hoopla

You'd have to think that all the decent coaches interested in a job next year have already been signed up - and even a gun new coach needs time to get to know his players. The delay is a real concern - it must be working against Casey's recruiting and pre-season training plans vis a vis the other VFL clubs. I want Jesse Hogan to play in a well coached competitive team next year. With every passing "coachless" day this becomes less and less likely. Methinks - you are right

Lies, damn lies - and statistics ...... and nonsense. It doesn't even get history right - the Swans won the flag last year. ............and then there is the small matter of 25% changes in team lists!

..... yeah ..... but they've just gone back and turned the same stones over again ..... I thought Anderson said in his presser only last week that they were still turning over evidence? New Year's day would be the go ..... nobody even tries to follow the news that day Beware of lawyers bearing gifts (.... but yes you have put the possibility of a happy new year back into the melting pot)

................ well they are going about it all wrong. The best way to do that is to stop looking !!

Two Captains and a Vice Captain is a bit messy - but I think Jonesy has earned some additional recognition.

I really do think the AFL has grounds to caution McLean. Three years after the fact ( and contrary to his own statements at the time) McLean has come and made damning public comments about the inside workings of his former employer. So what , you say, he has the right to say what he likes? Imagine what would happen to the AFL's reputation if every player with a grievance against his former club came out and had a crack. Members of other professional associations have to abide by codes of ethics in the interests of their professions as a whole. Isn't part of every AFLPA contract that you not bring the game into disrepute? Hasn't McUnclean done precisely that? You can tell me that bias is affecting my judgment - and perhaps you'd be right - but you wouldn't want every unhappy player to follow his lead At the very least the AFL should make it clear that disgruntled players should take their concernsdirectly to the AFL and not to the media! Last season the reaction of Melbourne supporters to Scully hit the headlines.I reckon our response to McLean next year might be even more colourful. Of course Malthouse may not give us the opportunity - by leaving him in the VFL where he belongs

I know that's the other argument - and how I hope its the right one. But I can't imagine the AFL coming out and saying that we have spent 6 months (plus!) chasing down every thing that moved at the MFC in 2009 and there is no evidence they tanked ( threw games or whatever). "We wish to assure the doubters that we have subjected Melbourne to every interrogation technique known to mankind and found they have no case to answer. We ( I, Vlad) have been confident of this all the way through but after Brock McLean's claims felt that it was important for the integrity of the competition to devote considerable time and money to prove that absolutely. We appreciate the willing cooperation of the MFC" "Yes Caroline you have a question?" ...... " Look I'm not going into detail this morning - but let's just say that individual statements can only be properly understood in context" ...... " No Caroline I'm not going to go into individual matches - but let's just say that some sound coaching moves don't look logical from the other side of the fence". "Yes Caroline, you might think that its possible to make judgments like this in 5 minutes - but you'll just have to take my word for it that these judgments involve dozens of variables and thousandsof pieces of evidence" "Yes Caroline, it may sound strange to you that we had to interview Dean Baileys four times (actually I think it was six) to decide this - that's just a measure of how complex it was .... besides we were in Adelaide anyway on the Tippett affair" ........ "No , at no stage did we involve legal counsel because at no stage during the entire investigation did we contemplate any findings that Melbourne would have sought to deny" ...." No .. the investigation never changed direction - it was just a systematic evidence-gathering process" It can't be that hard to establish innocence - unless you are absolutely determined that you are going to establish some guilt - in which case you'll find it. If you are right that the delay is because they want to demonstrate that they have been thorough - then all they are doing is demonstrating that they have been stupid ( and incredibly wasteful) McLardy's made it clear from Day One that we'll take a guilty verdict to court. The only way the AFL will avoid the court - is by shuttingit down before Clothier and Haddad find something damning in the rubbish bin. It will be the MFC's problem if it gets that far. Actually the person who has really brought the game into disrepute by airing his whinges in public is Chris Judd's nemesis , Brock McLean I like it ... but your kids have got a heck of a lot more commonsense than the AFL ( and C Wilson)

Hate to say it ..................... but you are right.

I can't believe that Fan is off again with his Wilson Worshipping. Surely Fan you can concede two things 1. Wilson's information is not necessarily accurate and is not free from bias.She doesn't reliably separate the wheat from chaff - just as often she simply produces the chaff. If ( if) there was a time that she had influential and reliable contacts that time has passed. 2. By producing inflammatory headlines Wilson does influence the opinion of the casual observer. You acknowledge that she is against us - and so that influence is necessarily damaging to our brand. By looking forward to her articles you are (1) looking forward to receiving potentially misleading information; and (2) seeing the public exposed to information damaging to the reputation of the MFC. Why is that? Your views on Wilson may once have been justified - they are not anymore. You really need to rethink your position.

Yes ..... I agree with you If we really start performing then its neither here nor there that our discards perform elsewhere.If Neeld's recruiting and training strategies produce a winning mix - then he's done the job.

He's really struggling for copy isn't he? He probably wrote it a few weeks ago while sitting in front of his calendar planning his holidays - which seems to have already started Great read BB And I reckon your are on the money about Anderson. What all this ignores of course is that every day the fiasco drags out, the MFC suffers. This thing is hanging over our heads - and as potential members and sponsors wait for the outcome - we lose money. The club can't come out and criticize the delay ......... but you'd someone in the media might point it out. We've been penalised already.The longer the thing goes the harder it will be for the AFL to justify a "not guilty" verdict. ... and if that's what they do find - they should give us compensation.

Disclosure of "events subsequent to balance date "with potentially significant effects on the reader's assessment of the financial health of the organisation is always an option.The directors have decided that nothing of financial significance will emerge from the investigation - and that the best way to convey that is to sign off the accounts without mentioning it. As I have said that's fine by me. They'll just answer the question if its asked. I also struggle to comprehend the reason for the initial loan - but now that it has effectively been repaid I'm happy to move on.

No Stinga ..........not that I picked up. There is no requirement for them to provide that detail. They would probably argue that it is commercially sensitive information which ( to my knowledge) no club discloses in its financial statements

Somebody's political correctness flag will probably shoot into the air - buts its a good idea, Biff. Also Casey kids and their parents. Sydney has been filling the SCG with free passes for years.

I should clarify. The club has had to deal with a number of debilitating off field issues.Given our on field struggles - and despite external events beyond our control - I believe that by any objective measure the club's finances have held up extremely well. Under accounting standards there is no such thing as a "contingency provision". I am talking about a "contingency note" !.Disclosure of the fact that the investigation is taking place is far from tantamount to an admission of guilt. There is an argument which says that full disclosure of the "state of play' including a categorical statement of innocence would have constituted a stronger denial of liability than silence does. As I have said I am more than comfortable that they have taken "the silence" option. Again the fact that the Schwab loan has been fully disclosed is a positive. I notice Schwab is a Foundation Hero. I'd agree with you that he probably should have knocked the $7500 on the head before making any donations.Its open to Wilson to bag him for that if she wants to!

Yeah I was hoping he would continue - just to prove Brock wrong

I shouldn't have re-read that - its' even more disgusting than I remembered ............. "Melbourne will be harshly punished. Cameron Schwab and Chris Connolly will be finished at the club. But football lives, young men who played no real active part in the treacherous football facade which took place at the club in 2009 were ruined or at the very least tarnished by their association with it" You do wonder how the Age's lawyers could have passed that and - remembering that the Age is a sponsor of the club - how/why the editors said "print it!" Thanks Fifty-5 - you've upset me all over again!! It is strange - and encouraging (?) - that Wilson has gone quiet over the past several weeks ........ but equally puzzling - and worrying - is the fact that the AFL haven't yet got to the point of even forecasting a target end date. The greater the scope for us to fight their findings - the longer the process will need to run. Wasn't a murder committed on it?

There is a lot of merit in what you say - I just hope the AFL is "big" enough to see it that way! As McLean is still under an AFL contract, they do have an opportunity to sanction him for "bringing the game into "disrepute" - but to dothat they may run into the AFLPA which will rattle on about rights of free speech etc, They cannot get stuck into Wilson and Co - without first blowing her out of the water on the facts - and then they have to factor in the importance of media support to promoting its brand. Whatever happens you'd have to think that the AFL has every reason to release its finding during the holiday period. New Years Day sounds good. They could - and should - have done that months ( and months) ago. The problem with that now is that they will have to explain why it took all this time and all those resources to work out the "bleedin' obvious"

Good stuff Old Dee. I just think of you as Long-time Dee - which makes you a gun! (Just quietly I haven't been described as a spring chicken for a while !!) Go Dees

I don't disagree with any of that Old Dee ..... and I am pleased to hear you confirm that you don't think we should be punished.For that matter you might be pleased to know that I was not blind to the extraordinary inconsistencies that took place on McMahon day I only referred to you as the "old guy" because that is the way you describe yourself ( and I certainly don't see an inverse correlation between age and wisdom!) Thankyou Sloonie ............ I'll try to sound less less preachy and arrogant next time ! That's fair enough by me - just wish the AFL would forget the niceties of Anderson's farewell - and hurry up and clear our name!!

The full Annual Financial Statements are now available through a link on the website. Perhaps other posters have known this for days - but Ihave only just picked it up. From my point of view it is a good transparent set of accounts containing full disclosures of all of the various classes of income - allowing those who wish to consider profit net of the Foundation Heroes contributions for instance,to make their own assessments. For C Wilson's benefit , the loan to Cameron Schwab is noted - all $7500 of it !! The significance of the Bentleigh Club acquisition certainly stands out in the comparitive information.All our ongoing commitments to players, to Bemtleigh Club Creditors and to the Vic Comm for Gambling Reg are also well set out. In stark contrast to the situation 3-5 years ago, the directors are entitled to maintain that the club can meet itsdebts as and when they fall due without having to cite AFL guarantees. Nonetheless they clearly - and correctly - point out that the clubs ongoing operation - and its future revenue streams are dependent on AFL support. As we are under competitive pressures to continue to increase our football dept spending - and as we have a small and ageing membership base ( which makes it difficult for us to attract sponsors esp in these tough economic times) we are notin a strong financial position. But I would suggest there is now a clear gap between our financial health and the financial ill-health of half a dozen other clubs. One other thing I noticed was that there was no Contingency note in relation to the tanking investigations. Why would there be you ask ? Some ( like Wilson) might want to argue that the possibility of a $1m fine is relevant to a proper assessment of the financial health of the MFC - and that the club should have acknowledged this even if only to put it to bed. It is not uncommon for organisations subject to major litigation for instance to include contingency notes disclosing that the company is subject to major litigation - but the directors and their legal advisors believe that the litigation will not be successful and that no liability will arise. I would have expected the Boardto have discussed that possibility - though ( on what we know at present)I would have taken the silent option as well. By any objective criteria, the club has done well off the field.For this to continue we just have to starting performing on the field almost immediately - which is just one of the reasons why I believe that the balance of our trading and recruiting strategy between maturity and youthful potential has been just right. We just need this tanking fiasco out of the way - not just from a direct financial perspective ( re fines) - but from an on field perspective ( re draft access) as well ........................ (which will ultimately affect our finances...............etc etc

You are of course quite correct. Do those posters who maintain that we did tank ( like the old guy and shoonie the loonie) actually think we broke a rule and deserve punishment - or do they think ( as I do) that we worked within the framework established by the AFL just as other clubs had done before us ? The ambiguous term "tank" describes Carlton's legal actions in 2007. If that is what they mean , then we don't have an issue. ( As for Anderson - yes I have no doubt that we wouldn't be where we are now - and the AFL wouldn't have dug themselves into this hole - if he hadn't been holding the reins during Demetriou's mid season holiday)

Logically Wilson's next article should be " The MFC Investigation finished Anderson"I refuse to believe that the fact that Adrian Anderson is leaving in the midst of the MFC tanking investigation is purely a coincidence.He has said that he has nothing else in the pipeline. If you were confident of a clear "worthwhile" outcome wouldn't you want to finish what you have started ?. As he has demonstrated with the tribunal, Anderson is driven by a desire to replace subjective judgment with black and white rules. To him, there is a point at which "tanking" crosses a clear line from 'list management' to 'result rigging' ....... and he has been driving the investigators to find that point ( even though no such point exists!). In doing so he has dug the AFL into a big hole - and put it into a position which will damage its reputation whatever it concludes about Melbourne. I reckon Demetriou would have dismissed McLean's comments as the jaundiced view of a player whose future in the team was threatened by arrival of a group of young talented midfielders - but Demetriou was away and Anderson jumped in boots and all. I wouldn't be surprised if this drove a wedge between them ........... which was instrumental in Anderson moving on. You'd think Caro would be on to this. But that would force her to admit that the investigation was always going to finish in 'no mans land' - that ' criminal tanking' can never be proved - and to do that would contradict the guilty verdict she pronounced all those weeks ago .Accordingly she has said nothing. I have no inside information on any of this. I just can't believe that the timing of this surprise announcement is pure coincidence - and nothing else. I think Caro would have the same suspicions - but she can't pursue them because they shoot her own argument in the foot.

I agree with your suggestion - but the AFL is not in the habit of admitting it was wrong - and it will find it difficult to acknowledge that the draft/priority picks system placed clubs in awkward positions - and to admit that the investigation was a waste a of time and money etc.. At least Anderson's personal stake in justifying the witch hunt is now out of the way

The club should give McLean back his $5k ( or $15? or whatever) and wipe his name from the Foundation Heroes list. He's forfeited the right to be a hero of this club in any sense of the word. In fact he's the one who should be charged with bringing the game into disrepute!