Yet another reminder that despite the millions of dollars in revenue each year, AFL clubs are still football clubs at heart.

This is some local footy level stuff

5 minutes 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

I didn't realise there was an apology.

I've just googled it. The club said "we acknowledge the meeting has caused distress and for that the club is sorry"

Sounds like a non-apology to me. I'm sorry you're upset, no apology regarding the cause of the upset or an admission of fault.

We'll see what comes of any AFL investigation. If there's grounds for legal action we'll see what plays out there.

If the club have done wrong then they should face the consequences.

But at the moment all i see are complaints about sensitive, inappropriate information. Could be something, or could just be a beat-up.

We'll see.

25 minutes ago, Brownie said:

This is the thing, on reflection, it seems so unbelievably loose that there must be another context to this story.

It seems so crazy.

If it's BS, then Morris should be held to account. (I know he won't)

Just when I thought we had a new beginning and a fresh start to our culture, this looks really ominous.

It can't be described as an over correction whilst transitioning from what once was, either

Fair enough, clean the joint up but ...

There's an obvious line that you don't cross. Telling so many people and then not expecting the info from the link-up meeting to get out is astonishing. Bizarre in fact

4 minutes ago, BDA said:

I didn't realise there was an apology.

I've just googled it. The club said "we acknowledge the meeting has caused distress and for that the club is sorry"

Sounds like a non-apology to me. I'm sorry you're upset, no apology regarding the cause of the upset or an admission of fault.

We'll see what comes of any AFL investigation. If there's grounds for legal action we'll see what plays out there.

If the club have done wrong then they should face the consequences.

But at the moment all i see are complaints about sensitive, inappropriate information. Could be something, or could just be a beat-up.

We'll see.

You may be right but there's already a fair bit of circumstantial evidence pointing to wrong-doing

As previously stated, onfield matters are all about all-systems-go. Business as usual

But we didn't need another distraction like this

4 hours ago, Engorged Onion said:

Notably, the article says, welfare staff weren't included in the conversation.

4 hours ago, 3KZ is Football said:

Whoever Morris spoke to needs to be spoken to.

Let’s hear the other side of the story

Morris is an ongoing problem for the MFC

This bloke needs to have his membership reviewed by PTB along with contacts

If this is as it seems on face value, Guerra should resign. It’s easy to hold Richardson up as the scapegoat, but the most senior person in the room in a pre-planned meeting automatically becomes accountable for the content.

I will reserve further judgement until the facts come to light, noting at the moment we’ve heard one version of events, but my initial impression is “yikes”.

5 hours ago, NeveroddoreveN said:

We will end up paying for this one.

Why on earth would you invite players partners to such a meeting. Most of them would be friends with both May and his partner.

We will get what we deserve.

At the moment we have one report of one side of the event.

Why not wait until more is known before sacking anyone.

Edited 3 hours ago3 hr by monoccular

just as we thought this may bs was over ffs

Edited 3 hours ago3 hr by 2029_brownlow_medalist
.

The level of detail in Morris' story makes me think someone has recorded the call

Do we really want to hear the other side of the story? The club has already backpeddled with a Claytons apology (pardon the pun, younger posters may not get the reference). Careful what we wish for!

Sounds like a bunch of kids running the club. We're gonna pay out again for another dumb move.

Edited 2 hours ago2 hr by Stiff Arm

The CEO needs to make an open and truly sworn statement to the members.

Not for the first time we hear nothing, until it hits the fan.

At face value of what has been reported, in what universe does an employer invite their employees WAGS to a meeting to discuss a "football (ie. business) program"??

Again at face value, there were three senior people conducting the meeting, yet none had the "strength of character" to stop the meeting going off track.

Looks like we failed the character test at the first hurdle.

8 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

The way I look at it is the club got on the front foot to address the matter and keep staff in the loop especially as their was media speculation around Steven May

I dont see any wrong doing here.

What i do have issues is clearly there are still snakes at the footy club whether thats player or partner. Get to the bottom of it, find out who it is and get rid of them.

This was my initial reaction too. Without knowing what the specifics of the discussion were (I can take a guess) or how it was framed, on the surface of it it looks like the club was trying to get on the front foot to address the issue with May.