Johnny Karate

B: Garland - Frawley - Terlich HB: Watts - McDonald - Grimes C: M Jones - McKenzie - Viney HF: Sylvia - Dawes - Howe F: Blease - Sellar - Byrnes R: Jamar - N Jones - Rodan I: Dunn - Nicholson - Toumpas - Kent (sub) In the mix: Strauss, Pederson, Magner, Gillies, Macdonald, Evans, Tapscott & Jetta I'm assuming Trengove & Clark aren't fit & that Kent, Blease, Dawes, Viney & McDonald will be.

I'm not a clairvoyant - so I can't answer for them. However, given they were signing deals with AFL backed franchises with massive draft & salary cap concessions designed to ensure success the thought may have crossed their minds.

I mentioned midfielders because if they get their hands on the footy often enough & use it well enough, the job is half done. I feel the respective lists are pretty even but it's JM2C. I haven't heard too many experts rate our list as definitively better than Port's either. It is always disappointing to lose first up but we are what we are so it shouldn't be unexpected.

Most star players don't leave solely for cash. Success or a shot at it will come into equation. If we were to win 10-12 games this year & the kids loooked good we'd have a case to make to DT.

Hartlett, Boak & Brad Ebert would waltz into our midfield for starters. I'm not saying "expect to lose" but those who are assuming that a win is a fait accompli are setting themselves up for a big fall.

He also won the rising star in 99, his first year in the AFL.I'm certain BH was referring to KPFs rather than mids anyway.

OP was soft. Needed more "pathetic & disgusting" as well as biased amnesia regarding Greg Denham's confession of "doing nothing to uphold journalistic standards because of the rewards on offer." ;-)

I read an article from everybody's favorite journalist a couple of weeks ago that part of the reasoning for the AFL's illicit drug policy & refusal to follow the WADA procedures were due to a large amount of Aboriginal players testing positive for cannabis during competition. Unlike much of her op-ed pieces I have little doubt that CW was on the money. I don't think that every player that indulges in the odd puff should have their career ended & name dragged through the mud in the press in a 21st Century incarnation of the Salem Witch Trials. Ultimately if it becomes habitual 'the market' will sort it out - Ben Cousins never tested positive for illicit drugs yet found himself sacked from the Eagles less than 2 years after winning the Brownlow. Deviant behaviour & breaking team rules are not tolerated at AFL Clubs in this day and age. I agree with other posters opinions that the AFL's policy is more about image protection than 'duty of care'. I also agree that it is a problem beyond their jurisdiction & they should butt out.

Daisy, I love the club. I hope we get off. I don't really want to see heads roll needlessly. I don't believe in change for the sake of change.I have a view that the club has made its own bed with the triggering of this inquiry & that those think the club is a blameless victim of circumstance are seriously deluded. I agreed with tanking at the time but it's clear that the club got many things horribly wrong & that is why we stand alone, accused of tanking when others have probably done the same. Yes, it is a tad unfair but we brought ourselves down, no one else did. I suspect from some of the views expressed in this thread that 'Baghdad Bob' will receive some enticing offers for his avatar.

Andrew: "I'm on holidays Adrian, what is it?" Adrian: "I'm so sorry sir but er-" Andrew: "SPIT. IT. OUT." Adrian: "It's just the tanking thing has raised its head again." Andrew: "Oh Jesus, is it GWS?" Adrian: "No sir, it's Melbourne again." Andrew: "Them again. What now?" Adrian: "Well sir, Brock McLean was on OTC-" Andrew: "The chap with AIDS? Get to the point Adrian" Adrian: "No sir, I mean yes sir. Well he was asked why he left Melbourne & implied it was because the club was tanking in 2009 & that he felt sorry for the coach because he was being put up to it." Andrew: "Flip!" Adrian: "Flippin oath, sir!" Andrew: "How bad is it?" Adrian: "Well I don't think it'll be in the front pages of the Sydney papers..." Andrew: "Yes! The Giants won again?!" Adrian: "No sir, nobody gives a sheet up there. I mean the Melbourne media are running with the line that McLean left Melbourne because of tanking in 2009 & linking it with Bailey's comments at his departing press conference last year." Andrew: "Flipping Elle! What did HE say?" Adrian: "He said he had no hesitation in placing the club well for draft picks." Andrew: "How did we respond to this?" Adrian: "I rang Dean, told him to shut the flip up, & put out a press release saying I called him & he had clarified the comments." Andrew: "The Motherflipping Melbourne Football Club! We've tried our best to make this go away for both our sakes but the chimps keep chattering away & passing their sheet to the media to hurl at us. They've lost control of their zoo down there. Adrian, grab a pen, this is what I want you to do." Adrian: "Go ahead sir" Andrew: "Two large pizzas & four cokes." Adrian: "You're in London, sir" Andrew: "Force of habit. I want you to run a no holds barred investigation into the goings on at the Melbourne Football Club in 2009. Take as long and be as thorough as you want. We need to look like we're doing something about this. It doesn't look good for us but we can still plead da fif while throwing the MFC under the bus. I'm sick of cleaning up their mess for them. Why they have some dodgy old guy with jobs for the boys at his recycling plant like Carlton did, that shut them up down there. The old 'shut the flip up' phone call won't do this time. Call Schwabby, tell him I'm sorry but he couldn't control his people, it's either him or me, and I love me." Adrian: "Yes sir." Andrew: "On second thought, Adrian." Adrian: "Yes sir?" Andrew: "I dont give a sheet that I'm in London order the pizzas anyway, you're my personal beach so do it!" Adrian: "Yes sir." Andrew: "Good dog, handle that other stuff too, I'm off to the badminton, don't call me over here again. I'll see you when I get back & Adrian if you've chewed on my favourite slippers again, you'll be sleeping outside when I get back. Got it?" Adrian: "Woof!"

There have been plenty of past instances of players & employees parting ways with the MFC in unhappy if not poisonous terms. The club has leaked like a sieve to the media over the past 3 years from within & outside from former employees/admin. Bailey & McLean felt compelled to infer that the club was rorting the system. How was the JMac fiasco handled? Miller & Bruce gave scathing exit interviews. Chris Johnson son of an MFC gun was publicly humiliated in front of the whole playing group. If you want to go further back, how was Woewodin treated? Or Daniher in being asked to reapply for his own job after 10 years in the chair? A large factor in our massive debt was high staff turnover.When Hawthorn turned over their list - players such as Holland, Thompson & Barker had nothing bad to say about their club. Yet we have had players such as Bruce, McLean & Moloney who all loved the club, depart very hastily as well as a number one draft pick who felt he would be looked after better by a team that hadn't even kicked a ball in anger. Carlton wasn't really killed by the AFL for salary cap rorting, they were killed by Silvagni, O'Reilly & other whistleblowers willingly admitting fraud to spite John Elliott. Melbourne is being investigated for tanking on the back of a former coach & player inferring that the club was delibrately losing for draft picks. No other club has had former employees go on the record with such candour. Fev & Libba's suspicions are not the same as Bailey saying he had "no hesitation" about placing the club well for draft picks, nor McLean claiming Bailey was under pressure to tank & that both agreed that it was [censored] in DB's office. Both have tried to qualify those statements now but a large part of it is to save their own hides. Neither would've made the statements so recklessly in the first place if they didn't feel some antipathy towards the MFC for how it had treated them & the situation in the first place. The MFC has a history of mismanagement & treating its own poorly. Those are facts, not conjecture. A spade is a spade & a club that doesn't treat its people well is bound to be bitten on the arse by revenge seekers.

Yes & perhaps the Tigs may have faced some scrutiny had they lost. I'm not arguing that both teams were any more than shite in 2009. However, we were always going to cop more stick (tanking wise) if we lost. The perception of the incentive to lose for a pick in the late teens fails in comparison to a team looking so eager to "win" it's 2nd consecutive wooden spoon, number 1 draft pick & a number 2 pick to boot. It's why the perception of West Coast's "experimentation" in 2010 is nowhere near as strong as of us throwing games in 2009. I'm not saying that it's fair or right but it is what it is. Perhaps not but I guess this is where we get into the long philosophical discussion of what constitutes deliberately throwing a game vs winning not being the no.1 priority. But it's not. It's Warnock playing forward, Frawley playing forward, PJ down back, Miller in the ruck, low rotations, massive changes in team selections - all in just one game! If it was over the course of 4 or 5 weeks, you could argue list mgmt & experimentation but the fact it happened on one day against the next worst team in the comp forms the perception that Melbourne deliberately trying to lose ergo losing was their no.1 priority. I hope so, but given our history of ineptitude in managing this - I wouldn't bet an outright against there being a paper trail. No the full measure is that we still suck. That period caused massive damage & opened up great divisions in the club. In 2009, I didn't think it was possible for our on-field leadership to get any worse, yet 2 & a half years later the leadership vacuum was so bad we appointed the world's youngest co-captains. The culture at the club was so corrosive that we lost our "prize" for winn-sorry losing the Richmond game. Our tanki-sorry "experimentation" was handled so well that 3 & a half years later people are still talking about it & the AFL felt compelled to investigate something that they didn't really want to.The whole thing has been a complete [censored]-up from start to finish. Anybody who thinks it has been anything but is deluded. I note that you didn't actually name Fevola & Liberatore. In my op on this topic I stated that people of credibility at the coal face were still knocking Melbourne.Fev & Libba hardly reek of credibility. Fev was the AFL's answer to Amy Winehouse & Libba has a reputation for shooting his mouth off (yes, I'm aware McLean is similar) However, they have been just about the only two at Carlton during 2007 to go on the record & not much was of substance it pretty much extended to nudge, wink & "tanksalot" jokes. This is different to DB stating at his final press conference in direct response to a question about tanking that he had "no hesitation in ensuring the club was well placed for draft picks..." It is also different to a former player (albeit a boofhead), with a reputation for honesty, who had donated money to the club in 2008 claiming on national television that he walked out because he felt uncomfortable with the club's "experimentation" & then went on to imply that during a heart to heart with Dean Bailey that he felt the same. Carlton's "whistleblowers" can easily be dismissed as a couple of boofheads speculating about motives. Bailey & McLean inferred direct corruption. I'm mystified as to how some still feel as though the MFC is a victim of a complete media/AFL/anti-Stynes/anti-MFC conspiracy. This investigation doesn't suit anyone's agenda & is damaging to both the AFL & the MFC. The AFL is to blame because they set up rules that could be exploited & kept their head in the sand on the issue when it was clear that tanking was becoming a definite tactic. The MFC is to blame for botching their strategy & people management so epically, that there are now a cabal of whiteants that are so [censored] off that they wouldn't mind seeing the club eviscerated. Yes there are other factors, some may have been a bit of bad luck (re. McLean filling in as a guest on OTC that night, although who's to say he wouldn't have made similar kinds of claims the next time he was on media St?). However, I can't help but feel, if we'd've treated our own a little bit better - that they wouldn't be lining up with the baseball bats now. In my view Carlton & Collingwood got away with what they did because the admin rallied together, the way they "managed" their teams was subtle enough not to ring alarm bells with the players & finally the timeframe was not after years of tanking controversy unlike the MFC in 2009. Again I'm not saying that what the MFC did was morally wrong in comparison to Carlton & Collingwood. But almost certainly their strategy and execution was inferior.

I disagree that we list managed & experimented "expertly" - this is where we completely botched it IMO. The Richmond game sticks out like a sore thumb with the dodgy positional moves en masse. With the media hounds sniffing a tanking story, perhaps the MC could've been a little more subtle than playing Frawley & Warnock as KPF's etc. Although it did take a kick after the siren for us to "win" - so perhaps extreme measures were warranted. I'm not saying what we did was any worse than what others have done but it was almost certainly dumber from a managing outside & inside perceptions point of view. It's also clear the MFC have/had people management issues, Bailey & McLean speaking out of school as well as a host of whisperers in the dark. How many people of credibilty spoke out about Carlton doing it? How many were whiteanting them three years later? I don't like this inquiry, I hope we have no case to answer & if we do I hope we fight it like hell. I don't blame the MFC for tanking but I do blame them for mismanaging it enough to get to this point. The AFL would've never investigated if there weren't people at the coal face during 2009 coming out & making these allegations.

At the risk of derailing the thread somewhat, I thought Daniher did a brilliant job to get us two top 5 picks in 2003. Pity it was the worst AFL Draft in history.I generally agree with BH's take on it. Did the MFC tank? Yes. Have others done it before? Yes. Did we botch it just about every way? Yes. Is that why we stand alone in facing potential charges? Undoubtedly. Is it fair? Probably not. Is it a conspiracy against the MFC? No. Is it the AFL trying to protect their image? Undoubtedly.

I tend to agree. I too find the AFL's themed rounds tedious. However, I see them as being more of a marketing campaign targeted at involving/attracting niche groups in/to the code rather than "messages being shoved down our throats". Homophobia is a problem in greater global society, whether it's through downright anti-gay activism or tacit reinforcement of it from people who don't have anything against homosexuals but have used derogatory language & terms (most people, myself included have been guilty of the latter) as well as everything in between. The fact there are no "out" gay players in the AFL reflects this. So, if the AFL decides to have a GLBT round, I'd be a little suspicious of their motives (exploiting a wider societal issue for financial gain), however I see no reason to be opposed to the idea.

Some have the ability to be balanced based on facts. Others don't & insert hyperbolic bluster. Exhibit A. Facts would be appreciated. Were they really ostracized or did they choose to sook about having their toys taken away? So the inclusive club shouldn't have been inclusive? How would this make the previous board any better than what the current board is accused of? Or was it an elitist culture that let it's guard down & consequently the riff raff in?Interesting how the exclusive boys club managed to do what the former "inclusive club" couldn't & engage with fans to the degree that $5m worth of debt was wiped out within 18 months. By what voodoo? Is this what sparked the current witch hunt? Without the facts to back this up this has as much credibility as fanboi fiction. Any halfwit could see the comparisons are night & day. Luring the well settled captain of an interstate club for a swathe of money that the worst club in the land didn't have versus landing a disgruntled young man to a team presumably on the rise after rebuilding through the draft with salary cap cash to splash. Night vs day. Schwab has earned a reputation for meddling in FD affairs too much which has earned justified ire & criticism. However, it's hard to ever recall him usurping the list manager by going down media street and announcing to the world that he would put this club on the map by landing the biggest fish. Accident? No. Calculated putsch by the AFL & others concerned with the club's direction? Yes.Hiring the world's most expensive part time CEO & turning profits by living off the AFL's $2m per annum CBF were factors. Schwab was trying to get a job with the AFL commission but was advised by Demitriou & others to go for the vacant Melbourne position. The facts are that for all the bungling the AFL has had far more faith in the current board & it's business plan than its predessecor's. That speaks volumes. PS. No spirited defence of the namecalling & scurrilous accusations leveled at our former president? Good move. There's a first time for everything. ;-)

The Stynes/McLardy board has had some unfortunate lapses of judgement. Clearly there is also some very noisy opposition toward it. Criticism is fine but not much of it has been constructive. At best it has been negative disingenuous spin & at worst it has been a disloyal white-anting campaign of political bastardry aimed at eliminating one so called "boys club" for the jollies of another. Ultimately loyal supporters & members of the club will be the real losers out of this. Really if you feel you have something positive to contribute to the club you could offer your insight to the current board. If you feel said advice is being ignored or they are/have treated you badly; form a viable alternative ticket or back one (apparently the local Girl Guides chapter has outstanding corporate governance). But let's also not whitewash history & have a look at some of the factors which lead to the ascension of the perceived boys club. In 2007 the then Gardner board involved Jim Stynes (in the initial stages) & Garry Lyon in the selection process to appoint a new coach. Chris Connolly was also interviewed for the position (funny how they're "revered club legends" when they're useful but a bunch of out of line "liniment sniffers" when they have the cheek to usurp others into a position of power). After failing to land the head coaching gig Chris Connolly is parachuted into the position of Football Operations Manager (presumably as a consolation prize) - ignoring a separate panel's recommendation that former Hawthorn coach Peter Schwab assume the position. On rolls 2008 & the Gardner board appoints Paul McNamee as CEO to replace Steve Harris. This strategic direction leads to alarm bells ringing at the AFL & sets in place a chain of events that leads to the ascension of the Stynes board, the sacking of McNamee & the AFL's backed hiring of Cameron Schwab as CEO. So if the Stynes/McLardy board is the route of all of the club's evils what does that say about some of previous board's actions & decisions in 07/08 which lead to the AFL backed putsch? Most of this criticism of the current board is overly negative bordering on destructive. Is clearly personal & AGENDA driven. It's all dirty political point scoring. Describing a man whose board presided over the eradication of $5m worth of debt, increased sponsorship & revenue streams as well as vastly improved strategic relationships with the MCC & AFL as merely "a dying cult hero & his mates" is clearly political mudslinging. As is the baseless accusation that he knowingly accepted illegal payments as a player as is the other agenda driven bile, bias & [censored] slung on this thread.

The fallout from this may be a tipping point for me... I'm surprised the AFL gave "Your mum gave me AIDS" McLean's comments enough credence to launch an investigation. Further, it's amazing it was an investigation of substance when considering that 'proving' tanking would not suit the AFL's agenda nor Demitriou's. The findings combined with the cheif's past statements make him look a real dill. I'm saddened but given its track record not at all surprised that the club has completely ballsed this up. I was pro tanking but in fairness I did think the pack of dills running the joint would be a little more subtle than having secret "vault" caucus meetings. I'm a little disappointed I wasn't invited it seems as though every other c*** was there. Finally, a giant middle finger to the rats. Dean Bailey was a terrible coach, he almost effed up losing & copped a 31 goal hiding - that's his legacy. I don't by the "poor Dean the admin was mean" line - Bailey must've in some ways agreed with tanking - if he didn't he would've done better in 2008 than taking a side that 18 months previous had made 3 consecutive finals series to 3 wins for the season. However my greatest hate goes towards *spits* Prendergast - tanking delivered him a recruiting managers wet dream & he delivered Watts, Blease, Strauss, Scully, Gysberts, Tapscott & Cook with his top 20 picks - the only one he got right was Trengove & he's captain. Go figure. So it's not enough that this d-head stuffs our rebuild by a terrible array of draft choices he then drops us further in the [censored] by squealing like a stuck pig when interviewed by the AFL's goon squad. The only solace I get from it is that his career & reputation will be destroyed. The club could well be staring down the barrel of massive draft sanctions, financial penalties & possibly the stripping of premiership points. The sheer incompetence of this monumental [censored] up pretty much warrants it. But it would just about be the end for me as it would eliminate hope for another decade. I imagine many others would feel the same & drop off - the flow on effects from this would mean the club would revert to complete basketcase. Ultimately it's going to be the fans that suffer these penalties the most. We've had to pay our hard earned to watch this dross for the past six years - heavy sanctions will ensure this continues. While the fools that bungled this will surely be run out of the club/game they were earning hundreds of thousands of dollars for running the club into the ground during this time. They should be thrown in jail as frauds.

B: Nicholson - Frawley - Garland HB: Dunn - T McDonald - Grimes C: Wines* - McKenzie - Trengove HF: Sylvia - Dawes - Howe F: Byrnes - Clark - Pedersen R: Jamar - Jones - Viney I: Bail - Watts - Blease - Rodan * - assumed pick 4 "Worst 22" B: Bartram - Davis - Strauss HB: Tynan - Sellar - J Macdonald C: Evans - Taggert - Davey HF: Barry - Hogan* - Tapscott F: Jetta - Fitzpatrick - ? R: Spencer - Magner - Couch I: Gawn - ? - ? - ?

1 Dawes 5 Hogan 6 Pick #4 7 Byrnes 10 Rodan 15 Pick #49 18 Howe 21 Pick #53 22 Magner * 23 Tynan 24 Fitzpatrick 27 Couch * 29 Pedersen 31 Viney 33 Barry

A cold pie. It's harder & can throw its weight around.

I've seen him play a bit. The kindest words I can think of when it comes to Cruize; flabbergasted he didn't take North's offer of a 1 year deal for the sake of his career. I understand that we have a very poor list & it's going be hard for us to attract quality players but other teams' crap is still crap & usually no better than our crap.

On the face of it, pick 20 seems overs. Dawes played his best footy as a 2nd/3rd tall with an A grade midfield hitting him on the [censored]. He needs to take on a lot more responsibility at the Dees given the state of our KPF stocks. No doubt pressure will come from supporters who feel that pick 20 may have netted a star midfielder rather than an okay KPF. I bow to Neeld & Brown's greater knowledge of Dawes than I, but we better nail pick 4.

Agreed. It seems that for once our utter crapness as a club may be our saving grace as it seems us being the ugly one at the dance lessens the chances of players wanting to sign on & therefore those in charge of pissing high draft picks up against the wall. If the shoe was on the other foot would Collingwood give up pick 4 for Sylvia & S Martin? If we're going to burn our high picks like that - we should have just kept Barry Prendergast as HOR.

Agree Ron, Even Essendon under Matthew Knights porked Ross Lyon's Saints a few times in 09/10 - a team that was a bee's diaphragm from back to back flags. The longer term results paint the true picture.