Leaderboard

I'm impressed with this club's ability to lurch from one crisis to the next without missing a beat. I'm finding this very, very tiring.

My point is this has come from an article written by a journalist, nothing she says is gospel it is from a source. Allegedly 10 people were in a meeting, 4 have been recalled to be re-interviewed. The facts (unless you know different) are a meeting occured and team performance was discussed. You talk about testimonies being sworn, all proper investigations have these and declarations that are part and parcel. We have no transcripts to these interviews and dare I say neither does the media. Everything is hearsay especially the two players "we were never told to deliberatley lose" they assumed and felt it was due to players being played out of positions. That is not sufficient evidence to warrant sanctions for tanking neither is the other two witnesses saying a meeting occured. As I said in another post 10 people in that meeting will give differing accounts of what was said, it wont be intent to deceive it is just human perception of situations. The point of the meeting may have been to discuss the games left and winning not being the priorty, this does not justify sanctions, it is covered in list management. All 10 would be subject to cross examination and are not perjuring themselves by stating their perception of what occured. Let me finish by saying I have no allegance to any board member, I care about the MFC and it's supporters. Your posts infer the journalists are telling the entire truth and the Footy department and board are lying. Bailey may regret his actions that does not mean he was told to deliberatley lose it is a play on words, maybe he regrets not standing up and saying I want to win every game and will pick whoever I believe gives us the best chance to do so, he played WATTS when he wasn't ready to assist with a crowd for QB maybe he regrets that, why wouldn't he it set a losing culture and ended up with 186 and him losing his job So please don't drip feed info you have discussed them having sworn testimonies and if you know what exactly is in these testimonies please do the righty by the rest of the Dees supporters and enlighten us. And if you have an agenda state it My agenda is for the investigation to run it's course and be put to bed either way, so the club can move forward

There is one thing that is noticeably absent from this conga line of accusations against the Melbourne Football Club. Despite all of the material presented, there is not one single piece of evidence pointing to the fact that Melbourne tanked. Not a single suggestion that the players were told by coaches and/or officials to go out and not try their best in a game of football. Moreover, there's no doubt that the Melbourne team was a weak side that year but the three games used to illustrate suspicious conduct of games were against the Swans at Manuka where we couldn't win even when we had stronger teams, the Richmond game where we led when the siren sounded and the last game of the season when we played against the top team. You wouldn't believe it but we were the bottom side. The article makes it sound as if we were the red hot favourites to win! If this vault is supposed to be some secret venue for a sinister cabal of plotters, how the hell did they get pictures of those blokes inside the place with smiling faces? Is it a crime to discuss the club's position or the fact that its supporters were discussing what we all knew as fact? That you win five and you don't get a priority pick? It was the major talking point at the club at that time just as the same thing was the major talking point at Carlton in 2005, 2006 and 2007 and at various other clubs during the decade. Holy [censored] Batman - if they presented this speculative crap in a court of law as proof of tanking, the case would be thrown out in five minutes.

I love that Melbourne supporters cheering McMahon's goal (fortunately I was just off camera celebrating wildly) was cited in Wilson's article as some sort of support for her case that Melbourne was involved in a wacky global conspiracy.

Look it's a small point but it shows how hyberbole can inflate the situation ... "The Vault" is not a conspiracy to tank. It was the nickname for a portable building used as the FD meeting room at the Junction Oval. I went to a post-draft members meeting in "the Vault" with Barry Prendergast in 2008 - tanking was not discussed. The meeting that has been raised in The Age may have taken place in the Vault but that's as far as it goes. I think a little less panic is advisable.

Absolutely nothing should be said by the Club until they know what they are actually being accused of by the AFL. The AFL and Vlad need this to blow over as much as we do so we need to bide our time and almost work with the AFL on this. I know that is really unpalatable but there is more to lose by jumping the gun. I still firmly believe that there are other cards from the Scully debacle that the MFC have not played as yet. I like most here love the Club and wish that the backstabbing that is currently on display stops. It will only succeed in splittting the Club in two. Haven't we been through enough this year. Now is the time for solidarity. If when all the information comes out and certain staff have to resign, then the discussion re the current board can play out. Until that time get behind the Club - support it. Journos do read this site and if they get a whiff of instability amongst the supporters we are supplying them with more fodder to beef up a storyline.

The reporting seems to be changing the story every each snippett that gets released. The same journalsist has now stated that the "secret" meeting is now revealed began as a a match committee meeting, hardly a secret. Code named the "Vault" which is the name of the shed that all meetings were held in. The meeting was attended by up to 10..now at least 15 people. Tomorrow she will announced that Jordon McMahon was at the meeting and handed the script on his role in the next weeks match.

This isn't the AFL's fault this happened, it's the MFC's fault plain and simple. It's the fault of a weak culture, and managerial incompetence. A 10 person meeting to conspire the deliberate loss of football matches.................it tells you everything you need to know about those involved. Perhaps when Schwab was dicking around with the new club emblem, he could have included a symbol that represents the clubs interest or intent to win every game we participate in, or does that go without saying????

The AFL cannot properly confine its tanking investigation to the last in a long line of clubs which recognized that the AFL rules rewarded teams who lost games I was one of thousands of Melbourne supporters goaded by Carlton supporters for losing the Kreuzer Cup. Make no mistake the football public ridiculed poor old Melbourne because it was outmanoevred by Carlton - even though the scoreboard had Melbourne in front when the siren sounded, Carlton supporters were the ones who went home happy. An Assistant Carlton Coach Tony Liberatore came out and said that Carlton had tanked. The AFL turned a blind eye - just as it had done when Collingwood rested half its list a few years before - and when Hawthorn experimented with a losing handball-handball-handball game plan a couple of years after that. Melbourne decided it wasn't going to be dudded again - it was going to follow the path of the power clubs. The AFL had developed a system that encouraged teams to bottom out - now it was going to be Melbourne's turn. Melbourne followed the leaders. Now on the back of an outburst by a disgruntled former player reinforced by a sacked coach and a discredited recruiter the AFL has decided to dig back into the past. ............. selectively................ not to the heart of the issue let alone to those who first seized on it - but just far enough to catch out the last club in the line. It would be unconscionable for the AFL Commission (under the Chairmanship of a former Carlton Captain) to strike at the heart of one club having stood by while others ( demonstrably Carlton) who wrote the book - stand back and laugh. Melbourne supporters would not have cheered home Jordan McMahon's kick if the AFL hadn't effectively sanctioned Carlton's victory in the Kreuzer cup two years before It is the integrity of the AFL that is really on the line here

Brad Green was so disillusioned with football after 2009 that he had a near All-Australian, B and F season in 2010 and was subsequently made captain.

Hopefully Neeld turns up in a tank and steamrolls them all.

If he really cared for the club rather than his own self interest he would never have publicly stated what he did about the tanking issue. That's the problem with our leadership for years on end. People running their own agenda rather than running a football club/million dollar business. It existed under Gardner and it exists now. it's why we're seen us a joke and why the ultimate prize is so far away. Oh and it's also because of people like yourself pouring your vitriol upon us.

All still speculation at this point and if there isn;t anymore evidence then what's been mentioned in the media then there's still no smoking gun in my opinion from a legal perspective. Worst case scenario and there is a fine & loss of draft picks the club need to convince the AFL that the draft pick loss should be for 2013 given our 2nd round pick is dedicated to father son and Pick 4 is a compensation pick that we're entitled to under the AFL expansion rules, it's not our first round draft pick.

So we have a meeting at which there was discussion about the consequences of winning or losing a game or games but not direct instructions for the players to lose and suddenly we're guilty of tanking and must be sanctioned? That's not necessarily the case at all. A couple of years ago, the Fremantle selectors met to select their team for the final round of the season against Hawthorn. They decided to rest half their team and would have also discussed the consequences of picking a team that wasn't going to win in a pink fit. Does that mean that the players they put out onto the field weren't going to play the game on its merits? Having meetings and discussing the consequences of a particular selection process is not the same as actually ordering your players to lie down and lose and the players themselves have indicated that when they ran out onto the field they were doing their beat to win. In the case of the Richmond game, the fact they were in front when the siren went is more proof of that than some people's versions of what transpired at a meeting held more than three years ago. I am shocked that people are talking about sanctions when we as a club haven't even had our chance to put our side of the story. Some of you people are truly shameful and disgusting specimens, hardly worthy of calling yourselves supporters.

Garbage. Neeld is no one's puppet. He removed the players in question because they had, as a group, clearly failed. Schwab had nothing to do with it

Is it of interest to anyone where Wilson is getting her "inside information" on statements made to an investigator, in an investigation that is still unfinished. If statements have been leaked to the media, IMO the whole investigation is flawed and corrupted. Any decision therafter is of the same quality.

Regardless of the outcome I really wish it was footy season so we could focus on the team and the game we love rather that this bullsh!t.... Its sending me grey...

Why hasn't the club come out and complained loudly about the AFL Investigation leaking like a sieve? Whatever happened to due process or isn't that in the AFL's lexicon of Integrity? I'm really started to develop a persecution complex here

Kiss this year's draft goodbye if pick 4 is taken off us, without a full hearing according to the rules of natural justice. This has been a selective inquiry without any right of testing the statements by the victim and the ability to call its own evidence. An injunction will stop the draft. Can't see it happening. I can however see us getting fined in a messy situation where no other club is then examined. The whole workings of the AFL would be up for examination in a Court case.

Because Caroline doesn't comment on the actual sport, but on the politics of the sport, she usually over-dramatises. Patrick Smith's article,http://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/opinion/post-season-probes-leave-afl-lost-in-space/story-e6frg7uo-1226506991378 sums up the hypocrisy of the AFL in going after Melbourne. The AFL plays god by allocating favourable fixturing to the entrenched clubs and by spiriting off the best players in the land to franchises with no membership, then bullies a foundation club based on the commentary of disgruntled ex-players. How there is no linkage to other similar clubs in this 'investigation' illustrates the stand-over tactics employed by the AFL whose bureaucrats would dearly love a television-driven white-bread competition of equal numbers in equal states.

Three things i'm really sick of - firstly, the ability for these online articles to change their wording on a minute by minute basis. Writing is a dead art, get the articles right first time instead of revising them on a hourly basis to get the facts in there. Secondly, stop publishing the same material under a different heading. Drives me crazy saying "i've already read this". Finally and most importantly, for the love of God, stop publishing photos of meathead McLean in a Melbourne guernsey. Every time i see him now i think of burnouts, parents with AIDS, a truckload of pimples, and a sour taste in my mouth. I'd rather not think that way while looking at the Red and the Blue.

I am not just saying this because I barrack for the club, but the AFL will be making a very big mistake if it decides to impose draft penalties on Melbourne. The club has been a basket-case for want of a better word for the past 6 years. By imposing draft penalties will only ensure this continues, and in reality, will not do anybody any good. All it effectively does is punish the supporters - those who made the bright decision to 'tank' are still getting paid hefty salaries whether from Melbourne or another club now. They are in it as a business, so it doesn't really matter to them. The only real option the AFL has is to clean out the administrators at the club that were around and had a bearing in these decisions back in 2009, so if that includes CS, CS and even JH, so be it. Irrespective of what penalty the AFL imposes, I think Melbourne would have a fairly strong case if pursued through the courts, particularly because the AFL firstly is guilty of a lack of action years ago when this occurred, as well as not paying proper due diligence to other serious claims made at other clubs, particularly those claims by Liberatore and Wallace.

Just a random question... why do many think they are soo important? My rough calculations: revenue is around $33.5mil a year. The average membership costs (Adult 11) $329.... Your membership represents 0.001% of the clubs total revenue and because you post, anonymously without your membership number. to a non-MFC controlled forum demanding and/or needing answers you deserve them? As far as I am aware with the tanking issue (the same as 99.9% of the football community) is a few articles have been written in a newspaper and an investigation is ongoing. The club should respond to this on here or in public? Respond to Caroline Wilson whenever she writes an article about MFC?? I would much prefer the club concentrated on working through the issues with the AFL in the best way they see fit, getting new players functioning as a team for 2013, the board looking at our strategic direction, the marketing group looking at getting new members, etc. Surely as members, supporters or whatever you call yourself, our energy would be much better served supporting the team; rather than looking for another opportunity to "have a crack" at current or past staff. In the fullness of time it will be public knowledge to some extent - once the investigation finishes! And for those having a go at Cameron, Don or any others. How would you have any idea what so ever of what they are doing day in, day out? Name an organisation where you know what senior manager's do every day?? Not a bad first post under this name.... Oh, and a 4 x Member for 2013, debt demolition contributer, purchaser of every raffle ticket for a Volvo or offered by Dudley and finally Demon Blood supporter of MFC...

You spelled 'terrible' wrong. 1. As it stands, you can't prove we did anything other than what other clubs have done for ages. If we did, then you'll find out in due course when the investigation reveals what happened. 2. No. Hyperbole. 3. Who are you worried about? Bruce? He was giving us little. Moloney? Even less. McDonald? One mistake. 4. A combination of poor drafting, poor development/coaching, a terrible environment for a player to try to become elite in, and the players themselves not being capable of stepping up to AFL level. 5. This question doesn't even make grammatical sense.

No allegiance, but if this crap makes for strange bedfellows then we should at least bring our PJs

He's just covering his own arse, Collingwood did it as well and you can bet, as a consequence, that they'll be worried the MFC, if penalised, will take it to court and drag the other clubs through the mud with them. There is the mother of all can of worms out there just waiting to be opened and we're just the tip of the ice-berg

That tells me a lot about you, big ego, bruiised and battered when the new administration didn't want you, poor little lamb. Now you want to take it out on them by sniping wherever possible and showing them that they should never have made an enemy out of you. Well I'm glad they did and I hope we find out just who you are so we never make the mistake of voting for you in any election for any position at the Melbourne Football Club. The wasted oportunities you talk about must include the hiring of Bailey who for all intents and purposes was a monumental flop as a coach; nice one Paul.

Eddie-speak "One thing you've got to be careful with here is 20/20 hindsight morality,'' McGuire said. "That is that at the time Melbourne, had they won five games, would have been the laughing stock of the football world for giving up a priority pick. "Remember that everybody looked at Richmond as if they were the greatest shower of idiots of all time when Jordan McMahon kicked that goal to beat Melbourne because they missed out, remember that?'' The mans right !!

I've always liked McChins and if he was our president we would not be in this. I really believe this. As this [censored] gets deeper I think we will see many more opposition figure heads come out and defend us, in a way they are defending their own clubs too. This is certainly gaining momentum, as long as the findings are after we use pick 4 I will be relieved. All I want to do is take full advantage of this draft and then deal with the repercussions latter. If those repercussions are a board spill then so be it. I have to be honest, I am sick of this constant controversy we are in and am prepared for us to do whatever it takes to put an end to it!

It has been reported that COLLINGWOOD president Eddie McGuire and former Melbourne president Paul Gardner have both expressed their dismay about the tanking allegations against the Demons, and they both have come out strongly criticising the AFL for putting a system in place that provided a disincentive to win games. Eddie McGuire has been quoted as saying that the incentive for clubs to win no more than four games in a season in consecutive years, providing them with a priority pick, was flawed. Eddie has applied a very old quote in criticising the system He reportedly said "You can't blame the cat for swallowing the cream if you put the cream out in front of it.'' http://www.news.com....k-1226507551208 So who's feet does the actual blame fall at ? is it the AFL? and if it is the AFL then how can it be left up to them to be the judge us of what is or isnt tanking ??? Add to that the amount of negative press received to date over this issue and how could any other club let alone Melbourne expect a fair hearing anyway. The Melbourne Football Club would no doubtbly be thrown to the wolves should this be interpreted and proven to have happened and they would use us the MFC as Sacrificial lambs , to relieve the pressure. But where does it stop then ? As we all know there are many other Clubs that have done the same or even more than what we supposedly have done. My question is, would this trigger more investigations or they get their pound of meat would they then be Mulified ? Or is this going to trigger a whole range of other investigations into other Clubs who have done more than ourselves in the pursuit of the same sort of success and yet still have to be held accountable . If this was the case I wouldnt be surprised to see the MFC and all its supporters and other clubs March on AFL house in a day of action should this occur that Melbourne be extremly penalised, because many clubs by rights would then have to answer to the same if not more. We all know the AFL is destroying the game with their constant interference as well as there continual ongoing changes they seek to introduce each year to persuade us that they still have relevence. Lets just hope they have enough sense to realise that the Melbourne Football club did not Tank but just pursued the enticements that the AFL put in place to help the MFC amongst others once more become a success

1. Melbourne did stuff in 2009 that happens every year. 2. Some people in the football media are tired of playing solitaire for seven hours a day and have a limited understanding of list management, so have decided to appropriately embark on a witch hunt at this special time of the year. 3. It appears that when Melbourne engaged in some list management in 2009, perhaps some club officials with verbal diarrhoea may have been a fraction blunt in their directions to then coach Dean Bailey. 4. The list of people keen to stick the boots into the MFC isn't restricted to the media or the AFL however, and every loosely termed 'man' and his dog with an axe to grind with the club is lining up to kick the Demons in the proverbial plums. 5. There is no new intel to factually suggest what penalty if any the MFC will receive, other than the ramblings of some journalists keen for scandal and a 'big story' of the MFC being forced to squeal like a pig. 6. Any punishment dished out to the MFC at this or a later time may (hopefully) result in court action by the club. 7. In short, after 31 pages, we don't have a whole lot of substance, other than that this club may not have been the most cleverly run outfit in the land in recent times.

The point is "tanking" (or whatever the correct term is, if there is one) is about deliberately trying to lose ("match fixing" in a way) which is what Caroline Wilson is insinuating. I argue that there is a difference between deliberately trying to lose, and winning not being a top priority. It is very hard to prove that actions such as resting players constitutes deliberately trying to lose unless there is concrete evidence to prove that was the motivation for it.

I have been very adamant about the fact that nothing would happen vis-a-vis the Clothier Investigation. But I didn't account for one thing - the AFL losing control of their investigators. Tanking needs a narrow and deep definition for legal purposes. Telling players to lose would sum up that definition. Every other thing that clubs have done, and will do, in losing seasons is not tanking. You can't prove it and as long as the 22 you send out there are trying to win you are safe because when it comes down to it - that is all that matters. If the Commission wishes to make an example of us we will blow this up in the courts. F___ them. We are no-one's patsy.

Why am I not surprised. The two dummies together. Not a skerrick of brain power amongst the two of them.

Dumb thread for so many reasons

I don't think people are grasping the issue that the AFL cannot have an adverse finding against Melbourne without ending up in Court, either by Melbourne or more significantly with the betting agencies. Another point, the concept that a club (which is a business) cannot act on strategies to improve its position over its own time frame is also perhaps a legal matter to be argued. It is totally reasonable that an FD would sit down and discuss its position in the broad context of playing list personnel and draft picks. It only becomes an issue in realtion to bettig if that information was acted on through placing bets. This is the WHOLE issue as I see it. Not tanking per se, whatever the AFL or legal worlds definition of that is? Of course given the caliber of the investigators I don't doubt that some of the people involved may have shot themselves in the foot. Also given The Age has also chosen to humiliate Demetriou as part of this story I don't discount that he may want to extract some sort of revenge against us, somehow?

This deserves a Christopher Walken WOW. It's 2012 you do realise its no longer cool to hate women. Quite possibly the most sexist thing I've seen in a long time. MFC admin and board members is where your ire should be directed. Don't shoot the messager.

This club is the laughing stock of the competition. It's embarrassing supporting the demons. We are getting investigated for fixing games, can't get or top picks right and can't keep/develop our talent. Changes need to be made from the top down and bring in management that both know what they are doing and can start fixing this train wreck of a football club

Bloody rich really - particularly given that he was one player who consistently did his best for the club, eg, by urinating on the bar one night in St Kilda at 3am as the team's VC, and also by racking up a total of zero possessions in the 186 loss against Geelong. Quality stuff Brent. You bozo. Brock "Burnouts" McLean and Bozo Moloney. Caroline Wilson's star witnesses in the case against the MFC. Hence, can some of you please calm down? The frenzy on the thread is adding fuel to the fire. The events occurred in 2009 and were investigated by the AFL. IMO there is nothing that Burnouts raised in that interview that was particularly remarkable - except that now a few former MFC players/coaches/recruiter, all of whom clearly have an axe to grind with the MFC, are now also using it as an opportunity to take another pot shot at the club. If it gets to Court, it won't be good for the likes of Bozo Moloney. Take a moment to reflect on some of the "love of MFC development" / "future is bright" statements Bozo made between 2009 and 2011. Was he lying then - or now? Moloney's credibility will not last very long. This whole thing is becoming a circus which is taking a life of its own. And when that happens, it matters not where the truth lies. The media love this territory. For the sake of our club, don't buy into it. Stay united.

So according to the logic of The Age article, the crime that the MFC should be punished for is NOT tanking, but "talking about tanking"... It being OK to tank if no one from the club involved talks about it. What a joke.

You are 100% correct Sue. However, if there were to be a charge of bringing the game into disrepute, then on what basis is such an arbitrary judgement made? The point being, if and when the AFL moved to sanction us, they ought to be damn sure of grounds and not leave themselves open to being whacked by the legal principle of reasonableness and what I would confidently predict would be the adverse findings against the AFL, made by Court, under the provisions of Administrative Law. Once again, while it is understandable that Wilson's article would raise the hackles of any true Dees supporter, the whole issue is without substance and as hollow as Paris Hilton's head.

That's right. They've already moved the Priority pick. It doesn't sit well with me removal of premiership points, draft picks, etc. But if the AFL deem fit to strip us of our wooden spoons like the NRL did with the Storm's premierships, I'm happy to oblige.

The best post of all on this subject. The first thing a court would do is examine what "tanking" actually means. Did the MFC say to the players, OK guys, today I want you to go out there and lose. Or better still, any body lining up from within 40 metres needs to aim to miss. Now that would be tanking. List and player management? Now that's another thing entirely and every club does it to varying degrees. If the AFL pursues this to the point of sanctions, they will walk out of a court room very red faced. While we are at it, we will go them for damages. This entire issue is a crock.

Your comments never have any substance, or provide any answers, yet you have cheerleaders like timd. Cute. I've already said that they were incompetent and "couldn't even lose properly". Those making some of the decisions down their are a lame joke. Who would deny that ? If you're going to tank, which imo was the right course to take, you don't need 10-15 club officials in on it. You've got to be smarter than that. The best intentions of the club were clearly at stake, but just as clearly the whole saga was mismanaged. And those at the helm of such incompetence definitely need to be held accoutable. But right now I'm more interested in how things are handled from here. I want the club on the front foot and to take any action necessary to ensure we don't get sanctioned in this year's draft. If that means an injunction to ensure this then that's what they must do. The club must not roll over even if some individuals past and present do.. But let's get back to you - you'll get support from anyone that has a gripe with the club, that's obvious, but you act like a jilted mistress and provide no semblance of support, or balance in anything you ever say. The timd's of this world think you're great, but I see you for what you are, which is just another divisive person that thrives on club politics and is systematic of the stench that has permeated this club for decades. You make me sick.

If the club has, as reported, sought legal advice, do you think a big part of that advice would be - "say nothing"? They have no reason to publish anything on the website, I think that's the least of their worries

Lets just settle down. Nothing will come of this, so they had a meeting to discuss the benefits of not winning 5 games. When you had a [censored] season you need to discuss the upcoming draft. Tanking is when your instructed to lose. No player was told do not win this game. Thats the definition of tanking. FFS people need to stop worrying about things before they have happened

are you for real, DB should have coached to win, now hes backed into a corner and hes singing like a canary, yeah hes as an honest guy. Hes the worst coach the clubs ever had and now we have to go through this crap, what coach loses by 31 goals. He deserved to be sacked.

Amazing how you guys can be reasonably mature with the Jurrah situation but when something involving women comes up you all turn back into school kids. Grow up. This involves friends of mine, and these tasteless jokes are offensive and just plain dumb.

Just my take on it Demonlanders and no inside knowledge of any kind, but looking at this from an investigators background Adrian ANDERSON & DEMETRIOU in response to Mcleans comments re-opening the tanking saga Look this keep rearing it's head with every comment or inference relating to tanking of draft picks We need to conduct a thorough investigation and put the matter to bed once and for all so we can move on The investigator Reviews the available evidence/allegations and forms an investigation plan with numerous avenues of inquiry You obtain lists of witness who must be interviewed You interview all these witnesses and put various questions to them about their role and in what forum they discussed performance and meeting KPI'S You establish the FD has meetings every so often to ascertain where they are and how they can move forward You have further avenues of inquiry to interview every person who was at those meetings, thereby identifying further witnesses You ask questions about each and every meeting and who was present At some stage common knowledge all clubs out of the finals race do it FD'S hold meetings with boards to look to the following season and what they should do for the rest of the season. During that meeting the following matters are discussed Dean Bailey look we are on a certain amount of wins and I have two choices we keep playing our best side and win this many more games we move up the ladder but can't make finals Board put forward look Dean we can't make the finals but are looking toward the future so lets start focussing on 2010 Bailey wants to win he is a coach so he may ask for assurances on his position The board says Dean if we could make the finals I agree with playing players under duress until we are mathematically out of the hunt, don't worry about you position play the kids for now winning is not the most important thing, we must focus on 2010 and however you perform for the rest of the season will have no bearing on your coaching future Okay so you assure me that if I play the kids and try players in different positions and we lose all our games my position is not under threat Board - whilst it wouldn't look good on the bright side we will get the first two picks in the draft, so you do what you have to do If you are the investigator and you interview 4 people and establish this you now have to interview every one who sat in that meeting and establish what was said. I can tell you from experience I have interviewed people for numerous incidents and if you have 10 people who witnessed the crime all 10 will give you a differing account. Some points will be the same but every account will be different. IMO and it is just that, this is where we are currently at The AFL want to put this to bed once and for all. Some kind of meeting was held and everyone present needs to be interviewed and establish what exactly transpired. So I believe Clothier is following further avenues of inquiry and Caro may have touched base with a source for any update on the investigation and been told they have established a meeting took place because 4 witnesses have told them there was a meeting. Caro has written her story with a bit of poetic licence and we have this story today. It is also my experience these matters take a fair bit of time to investigate review and complete your report so will still be some time However the AFL is on a knifes edge here because Massive implications effectively into match fixing Bailey if he deliberately went out to lose and anyone else is open to Criminal Charges as it is tantamount to Fraud - "Causing a detriment by Deceit" Detriment is to the punters who bet on games and the deceit is not trying to win Bailey and any other FD, coaching staff who participated in this is out of the game for good If we are talking match fixing we wont be the only ones hit, the media and other will demand a Commission into the Kruezar Cup and other games in question In closing everyone potting the club for making no comment, Good decision best form of defence is built around the disclosure of the prosecution case, review their evidence and pull it apart piece by piece. Sit tight brace yourself for more stories as they will dig and dig, Denham will be like the court jester tomorrow and we will get more kicks. At this stage think Pick 4 and others are safe for 2012