specifically discussed.

This is quite amateur, how can you blame the leaker when the actions taken by the club ethically and legally questionable.

Whatever flak we get here, we completely deserve it.

This is another issue of culture. Only solution is to move on Max and Kossie.

4 minutes ago, heath55 said:

Admitting public fault is getting on the front foot with the ordeal and limits what further information is ‘rumoured’…it doesn’t tell the entire story - again, we have limited knowledge of what was said & in what context, that’s rather significant than making assumptions on what was specifically discussed.

The quick apology says it all. Within hours of the story breaking the club was on the front foot apologising

But if you've done nothing wrong, why apologise?

The way you've described what may or may not have happened might see the club deny all (or go into denial) Or at least have a delayed apology

But the following is damning (in my view)

Richardson also allegedly said in the meeting: “Can we all just make sure we keep this information to ourselves?”

He wants everyone to keep it all a secret? In a footy club?

Morris also states that MFC have been very reasonable to deal with in regards to this story and appear to understand they have done the wrong thing regarding this. Let’s just hope we continue to be open and honest and cop our whack. Sounds like Richardson just signed his exit papers.

1 hour ago, Lucifers Hero said:

Regardless of the content the mere concept of such a call is next level stupid.

Sorry If I am misunderstanding your point, but what is wrong with a Zoom type meeting to welcome Player Partners including new Players’ Partners and introduce the new CEO and Coach?

Edited 13 hours ago13 hr by Redleg

Teams meeting is a popular and regular avenue to conduct any online meetings of all forms. This happens regularly across many big organisations and companies.

I manage a team in my regional area in the industry i work in and we have weekly teams meetings, one to one supervision and even ones where i have had to be a witness to a disciplinary one one with a staff member with HR included.

Some folks need to get with the times here.

Caroline Wilson on 3AW

There definitely is a recording

Smith not "absolutely happy" (my words) with Guerra

Richardson... you can guess

9 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Sorry If I am misunderstanding your point, but what is wrong with a Zoom type meeting to welcome Player Partners including new Players’ Partners and introduce the new CEO and Coach?

Nothing wrong with it per se if that is all it was. The club apologised if it caused distress; hard to imagine how a welcome meeting might cause distress.

Given Guerra, Richardson and King reportedly all spoke to the 'May' situation indicates a prior intent for it to be more than a welcome.

Sorry Red, for mine it doesn't pass the pub test; and my 'spidey sense' is twitching 🙂

Edited 13 hours ago13 hr by Lucifers Hero

3 hours ago, Redleg said:

So what do we actually know?

We know that a player and his partner were discussed at a partners’ online meeting with club officials.

We know that the intention of the meeting was a welcome and to show that the club supported players and their partners.

We know that this discussion occurred, but that it wasn’t the reason for the meeting.

We don’t know what specific details were discussed and if they were public knowledge, or private communications, or came from other sources.

We don’t know if any person prior to the meeting asked for some info on the situation, for whatever reason.

We know that someone leaked the meeting to the media.

We don’t know how the other attendees felt about the discussion.

We don’t know if the leaker was accurate, truthful, or had an ulterior motive for involving the media.

We don’t know if the person who went to the media, first raised a concern with the club and if they did, what the club response was and why they then felt it necessary to go public.

We don’t know if anyone, including Officials present, suggested an end to the discussion or that it was inappropriate to discuss.

We do know for a fact though, that many on here love to go off without proper and full knowledge and understanding of an issue and spout garbage condemning people.

You forgot to list one other matter.

The Club has issued a statement of apology.

The content is what is at issue here. It's not anything goes or anything is on the agenda ... zoom meetings or teams meetings per se is not the issue

Subject matter needs to be screened and passed fit for discussion

Otherwise, you get what we've got now

14 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Sorry If I am misunderstanding your point, but what is wrong with a Zoom type meeting to welcome Player Partners including new Players’ Partners and introduce the new CEO and Coach?

I guess the risk is (and it seems like what might have happened) that someone can easily record a conversation out of camera shot.

That's not the end of the world if the discussions aren't sensitive.

I suspect the whole meet and greet was probably a really good idea to do.

As mentioned above, families and partners are critical to a players performance in lots of ways.

Maybe the meeting was a good idea until someone went down a rabbit hole instead of saying "we just can't discuss this due to privacy reasons"

If you've got something delicate to discuss, you'd do it just with your employees / players and then do it really carefully in a controlled environment.

Anyways, yes it's a lot of speculation about how it went down and exactly what was said.

I have the feeling the intent and idea was great, somehow they just went into a discussion they shouldn't have had in that forum.

2 hours ago, Lucifers Hero said:

Regardless of the content the mere concept of such a call is next level stupid. Much better to relay any message minus personal info, to players to discuss with their partners.

As to the reported content - if correct, I have no words for that level of stupidity and ignorance.

Agree Luci

Beig charitable it was a well-meaning exercise, but a really, really stupid own goal.

4 hours ago, rpfc said:

Or blew the whistle.

One man’s freedom fighter and all that…

Not going to guess nor have I heard any names but I have heard that it not a secret within the club.

I think l came upon an interview with King about the issue on 3AW.

And he was apologising

Surely Guerra should have been doing this ?

22 hours ago, Dees051321 said:

Exclusive: Melbourne under fire for “concerning” conduct

By Tom Morris

The conduct of Melbourne Football Clubsenior leaders is under the microscope following a phone hook-up on February 5 which involved the girlfriends and wives of players.

The TEAMS meeting, which commenced at 7:30pm, was framed as an introductory session for partners of players to meet CEO Paul Guerra, coach Steven King, and footy boss Alan Richardson to address "a matter that impacts the football program".

There were approximately 15 partners on the call, but no psychologists or welfare officers.

A whistleblower who was on the call has claimed confidentiality obligations were breached regarding Steve May and his partner Sachi Dade’s personal situation, along with the sharing of inappropriate and inaccurate legal information.

SEN understands senior officials such as Tom Harley at the AFL and James Gallagher at the AFL Players’ Association are aware of concerns around the phone hook-up, which lasted approximately 20 minutes.

The AFLPA believed it was serious enough to refer the matter to the AFL following a complaint. The league has since referred it to Melbourne but has remained in close contact with the Demons as they navigate it behind closed doors.

Following a brief introduction, the meeting quickly pivoted into a discussion regarding premiership player May (who was on personal leave at the time) and his partner, Sachi Dade.

The situation related to a welfare check conducted at a private residence on January 29.

No charges were laid and the matter is now resolved, Victoria Police confirmed to SEN.

“This catch up was on the back of a conversation with some leaders in the wake of what’s happened with Maysie,” Richardson told attendees about the reason for the TEAMS call.

“They thought it would be good to catch up.

“What we do know is last Thursday the police were called to the family home.

“It was a combination of a welfare check because Sachi was concerned a bit about Steve, because he’s had some challenges. But clearly there’d been some challenges between Steve and Sachi. That’s pretty clear.

“There’s a lot of work to be done. Steven has agreed to do some personal growth work.”

SEN has chosen not to publish all of what was said, since some of the material is legally sensitive, personal, and unverified.

Disclosing delicate information in a forum of individuals with no contractual obligation to the club prompted a complaint to be made to the AFLPA, with the AFL then included in discussions at a high level.

“Can we all just make sure we keep this information to ourselves?” Richardson said in the meeting at one point.

“The reason that this is a little bit unusual – I don’t think I’ve ever done this before – we’ve had issues with Clayton (Oliver) and the like. Is that this is involving a partner.”

A source present on the call said: “It raises serious questions about whether the club understands or respects even the most basic standards of privacy and duty of care.”

The whistleblower, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, continued: “What is particularly concerning is that this disclosure did not occur in a controlled or necessary environment, but rather in a broadly attended group call that had been framed as a routine and welcoming introduction.”

SEN has obtained a text message sent from a Demons staff member to partners the night before, inviting them to the TEAMS chat.

“Hi all, I’m reaching out to invite you to join an online meeting with Paul Guerra (CEO), Steven King (Head Coach), & Alan Richardson (GM of Football Performance) tomorrow night at 7.30pm.

“They would like to introduce themselves and also have a conversation surrounding a matter that impacts the football program, and we want to ensure you are kept across the information as best we can.”

The source said: “There was no warning that such a delicate matter would be discussed, nor any opportunity to consent to being part of that potentially triggering conversation.

“A situation that should have been carefully managed instead became a platform for the dissemination of non-factual and highly sensitive information, with no apparent regard for the personal, legal or reputational implications for Steven, Sachi or their daughter.”

Guerra also spoke, declaring: “This (the May situation) will not be swept under the carpet.”

“We need to understand that our objective is that we have people living to the standards we want that work and operate inside the Melbourne Football Club… That’s everybody. If they can’t then we will have conversations with them about what that may look like for them going forward.”

King added: “I want our football club to be a welcoming place where everyone can come. Character is obviously a massive part of my values and what I look for in footballers and people as well… It’s really important we address with you tonight the Maysie stuff.”

Despite what appears to be well-intentioned by the club, some on the call have described the meeting as “deeply inappropriate”.

“They made him (May) sound guilty without any of the facts,” the source continued.

“Melbourne shared private and confidential information in a non-controlled, obviously not confidential setting. It was a group call. It felt totally inappropriate. You could feel how taken off-guard everyone was. Nobody was prepared to hear that information.”

Melbourne was contacted for comment

Whoever it was should be shown the door, no ifs or buts!