Leaderboard

Had the morning free today so went down for a look. I didn't stay for the whole session, but here are a few notes of what I saw: No Dawes, Rodan, Bartram, Garland, Barry, Viney or Sylvia. Jones, Tapscott and Byrnes were doing laps. They were later joined by Clarke for some handball drills. After this Clarke did a bit of kick to kick with Leigh Brown, mainly with his left foot. Seemed to move ok, but when he had to break into a gallop to get to the ball he looked pretty ginger and limped quite a bit. Hogan, Tynan & Evans did handball drills for about 30 mins, walked a few laps, then left. Hogan is a big lad for 17! Main group did some warm up excercises and run throughs before splitting up in pairs for 10 x 200m sprints around the boundary. Pairs were: Grimes/Howe, McDonald/Nicholson, Trengove/Magner, Blease/Bail, Watts/McKenzie, Dunn/Frawley/MacDonald, Couch/Jetta, Fitzy/Pedersen, Spencer/Gawn, Taggert/Strauss, Seller/Davis, Davey/Cheynee Stiller** Each player was encouraging the other on, and trying hard to catch the pair infront of them. Neil Craig was standing at about the halfway point of the sprint encouraging those who were falling behind. A few notes: • Grimes and Howe look REALLY fit • McDonald is a machine. Always a step ahead of Nicholson • Trengove, Blease & McKenzie started falling a few steps behind their respective partners after about the 5th 200m • Magner pushing really hard in the 9th/10th sprint and actually caught up to and passed Nicholson. • Gawn pulled up halfway through the 4th sprint with Spencer. Looked to have aggravated his hammy. Went straight off for some rub downs/stretching before leaving. • MacDonald fell a few steps behind Dunn & Frawley after the 4th sprint, and paired up with Spencer after Gawn left • Pedersen was left behind by Fitzy in the last 3 or 4 sprints. He looked stuffed! • Davey in the last pair for the first 9 sprints. Really blowing hard. In the last sprint he was put in the second last pair and was passed by Sellar & Davis. After the sprints they had a bit of a warm down and some stretches before getting their boots and and splitting up in pairs for kick to kick. As I was leaving they started doing some fairly high intensity match simulation drills. Will leave the reporting of that to someone else though as I didn't see much of it. A few players broke away into a smaller group and didn't participate. I counted five - Spencer, Fitzpatrick, Taggert were three. The other two I couldnt identify from a distance. Training days

There was a left footer there that I didn't recognise, so it looks like we've invited one person down to train - and no it wasn't Brynes who ran a few laps. Blease ran with Bail in the 150m sprints and was only getting dropped in the last few and even then by only 1.5 metres. He has already significantly improved his engine from last preseason.

Not sure which thread to put this in, seems like a few more could be merged As a former Policeman (not a gun investigator but qualified enough to say calm the procreation down), I have been quite amazed at some of the things written in the news and on the forum, so wanted to add my two cents. 1 first of all it is a civil, not criminal matter so the rules for a finding of fact are based on 'balance of probabilities' not 'beyond a reasonable doubt') findings are based on evidence, heresay unless certain exemptions are made, cannot be allowed into evidence. 99% of everything I have read has not been direct evidence but would be dismissed after consideration by a judge. Mr. Haddad is mentioned as a UN investigator this means nothing but it does sound good. If he had been with the armed robbers squad or the hommies then I would take him a little more seriously, but he was not appointed via any balanced recruitment process, nothing personal but he is just a good soldier not Dirty Harry. Any reasonable silk will take large chunks out of a statement by a peanut like Brock, you can make statements too good and they look cooked when you read them. 2 a witness can only provide evidence of what he or she saw, so former sponsors ... Meh means nothing except 2" of news print. 3 there are literally dozens of witnesses, does anyone have any idea how long this would take to hear and depose, think Milperra Bikie Massacre, that took two years this would be longer, no one is going to be up for that not the AFL not the club (actually I'm wrong the lawyers would love it). My point being that if the AFL hits us with punitive sanctions we should make very clear to our board that we want them to challenge them in court, I really deeply believe a compromise will be worked out that doesn't gut the club. 4 there was no direct profit or financial misconduct, while draft picks are gold, their tangible value is very hard to debate, they cannot be redeemed for cash and which individual profited? there is no criminal conspiracy to defraud (a criminal charge) unless you had the board as a group put there hand up and confess, which considering their personal financial positions, they would not jeopardize, and even then proving the 'for benefit' bit would probably set a legal precedent. My point is in other areas that the AFL has come down hard on there has been a clear financial trail, whether gambling or salary cap rorts. In this case it's 60 different muppets all with a slightly different tale to tell, can anyone really prove what Bailey did as a result of a conversation with Connolly or Schwab? 5 football clubs have always sat slightly outside the law, this has caused me much consternation because I am a great believer in the rule of law, which directly conflicts with my love of the club. I think the AFL gets this and that is why they have generally been keen to stay away from the courts. AFL is part of Australian culture that is why it has been cut some slack in the past and will continue to do so-Societies being protective of their culture (I could tell you about some really obnoxious cultures I see here in Africa). For all the [censored] we hang on the AFL it's been pretty good at moving forward, thuggery, violence towards women, alcohol, and race are all issues that they have been moving forward on over a period of time to make sure the good aspects of our football culture remain, I don't think they will tear all that down which is what would happen if they really tried to kill us over tanking. The good aspect of football culture that stands out for me is getting a group of young men to play together for a common purpose and with each other, it breeds good people and allows an outlet for all the crap that goes with being young and male, short of sending them to the army or on a cattle drive. But it is a fine thing to balance collective responsibility (the club ) versus individual actions ( the player ), and sometimes this loyalty means that societies rules get bent in a football club, for the greater good I'm happy with that because they (the afl) have been getting rid of the excesses mentioned previously. 6 The AFL got the priority pick thing wrong, the lesser evil for them will be to amend the rules and incentivize winning games over draft picks via a lottery. This is typed on a dinky widget so please excuse typos/ grammar/spelling mistakes.

THE TIMING OF THE SHREW by Whispering Jack "No shame but mine. I must, forsooth, be forced To give my hand, opposed against my heart Unto a mad-brain rudesby, full of spleen Who wooed in haste and means to wed at leisure" William Shakespeare The Taming of the Shrew Imagine if the Age newspaper published an opinion piece tomorrow on Adrian Bayley, accused killer of Jill Meagher, in which the author pronounced him guilty beyond any doubt of murder even though the trial is months away? What if it was suggested that the appropriate punishment for such a heinous crime was nothing less than life in prison to be served in solitary confinement for the next ten years? There are those who care little for the rights of the accused in such circumstances but in reality, it is the respect for those rights that is the very cornerstone of our democratic society. Without the rule of law, our society sinks into the realm of the uncivilised. Three years ago, the Council of the International Bar Association passed a resolution endorsing this definition of the rule of law: "An independent, impartial judiciary; the presumption of innocence; the right to a fair and public trial without undue delay; a rational and proportionate approach to punishment; a strong and independent legal profession; strict protection of confidential communications between lawyer and client; equality of all before the law; these are all fundamental principles of the Rule of Law." What this means is that in the context of the AFL's current investigation into the Melbourne Football Club's activities in the same year as the passing of the above resolution, there is no place for sensationalist opinion pieces such as that written by Caroline Wilson and published yesterday in the Age. Wilson may well know more than she's letting on but playing judge, jury and executioner based on the evidence presented by her this week is not helpful to her reputation as a journalist or to her readers' understanding of the matter. What she has done is to treat her readers to rumour, innuendo, supposition, double meaning, lack of context, smoke and mirrors and general palaver that may or may not stand scrutiny in a court of law. Most of it fails to address the basic fact that for a decade before 1999, the AFL and its leadership set a certain standard as to what defines "tanking", the loose word that's supposed to describe the offence being investigated. During that period, there was an almost annual outcry about one team or another deliberately trying to lose games to achieve a better outcome in the draft and the AFL condoned the practice as long as it didn't involve a direct order to the players to lose matches. After the infamous Kreuzer Cup in round 22, 2007 an employee of the "losing" team, Carlton spoke about his concern about how that game was played. The AFL's investigation lasted about 15 minutes after which the world was told there was nothing to see here; move along. The message was loud and clear. Once your season is over in terms of your capacity to make the finals, you can send players off for surgery, play them out of position, interchange them when they're firing and, if you're permitted to do that, then surely you're also allowed to meet and discuss such things among yourselves, joke about them and even brag to your sponsors that things are going to get better next year because you managed to pick up a priority pick? I was never comfortable with this but, as Patrick Smith pointed out in the Australian yesterday, the AFL's position has always been based on Andrew Demetriou's narrow definition of tanking. "Demetriou's understanding allows for only direct action taken on the field of play - instructing a player to deliberately kick a point when a goal would have won the match - as tanking. According to Demetriou, putting inferior players on the field, resting elite ones, playing others in unsuitable positions, taking influential players off the ground are all examples of list management and experimentation. They do not define tanking." So what is Wilson telling us when she describes Melbourne's conduct in 2009 as shocking and awful? That it was worse than those other clubs including West Coast, Carlton, Collingwood, Richmond, Hawthorn, the Western Bulldogs, St. Kilda and Fremantle that have lost sufficient games to qualify for priority picks but have (to date at least) not been investigated by the AFL? That the investigators have already found the club guilty even though it has yet been charged, has not seen the evidence against it or had the opportunity to put forward the case in its defence? I look at that definition of the rule of law above and I can only conclude that the Age and Wilson have trampled all over Melbourne's rights in the past week. If the AFL has been involved at all in supplying her with information/conclusions then they've created a fine mess for themselves and are about to help a lot of lawyers to educate their children at expensive private schools. Not only that, but Wilson has been disingenuous in the way in which she's gone about her business and in the timing of her articles. Her stories this week remind me of this famous scene from the Pink Panther - Inspector Clouseau was led by the concierge to believe that the dog on the floor in front on him didn't bite but he omitted an important fact - that it wasn't the concierge's dog. Who knows what manner of tanking Wilson's been writing about this week but is it the sort that would enable the AFL to apply sanctions against Melbourne without opening a Pandora's can of worms involving half the other clubs in the competition? Finally, what is it about Wilson and Demon CEO Cameron Schwab? Apart from a reference to him appearing "grim-faced" after Melbourne's third win of the season when the club was still two wins away from losing a priority pick (perhaps the chicken vindaloo at the president's lunch was off that day?), I don't quite see what he's done to deserve the gallows. Strangely enough, I've yet to find a Wilson article involving Schwab in which she has anything nice to say about him. It's almost as if there's a deep-seated rift between the Wilsons and the Schwabs going back centuries all the way to Shakespearean times, one that evokes visions of a shrewish Liz Taylor, mouth frothing and begging to be tamed. Taylor, of course, was acting.

MM would have chosen Green after much thought. His selection is a well deserved compliment. Good Luck Brad, except when playing Dees. Oh, by the way...can you settle a score with that Brock fellow re his performance on OTC & his insutling 'bruise free' comments... teach him some manners...poor form for current players to trash other teams/players.

Well we've got Viney, probably Wines, Sellar... May aswell get di Stiller too. Groan.

Surely the best ever sporting headline came when the lowly-ranked Caledonian Thistle thrashed Celtic in the Scottish FA Cup a number of years ago: "SuperCalaGoBallisticCelticAreAtrocious"

As a former Policeman (not a gun investigator but qualified enough to say calm the procreation down), I have been quite amazed at some of the things written in the news and on the forum, so wanted to add my two cents. 1 first of all it is a civil, not criminal matter so the rules for a finding of fact are based on 'balance of probabilities' not 'beyond a reasonable doubt') findings are based on evidence, heresay unless certain exemptions are made, cannot be allowed into evidence. 99% of everything I have read has not been direct evidence but would be dismissed after consideration by a judge. Mr. Haddad is mentioned as a UN investigator this means nothing but it does sound good. If he had been with the armed robbers squad or the hommies then I would take him a little more seriously, but he was not appointed via any balanced recruitment process, nothing personal but he is just a good soldier not Dirty Harry. Any reasonable silk will take large chunks out of a statement by a peanut like Brock, you can make statements too good and they look cooked when you read them. 2 a witness can only provide evidence of what he or she saw, so former sponsors ... Meh means nothing except 2" of news print. 3 there are literally dozens of witnesses, does anyone have any idea how long this would take to hear and depose, think Milperra Bikie Massacre, that took two years this would be longer, no one is going to be up for that not the AFL not the club (actually I'm wrong the lawyers would love it). My point being that if the AFL hits us with punitive sanctions we should make very clear to our board that we want them to challenge them in court, I really deeply believe a compromise will be worked out that doesn't gut the club. 4 there was no direct profit or financial misconduct, while draft picks are gold, their tangible value is very hard to debate, they cannot be redeemed for cash and which individual profited? there is no criminal conspiracy to defraud (a criminal charge) unless you had the board as a group put there hand up and confess, which considering their personal financial positions, they would not jeopardize, and even then proving the 'for benefit' bit would probably set a legal precedent. My point is in other areas that the AFL has come down hard on there has been a clear financial trail, whether gambling or salary cap rorts. In this case it's 60 different muppets all with a slightly different tale to tell, can anyone really prove what Bailey did as a result of a conversation with Connolly or Schwab? 5 football clubs have always sat slightly outside the law, this has caused me much consternation because I am a great believer in the rule of law, which directly conflicts with my love of the club. I think the AFL gets this and that is why they have generally been keen to stay away from the courts. AFL is part of Australian culture that is why it has been cut some slack in the past and will continue to do so-Societies being protective of their culture (I could tell you about some really obnoxious cultures I see here in Africa). For all the [censored] we hang on the AFL it's been pretty good at moving forward, thuggery, violence towards women, alcohol, and race are all issues that they have been moving forward on over a period of time to make sure the good aspects of our football culture remain, I don't think they will tear all that down which is what would happen if they really tried to kill us over tanking. The good aspect of football culture that stands out for me is getting a group of young men to play together for a common purpose and with each other, it breeds good people and allows an outlet for all the crap that goes with being young and male, short of sending them to the army or on a cattle drive. But it is a fine thing to balance collective responsibility (the club ) versus individual actions ( the player ), and sometimes this loyalty means that societies rules get bent in a football club, for the greater good I'm happy with that because they (the afl) have been getting rid of the excesses mentioned previously. 6 The AFL got the priority pick thing wrong, the lesser evil for them will be to amend the rules and incentivize winning games over draft picks via a lottery. This is typed on a dinky widget so please excuse typos/ grammar/spelling mistakes.

- moustache joke -

A couple that are non-sports related.. The midget psychic that escaped from jail had the headline, "Small Medium at Large". Or the article about the lunatic that escaped from the asylum, was alledged to have sexually assulted a lady at a laundromat, but is still on the run. Headline read "Nut Screws Washer and Bolts".

People ask where will the improvement come from, if this is anything to gage for the rest of the pre-season campaign then it is small matters like this which will see us improve. Good to hear Sammy already ahead of where he was this time last year. Big thanks to everyone for keeping us outside of Victoria up to date!

I think you will find rather than Pedersen not being fit, Fitzy is over all his niggles/illnesses and will grind anybody into the ground to prove he is ready.....don't forget they are competing for the same position.....besides that Fitzy is seriously fast

Not football related but when Elton John married David Furnish one of the English tabloids ran with "Elton takes David up the aisle"

I say we pick the player who is rumoured to have attitude problems.

He had a walk around & did some handballing with Jones & Tapscott. Didn't see him do any running, didn't even see him jog a lap. But I was only there from 10-11, and he appeared to be moving unrestricted. Looked in ripping shape too.

We win We win We win

And in the article below it Ralph refers to Jesse Hogan as our key DEFENSIVE hope. Crack reporting

To anyone on Demonland or anywhere else who have personal agenda's with board members, ex board members or alleged board members grow up and move on. Your childish actions are hurting my god damn club. I know nothing about board members or if Schwabb is doing a good job or not. I'm just a bloke who pays up and goes to games. Leaking info to try to over throw a board hurts my club whilst you try to pursue your agenda's. You don't love the club you love yourself.

Shizen footy coach, but great club man Bails. Confident he will do the right thing by MFC.

I came into this expecting some great expose regarding McLean's departure, only to be disappointed... a simple "?" mark would have made all of the difference. And before you get upset over my pickiness, let me point out why grammar can be important; as an example, I will use capitalisation which can stop many potentially embarrassing situations... it could be the difference between "helping your Uncle Jack off a horse." or "helping your uncle jack off a horse.".

Sheedy was done as an AFL coach when the Bomber got rid of him. He was appointed as GWS coach as a figure head who could get in the papers and promote a club in a very hard market. Williams was the real coach, When he realised he would not get the job, in comes Cameron. If Sheeds was the real coach he would be given time. Yes he was overlooked at the MFC. A good choice by the interview panel.

You have to give it to Magner. The guy doesn't look like any sort of runner with those short, chunky legs but he is showing a lot of the other guys how to do it. However long his football career is, when it is over he will be one Melbourne player who will be able to say he gave it his absolute best shot.

Don't know if this has already been posted (apologies if it has), but here's another article questioning the fact whether the MFC did actually break the rules (by Michael Burke of Victoria Uni News)... https://theconversat...the-rules-10519

But...hang on...we'd better decide whether he is forward or back, because if he's a defender and we play him at FF, then that's tanking.

Lots of bitter comments on here disguised as congratulations. I don't really think this is the place. Well done on a good start to your coaching career Brad, and I hope you push on to win the flag you deserved as a player. Hopefully with us in a few years time.

Surely this must be a joke? From the reaction of many on here over the past few months, surely BG has signed for the next 2 years as a player. Don't tell me he has actually retired from playing? Brad Green - "forced" to retire, now an assistant coach. Cameron Bruce - offered a 1 year contract, wanted two, we weren't willing, left and played 1 season at Hawthorn and half a dodgy one before retiring mid year. James McDonald - "forced" to retire, made a comeback season that was very unflattering. Yet some people still question our list management methods. BTW - well done Greeny.

Melbourne Tanked, So What? Erin Byrnes | AFL | November 2, 2012 at 6:54 pm It’s that time of year again when decent footy yarns are few and far between, so naturally, molehills become mountains overnight. The latest investigations into the Melbourne Football Club and the suggestion they tanked in 2009 are tedious, laborious, superfluous, pointless and a myriad of other words ending in “s”. Anyone who watched the Dees play during that time period knows they didn’t perform to their full potential, be it through moving players to non-preferred positions, adopting a free flowing style that offered little in the way of defense, or giving stars more time to recover from injury than usual. There’s almost no doubt they did that. But it’s going to be impossible for the AFL to prove it and punish them accordingly. So why waste the time and resources? The t-word is a nasty one for the AFL, but it’s a monster they created and therefore Demetriou and co. only have themselves to blame. They instituted the priority pick system and dangled the carrot in front of struggling clubs. They manufactured two brand new teams within the space of three years and gifted them the top draft picks. They allowed Gold Coast and GWS to scoop the pool and essentially blocked floundering clubs from gaining much from the past few drafts. Yep, it’s pretty likely the Dees tanked their season. But, you certainly can’t blame them for using the system to their advantage. It’s obviously not just Melbourne that has done it – a raft of other clubs have been accused of the same process. Why should Melbourne be made the scape goats? Read the rest here its well worth it and I think it sums up the Factuallity and Actuallity of where this will all end up In the Meantime has anyone considered that CW may be going through a Mid Life Crises ? After all she is 52 years old http://www.sportingjournal.com.au/2012/11/melbourne-tanked-so-what/

That's a great outcome.

Magnificent piece of writing. Please submit it to the editor of the Age so he can read an intelligent piece of creative writing and compare it with the rubbish Caro is spewing out

it will be interesting to see if G Lyon can work next to Wilson next year regardless of any outcome.

It seems Brad has landed a job as Blues development coach. Good luck to him I say. http://www.carltonfc.com.au/tabid/4311/default.aspx?newsid=150729

Now we are quoting friends of players. Perhaps the papers would let me have my say. Also disappointing that Jurrah walks out on us and now his friend feels compelled to get involved.

In his recent message, McLardy used the words '...certain aspects of MFC's on-field performance in the 2009 season,” not 'Tanking'. The 'T' word is not usesd. The AFL regulations do not use the 'T' word. Ipso facto, we cannot be accused of tanking. Semantic maybe but think about it - there is no rule against tanking per se. So what can the AFL find? Also, Tanking = Cheating and AFL would not want to put that label on an AFL Club...imagine the headlines in NRL land... I honestly think that if AD had been in Australia at the time HWSNBN (mark 11) made his comments on OTC, AD would have applied his straight bat to it and deflected it away. But his underlings let the genie out of the bottle and now... Here is a truly independant article on the subject. Michael Bourke is an academic not a journo. http://theconversati...the-rules-10519 I feel a lot more optimistic. Can't imagine the AFL would want to widen the investigation, after all the head of the AFL Commission is more than loosely associated with the other team that may not tried to win. The longer this goes on the longer the AFL will find a way to lessen the impact on MFC. Maybe, a position of: List management has been exercised by many clubs and therefore we absolve all of them from any wrong doing and the rules will be tightened.

Thanks BH. Love to hear Sammy improving his fitness. He could be a big improver playing on the wing at times

I think you very much misunderstand the predicament the club actually faces. it either fights or capitulates. If it does that it will have rolled over so far many will be dizzy. If it rolls over many will abandon as being exactly what many claim , that being a vaccuous refuge of old boys and having little relevance to the modern game" i.e Standing for Nothing.It would seem that those with legalese on this site and elswhere suggest that the AFL would have little to put forward or indeed defend it self with should it go to court.. In many respects the club could be at a point where it has little to lose should it decide to go all out David against the Goliath. Ego inc ( aka Vladamania ) is alerady percieved as the over bearing and unfair protaganist.. The Schoolyard Bully in this instance. Should the AFL impose a sanction that going to be as bad as it gets.. The BEST it could get is to take them to task. Other than money theres not muchg at stake, other that the aforementioned existance issues. To accept any penalty is to efectively admit it was of our doing. It wasnt. The climate and circumstances were all of the AFL's creation. It needs to take ownership of the malaise and fix it .It tacitly has but theres no esacaping who made this able. I dont actually see the club shaking in fear. GOOD

The safest possible bet this year, thanks. Wines.

Could be Gysberts all over again. No thanks

Hope he starts smiling. I remember Scully never smiled...

Defensive? HACKS! A simple fact- Hogan is a Forward you goons. If the newspaper idiots can't even get this right, what can we expect on more critical topics? Any ideas Ms Wilson? On topic, it will be great that he can be developing and skilling up at Casey towards a rapid injection into the seniors in 2014. Btw- worst case scenario: guesswork by the same genius that know where Hogan plays...

It's highly unlikely that before the AFL Commission has even met to make a decision, that the penalty has been decided and then leaked to an assistant coach at another club. All this tells us is something we should already know - people within AFL clubs gossip and make up stories too.

All this reminds me of a game of tennis. The balls been served and weve played a baseline return strategy to date. They keep hitting it hard, we just return, return, they keep at it. The secret to winning this point is to wait. You waiti while they get themselves into a bit of a rut. They think your on the backfoot. Youre not your just where you need to be at that point of play. You wait for that opportunity to change the pace of the ball, to move to the net and take your opponents advantage away . Now wherever they go you will put it away. Despite the seeming pounding were absorbing we do have an ace up our sleeve. The Courts ( npi ) . Trial by media plays by the 'pack of wloves' mentality where they band together to snipe and bite all the whiles hoping to wear you down , to react, to lose guard., to be vulnerable. But try as it may the media has no jurisdiction. Only the AFL can impose its will here; or so it thinks. So can we. We have two paths to redress. One is directly with the AFL and seek a solution thats fair to us , and all the competition. The other is our legal right to redress, the Courts. The last place the AFL wants to go is court. It doesnt rule the roost there. It would be forced onto the back foot itslef and this isnt a part of its game its terribly good at.. its a bully boy 'ace' server. Hit back and you have more than an even chance. Its just not done much and for good reason. it will be a move of last resort. Whatever be the resulting relationship between the Club and the League after such a stoush will remain for some while. Until it goes to court the AFL seemingly have the upper hand but its a hand it wants to use mighty carefully and thoughtfully. Force someone into a corner and it WILL get ugly. Another sporting analogy might be Boxing. One bloke hammers away the opponent seems to be on the ropes, hes taking all the hits, absorbing the punches and to many doesnt seem to be offering up much resistance. But again, its about timing and opportunity. When he senses the fighter tiring, when he notices the guard slip he musters his energies for that one mighty knockout punch. He was losing on points, right up until he put the other flat on his back on the canvas. The lesson is to know your strengths and how to use them. Our strength is our right and will to defend ourselves in a place where the AFL has to toe the line. Our allies will be many other clubs, who'll know if they arent with us they are open to the bastradry of the League's rulings also. I wouldnt stop there either. Id be lining up all those silly writers etc for defamation and libel where possible. If they havent crossed Tee's and dotted I's and got their FACTS straight , I'd eat them. Often in times of adversity there comes golden opportunites, aka 'silver lining' The Club can turn this kangaroo court come sytematic assasination into a chance to turn the tables on many of its detractors, stand up and quite firmly put it back to all and sundry "we're Melbourne, we're back, dont mess with us !!"

Liam Jurrah's benching in 2009 game against St Kilda doesn't make sense Now I've heard it all. This is just clutching at straws stuff. I do believe that Bruce comes on here from time to time and would love to know how he feels being dragged into this.

Jon Ralph has surely outdone her with the accusation that benching Jurrah after scoring a goal is considered tanking.

I have two things to say to Bruce Hearn McKinnon, the mentor of Liam Jurrah:- • Et tu Bruce? and • I well remember Ron Barassi when coaching North Melbourne, taking Malcolm Blight off the ground after his forward kicked the most amazing goal from an impossible angle in the forward pocket. I always understood this to mean that Barassi was trying to teach his player to be more team oriented and to pass the ball to players in better position to score goals. I know he had a different motive but we can now add North Melbourne to the list of clubs that tanked and never got investigated for doing it.

yeah i boasted to all my mates too. i boasted because as horrible as it is being one of the worst sides in the comp, at least you get the advantage of the draft system going your way. Between 08/09/10 we were just a shocking football side and consequentially we got some high draft picks. That's how it works. The persecution we are copping over this is so completely illogical and unjust I really can't believe it. Maybe in an alternate universe if we got those picks and went on to win a bunch of flags I could understand folks wanting to get in our faces. However the facts are that we were a terrible side and we still are, if it wasn't for the new sides we'd have been dead last this season. We got one priority pick, so effing what, we got the same draft assistance as every other struggling club, that's why Marc Murphy, Naitanui and Dustin Martin are at their respective clubs. Knowing that collingwood drafted Thomas and Pendlebury at pick 2 and 5 in the one year, and have since won a flag, yet somehow we are the ones under scrutiny really makes my blood boil

After watching this I now have a new found admiration for Grant Thomas. Always thought what a jerk but his dislike of Caro is now obviously well founded.

This spelling is acceptable in its derivation from the Ancient Greek ,emanating from the Athenians needing to leave the Island of Crete very quietly and quickly under cover of dark . DIS (as in disembark) and Crete (Greek Is.)They failed in their attempt at DISCRETION and were slaughtered by the chorus .

Once again I will reiterate that the fact is the club will definitely pick Oliver Wines at 4 if available. Fact. If he's not available the club will pick up a mid and not a ruckman. Fact. Source: The Mighty Melbourne Football Club. Cheers, Hells Gates.

If ADC's a former board member, then I'm Bon Jovi. Note: I am not Bon Jovi.

After the Kreuzer Cup thousands of Carlton supporters were boasting about their priority draft pick as well. However, three weeks before that game, a former Carlton board member was boasting they would get the pick and how they were going to go about it. I'm waiting for a call from the AFL.