Flying Cloud

On the Kevin Bartlett Show they used to play the song Denim and Lace when he came on. Is that because he is a chode in denim and lace?

Is it just me or does Caroline Wilson look tired of late?

I like strong arm tactics, reads coercion all the way to dismissal of the case. PS Probably the same strong arm tactics used on the 'roos. Boy were they shaking.

Of course the AFL could, but they won't. If they did, it would be almost certain we would get some sort of injunction in regards to the the draft. That is the last thing the AFL want.

I could understand that given the AFL Rule about all those involved in AFL having to cooperate fully they may be unwilling to lawyer up at this stage. However, given this coercive power of the AFL and the reinterviewing, I would believe that the AFL case would fall apart very quickly in a court as there is a good chance testimonies would change under cross examination. The person changing their testimony would only have to say I felt coerced by Ken Wood into saying that.

CC perhaps, because he may have told the room of 15 of the implications of loosing and made threatening comments. There is a rule covering coaches inciting coaches and players to loose. But I don't know what rule CS is supposed to have broken. Tanking is not an AFL rule. I don't have a view on CS. Never met him and while he has done some good stuff for the club I am concerned about the number of people that don't like him. But he does deserve to be treated fairly. Either there is compelling evidence he has broken an AFL rule or there isn't. As yet I haven't seen any. CW article this morning proves she has an agenda, and so everything she has written this week should be ignored. Edit: Spelling

As far as I can tell even if CS threatened all coaches and players with the sack if they won, he is not guilty of anything. The RULES in regard to not doing the best to win only cover the players and coaches. The other RULE was that clubs could get a priority pick in certain circumstances. A good administrator should work within the rules for the best of the his/her organisation. (however if CC said this may be different.) As much as CW carries on, it was the rules that were the problem. She may not like it, but the AFL is bound by their own rules.

What I sent... I have today cancelled my daily home delivery of your paper, and have removed the link from my Android phone and laptop, as a result of today's C Wilson article. I have come to the decision that a paper that allows an opinion piece at best, and a personal agenda at worst, to presented as a news article, and not as an editorial or as an opinion piece, cannot be relied on to provide objective unbiased reporting. I will source my news from other sources. Thank you.

She has not published one piece of "evidence" that includes Schwab. Yet she says that he must be sacked. He was not a coach or a player and so cannot be sanctioned under the rule regarding ensuring the team does all it can to win. So as far as I can tell the only AFL rule he can be sanctioned under is bringing the game into disrepute. Will be very hard for the Commission get Schwab for that given every administrator at every club has at some time put the interests of the club before those of the game/AFL. In fact they have a duty to put the club first.

If she does heads will roll at the AFL and they will be easy to find because only the Commission can make this call, and so it is either the Commissioners or the small team of staff that support them directly.

Have cancelled my home delivery and removed all online links. I had forgotten about the ABC. Thanks for the tip.

Have just cancelled my home delivery of The Age and removed the link from my Android. Years ago watching 60 Minutes I saw a story that I had inside knowledge of, was clearly done with an agenda, and was based on only one side of the story. Haven't watched the show since and am getting on fine. Think I can cope without The Age. There are many great places to get news online now, and I can clean the BBQ with paper towel.

Today's editorial by CW has shown her true intent. She has not to date published any "evidence" to implicate CS in this matter, but has stated as fact that he must go. Oops.

It is incredible the number of people with perfect memories of words spoken and meeting that took place well over 3 years ago. Just saying.

Absolutely the club can't be sanctioned over this. Flippant or not, there would have to be evidence that actions were taken to loose games, as a direct result of directions given. I agree if he said it then it was probably in a humorous way. Even if he said it in anger, then who knows he may have countered it 10 minutes later with, "you all know I was only joking". In which case there is absolutely no case to answer.

So who is the grubby little person feeding the grubby little journalist, and why? http://www.theage.co...1101-28mx2.html And i've gotta say the little picture of her at the top of each article smiling away when she is trying to destroy the club makes me want to..... Well it looks like she is gloating.

And how about Sydney's record in the NAB Cup? Or perhaps Vlad will say that the NAB Cup doesn't count.... Oh wait, don't think the NAB would be keen to continue sponsorship if that were the case.

Thank you.

IF the MFC is found guilty of tanking, they should be stripped of all their premierships from the last 30 years and then allowed to move on.

Yes, and if someone is run out of the footy business because of this, and decides to sue, it would be very interesting to see what would happen in a court case. I am sure there are a great many people working hard to make sure it never goes to court.

Fevola said he had not been interviewed by AFL integrity officers This has to change. The can have no integrity if they don't talk to all potential witnesses to tanking. Speaking of integrity, it doesn't seem the AFL own invetigation has much integrity. It is leaking like a sieve.

My understanding of the arrangements is that all payments to players came under the salary cap regardless of the source, except where it is a legitimate payment for undertaking other work. Hence why Judd's Visy payment is OK because of all the work he does at Visy ....... oh - now I see the problem Hang on but Mr Scully isn't he doing proper work so why is that in the cap... I am so confused

If he gets Carlton a cup he will be the first to win premierships as coach at 3 different clubs. Barrassi tried, Allan Jeans tried, David Parkin tried - they coached 3 teams and won at 2. Charlie Ricketts, Dan Minogue, Malcolm Blight Norm Clark, Norm Smith, Percy Parratt, Robert Walls, Tom Hafey, coached at 3 or more and only one at one club each. Of the 47 coaches who have coached the 105 premierships, he may be good, but he will have to beat history to win at a third club. .....and if he takes 11 years at Carlton he will be 70 when he achieves it!

Just some photos.... http://www.flickr.com/groups/melbourne_demons/

No excuse for the result, but can someone point me to where the rules of the game are written down. I need to go and re-learn them because I didn't understand half the decisions today.