old55

Yes we were - that's the whole point.

Succinct and excellent reasoning.

Me too. Surely Col is smart enough to see that a big year means the difference between a 4 x $500k contract and a 2 x $300k contract. As I've posted elsewhere - a big year from Col and everything else going right and we could make the eight.

Missed it - will it be on iView?

IMO the only real difference between the Hun and Age articles is tone. Both suggest we'll accept a fine and penalty for Connolly and Bailey. The Hun says we're prepared to fight if the penalty is unacceptable - wowee!!! "A fine of up to $500,000, and suspended or light penalties for figures including Bailey and Connolly, would prove tempting."

Sorry to rain on your parade Sue, but I'm the only poster to refer to the club reining Chris Connolly in, so some recollection issues seem to be reigning your mind.

Want to get a feel for what fans of other clubs think about this likely outcome ... http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/big-announcement-penalties-to-be-handed-out-to-melbourne-re-tanking.990131/ And the other side of the lunatic fringe here want to go to court. "Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right ..."

You're quite clearly referring to me because I used the term "reining-in" - correctly. If you read my posts you'll see that I very clearly stated that it would be far more preferable from "our" side if DB was not charged with anything. IMO if the AFL were prepared to accept this then the negotiated settlement would have been announced over a week ago. Quite clearly something has been holding it up and I've pointed to this being the case. My prediction of the outcome is on the mark, including the argy-bargy around Bailey. I'm a centimetre away from the bulls-eye while you're still trying to find the arena in Google maps. We may have botched tanking but I suspect we haven't botched the investigation. I don't know what the findings will be against DB until they're announced but I'm supremely confident they won't result in Webjet and Opel pulling their sponsorships or us losing our gaming licences as the resident hysterians here fear.

Was that dream before or after the Bev dream?

Gee I wonder if our Board and legal team would have thought of that? Why don't you give Guy and Ray a call and give them your insight. Get on a conference call with WYL.My take is the negotiated settlement will cover these bases and that's why it's taking time.

Expert advice.

I'll take that as a compliment from you, thanks! Finally BB is justified in his faith in Caro to get it right after 40 mis-fires. It's slightly more severe that I posted earlier but - where do I sign!

Will you stop posting too? I'll kick in $1000 towards the fine if you will.

I'll take: Schwab: no charge Bailey: irregular activities, no firm evidence, no charge Connolly: Bringing game into disrepute with threats relating to tanking - 6 months and $50K MFC: Bringing game into disrepute for not reining Connolly in - fine $300K

Maybe Cuddles should have considered the consequences of his "joke" Maybe Cuddles recognises he's been part of the problemm Maybe Cuddles is prepared to take a wack for the club Maybe Cuddles is big enough to stand up in front of the club and say I made a mistake Maybe the club will look after Cuddles for his sacrifices

It depends what the other alternative offer is - maybe it's to be charged with that AND have MFC, MFC Board, Dean Bailey, Cameron Schwab and Chris Connolly all charged with tanking which will no doubt end in court.

It's only a can of worms if Connolly or the MFC contests it. If all parties are prepared to accept it to make this go away then it's a can of beer.

That's not accurate - what we did was "try to lose". - that's what this is all about.

Any chance that the blue shirts ARE the probables and that say Joel Macdonald is really in there and the white shirts with Watts and Dunn really are the possibles?

Of course CC has to agree with any negotiated settlement - he takes one for the club and the board look after him for saving everyone big trouble. NO tanking verdict - just unbecoming statements.

So McLardy gives him a job selling insurance - where's the Dom Perignon 2000?

"Hiding behind pillows" must be new definition of taking direct action to extricate MFC and the AFL out of this mess

Yes that's right - he quite clearly sufficiently upset some MFC employees with his "joke" to cause them to relay it to the inquiry. Quite simply on ANY level he should not have been saying that.

Where did I say that? I specifically said that we don't admit to that. How about you read my posts. I said Connolly admits to bringing the game into disrepute by injudiciously talking about tanking, even if it was "just a joke" that was never acted upon - takes a Trigg-like penalty, we take a fine for not reining him in. Bailey is NOT GUILTY of tanking, MFC is NOT GUILTY of tanking. And you wanna go to court???

Indeed - Ph.D candidate too apparently ...