hoopla

Players usually change clubs for a number of reasons and McLean gave several in interviews after he left including the story about the long drives to Casey. My recollection is that Melbourne was not prepared to put him on the same coin he was getting in the last year of his 2009 contract because of concerns that he had lost a yard of pace due to his injuries starting in 2007. Carlton came in and offered more and he was traded for pick 11. I don't doubt that he was unhappy about the state of affairs involving the club in 2009 (who really was?) so I don't say he exactly lied when questioned by the panel of On The Couch. However, I doubt his response would have been a shock to the panelists. I'm told his views were known and the response he gave when asked on the night was to be expected.

No doubt increasing questions over his position in the team was a factor - not to mention money.

For him to come out 3 years later and highlight disillusionment with "tanking" is dishonest. Even if it was a factor - it wasn't the main factor. When he was the young player who stood to benefit by the clubs promotion of youth - he loved it - even contributed to the debt demolition

He is a hypocrite of the highest ( lowest) order

MELBOURNE'S benching of Liam Jurrah in Round 22, 2009, could form part of the evidence against it in the AFL tanking inquiry.

Jurrah's mentor and biographer, Bruce Hearn Mackinnon, said yesterday he could not fathom Melbourne's treatment of the exciting forward.

This is in the herald sun. i think they are getting desperate for more news and try to interview anyone. Now Jurrahs mentor is waying in. Give me a break. What next. A players dad sying my son was benched.

This ridiculous - the rest of the media are obviously circling for a few scraps

Carlton took Fev off in the last quarter of the Kreuzer Cup - and he himself has said that the team wasn't interested in winning. If that's not even worth a question by the AFL Integrity Officers, how can LIam's benching be worth a headline?

Actually LIam didn't look completely match fit that day. I've been worried that the fact that we picked him in the 22 in the first place might have been taken as damning evidence against us . At least it now looks as if we are safe on that one. Phew.

Just for the record - CS joined MFC in 1982 - straight out of school I believe. He then moved on to other positions.

This is true - but he soon moved back to his Richmond roots - before quitting to take a senior recruiting position with us as gsmith12 has described

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.

All good points neatly summed up in #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".

Unfortunately Wilson and her media mates have already done significant damage to the MFC - and the AFL

If The Age is losing readership, it probably has more to do with the print versus electronic media than with particular articles, or perhaps even The Age's perceived political bias.

To return to the issue, a great piece on legal rights Jack - well done.

My concern is more related to reality - what if CW is onto something, or in fact is eventually proven fundamentally correct? What if MFC is guilty beyond what has been accepted in other cases? Where does that leave the club? Legal rights have a tendency to take a back-seat in situations such as these. The AFL is presumably the final arbiter in such situations, as they have been before. What if?

One things for sure - if we are to get a fair trial we'll have to make sure that no-one who has read the Age gets on to the jury !!

One particular 'Journo' has taken the whole thing too far and it's fairly clear this particular 'Person' doesn't mind creating enemies and/or is in 'Payback' mode . Some people thrive on that sort of stuff but in the end it comes back to haunt them . This article (below) was posted in another thread . It quite disgusted me and it gives you an idea of the mindset of this 'Person'

http://www.vexnews.c...lly-like-sport/

That article is a disgrace.

..... as for that poor non-athlete in the photograph.........

It is certainly very clear that Wilson genuinely despises Schwab: does anyone actually know why?

Just in case you missed it Monocular, I've no doubt gsmith12's information below has something to do with it

Agree with your final comments Jack.

For those who are not aware -

Cameron's Father was secretary of Richmond for some years and a Life Member when he died in unusual circumstances in 1993.

At the time Cameron was the Tiger's CEO.

Wilson's Father was previously Chairman of the Tigers.

Cameron moved to MFC in 1997 and I believe the feud between Wilson and Schwab has been ongoing.

Wilson is taking every opportunity to stick the boots in and in so doing is damaging the MFC.

Nasty vindictive b**ch.

I'm sure somebody will draw this out into public arena shortly. Surely her poison will come back to bite her - and her paper - one day

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.

....

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.

Love your whole post WJ including Inspector Clouseau.......................... but your final paragraph is right on the money.............

Two things to mention;

• The current investigation was kicked off while Demetriou was overseas at the Olympics
  
• This is the only investigation into tanking to date undertaken by the AFL's new/expanded integrity department - the prior investigations were low level compared to this one so you'd think they should be re-opened and investigated just as vigorously as this one has been
  

I think this is a very salient point.

We attack Vlad ... but lets give him some credit. He knew that a full blown tanking investigation could only lead to trouble for the AFL - and so he played it down. There is no doubt that the competition ( through the damage to one of its clubs) has lost money through Wilson's hysterical coverage of this investigation. Would McLean's self-serving whinges has received any credence if Demetriou had been around?

http://www.foxsports...3-1225752963181

How about you write a full investigation into this Wilson??

An admission by the senior coach of the day here....

Make a good story for at least a week....

"Tigers Tanked to get Cotchin"....

Its a story Wilson. If you are a fair-minded investigative journalist you will be on to it .The fact that refers to a football department that has since been moved on is irrelevant................. and if the investigation you advocate finds even one pro tanking assertion in the vicinity of the Punt Rd Oval .......... you will label the Tigers a "disgrace"

Prove that all us Melbourne supporters have been wrong questioning your motives ............ here's your chance!

So i did a quick search and couldn't find this posted. It just shows not all media is against us in the tanking saga, hopefully more will emerge in the future. Michael rogers (whoever he is) seems to have the same views as a lot of us. Enjoy

Tanking Probe's innocent victims - Bigpond Sport

Absolutely marvellous stuff - some cool balance at last

"No AFL player wants to lose any game they play. Melbourne's players have lost more than most. They have pursued their collective AFL careers for the past three seasons, dogged by tanking allegations and ridiculed as the easybeats of the league. It's hardly the stuff of prospective 18-year-old draftee's dreams.

And just as the Demons look to be shaking off a six-year malaise, the tanking spectre rises again, bringing with it the threat of AFL-imposed sanctions that could very well imperil the club's best efforts to return to premiership contention"

Thankyou Michael

I'm sensing that this story has taken a different tack. Todays AGE has the Wilson rant buried well down the list of AFL related stories, number 11 in fact. Why would they lead with this story yesterday, and then by today try to bury it amongst the rest of their AFL related stories. I have a suspicion that Wilson hasn't got anything else to throw at us or maybe has been told to pull her head in. The AGE's senior Editor's would be trying to gauge which way the wind is blowing on this one and might have come to the conclusion that the story is running out of legs or starting to track negatively for them. I also like many on this forum get the Impression that we are being subjected to a public trial via the media with the AFL's tacit approval.It seems fairly obvious that information is being leaked from the investigation to the media. Why would they do this if they had sufficient evidence to act through the normal channels. Is it because as I believe, that they don't have sufficient evidence. I have a gut feeling that their investigation has faltered. This could be interpreted in several ways, are they either trying to flush out more evidence or is this one way of punishing us whist also sending out a clear message to all other clubs, whilst knowing that they will not be able to act against us once the finding are released? Why has all of this information been released two weeks ahead of the investigation deadline for reporting? Two weeks is an eternity in the media life cycle and the story could well be dead come reporting day. Then again I could be wrong and this could just be the calm before the storm. Either way it seems to me as though the AFL has deliberately compromised it's own investigation.One further point to consider. Wilson appears to have been the chosen AFL attack dog in this matter. This in itself seems strange given her strained relationship with AFL. I might be reading too much into this and crediting the AFL with Machiavellian prowess beyond their due, but given Wilson's obvious vendetta against Schwab, did they choose her because they knew that she would over step the mark as per Saturdays article. In effect deliberately compromising their own investigation whilst irrevocably damaging Wilson's own reputation within the Industry. Yeah a bit far fetched I guess but a nice thought though.

I hope you are right

This morning there was an extraordinary article in the Age headed " Coaches will come good if everyone plays the long game: Coaches in transition should ignore the imposter of short-term results and focus on the future"

How do the editors reconcile this headline with yesterday's article which said it was "pathetic and disgusting for a club" to " conspire" to ignore short-term goals to improve itself in the long-term?

Yesterday's article was part of a long series of articles attacking an AFL club .Today's article was by Mr. Craig Foster defending a club they would like to succeed - the Melbourne Victory !!

And for those bleating about carlton, richmond and the pies...they were all able to keep their mouths shut.

We would have been fine if everyone kept their mouths shut but people talked and we must now pay thevprics

We did keep our mouths shut. The "person" who opened his mouth is employed by the rival who won the Kreuzer Cup!

[One or two other ex-Melbourne people may have opened their mouths since. Ex Carlton ( Libba and Fev) and ex Richmond ( Wallace) people have also opened their mouths]

but none of this would stand up in a court of law. The rule is not black or white.

We may have done some wrong morally, we may have said too much which is stupid, but even on here for 2 years it was the Hot Topic.

The reason any of this happened is because the AFL left a door open.

Since 2001 we have not been alone in walking through that door.

Yes, The AFL expected us to watch the power clubs exploit the rules - and are now attacking us for trying to mimic them. When "natural justice" is in place its OK to follow the leader

No of course the media won't make that decision. The AFL will based on their investigations of which the media have been leaked some of.

My point was that rather than outright attacking CS or CC the media will throw muck at and deride the club until they get what they're after.

Unfortunately the Wilson-led media has already done the damage. The reputation of the Melbourne Football Club - and its appeal to sponsors - has already been trashed. As for CS and especially CC - what employment options do they have now?

Let's assume the AFL Investigators ultimate exonerate us . Wilson's headline will be " AFL goes soft on Disgusting Demons". Kids in the schoolyard will start bating the (few) kids in Melbourne jumpers " You got away with cheating - double cheaters"

As for CC - even if he is only guilty of overuse of a sardonic sense of humour - he has little chance of working effectively in "Community Relations"

The media has already got what it is after!

Someone is feeding that troll from the AGE.

Would be very sad if it was a MFC x board member or so called fan.

Clearly - that is the key point here

Who is Deep Throat - and what is his/her agenda?

This morning's Age sporting section carries a story headed " Coaches will come good if everyone plays the long game: Coaches in transition should ignore the imposter of short-term results and focus on the future"

Hang on - didn't the Age publish a story yesterday saying it was "pathetic and disgusting for a club" to " conspire" to ignore short-term goals to improve itself in the long-term?

Today's article was by Mr. Craig Foster defending a club he would like to succeed - the Melbourne Victory. Yesterday's article was part of a long series of articles attacking a club - and a CEO - Ms Caroline Wilson is hell-bent on destroying - the Melbourne Demons.

Well Mr Editor - does your paper have a view on the way football clubs ought to balance short and long term goals? Or are you happy to allow your journalists to build up or tear down individual clubs according to their own personal agendas?

The Age used to hold itself to be a quality newspaper. Lead by Ms Wilson it is beginning to look like Australia's "News of the World"

So a club says to a sponsor :"We are going to improve .......... we will have some exciting early picks playing for us next year .... get on board!"

Is that boasting? Does that prove tanking? NO and NO

It is emotive language from story hungry media - trying to match Wilson's lead. It is tabloid journalism at its worst

Good find, Clint

Terry Wallace in 2009

Yes Clint - very good find

That puts Richmond in the frame too, Caro.

After attending round 22, 2007, and facing derision from the Carlton fans after the final siren, I lost any qualms I'd previously held about "list management planning".

I was hoping to hear some criticism of Carlton from the AFL after that, but it wasn't forthcoming .

That made me think...once you reach the point where you can't make the finals,it's OK to plan your tactics to aim for the best possible draft picks.There is the advantage then of giving young players experience that they otherwise wouldn't get, and the opportunity to try players in new positions. Though there did appear to be a hint of lack of ethics in this, it had escaped scrutiny for several years before with other clubs. We were being naive by not doing it.

I think our Club's administration must have felt the same way.

In fact, AFL clubs are supposed to strive for excellence. Could it be argued that we weren't doing our best to improve if we DIDN'T maximise our chances of optimal drafting?

Yes..... if you factor in the AFL's response to the Kreuzer Cup - you could certainly argue this

The real story of this Wilson driven malarkie goes way back to when a young Cam Schwab was working late in to the night at Punt Rd and had to give an interview to the new footy girl for the Age.

Source:"The Truth"

Wouldn't it be beautiful if there was such an article - and if it somehow came to the attention of a journo from the Hun :"Wilson's Personal Vendetta Sinks Demons"

Aaarh.......... I reckon you've got it

Something personal has been driving her relentless pursuit of Cameron Schwab .Interesting to see if she retires shortly after he goes

Looks like she is going to prove that the pen is mightier than the sword!.

Might the basis of a good telemovie - "The Journo and the CEO"

The real story of this Wilson driven malarkie goes way back to when a young Cam Schwab was working late in to the night at Punt Rd and had to give an interview to the new footy girl for the Age.

lets just say things got more "revealing" than Cam was intending.

He has never been able to talk to her since but she keeps calling

Source:"The Truth"

Aaarh.......... I reckon you've got it

Something personal has been driving her relentless pursuit of Cameron Schwab .Interesting to see if she retires shortly after he goes

Looks like she is going to prove that the pen is mightier than the sword!.

She's clearly got a vendetta, and I'm certain it's to do with Schwab. Always finds a way to mention him without ever really expressly going for the jugular. Has wanted him out for years and took great delight when it looked like he'd leave after 186. Seems she didn't get her man that time but is determined to do so this time.

You are correct here.

A couple of seasons ago - quite out of the blue in March or April, I think - Caro wrote an extraordinary article headlined something like "CEO loan raises questions". The article was about an MFC loan of around $100-200k to Cameron Schwab. The article was extraordinary because the loan had been fully disclosed in the Melbourne Annual Report prepared several months prior as presented at the AGM at least 2-3 months before.

She was correct when she said that executive loans had become increasingly rare - and that directors needed to take special care before approving them. Given our less than strong financial position at the time, I picked up the loan in my review of the accounts. The disclosures were unusually comprehensive - and they satisfactorily answered every question I could possibly think of. Ernst and Young signed off the accounts None of the lawyers and accountants at the AGM saw a need to mention it. Nothing in it - no story - even at the time.

But away went Caro. "Even though the accounts said "X" there might be a problem if it turned out to be "Y"". "Cameron Schwab returned from Perth saying Z ....... and now this loan pops up.... makes you wonder" , she wrote. It was a none story when the accounts were released - and it certainly was a non-story 3 months later. Caro - was then - and is now - after Cameron Schwab.

Both the Wilsons and the Schwabs were heavily involved with the Richmond Football Club. The tigers were not terribly impressed when the young Cam wlaked out of his job there and came to Melbourne.Caroline and Cameron are around the same age. Let me do a Caro.... "is there some history there?"Caro wrote glowingly of young "sportsmanlike" players - aka Brock McLean - being disillusioned by the MFC's policies. Let's not forget that Brock has a link to Richmond as well - through his Uncle Ricky. I wonder if that has something to do with her unquestioning faith in the word of an employee of the club that won the Kreuzer Cup.

You are right - Caro wants to destroy a forner employee of her beloved Richmond football club Cameron Schwab

Trouble is ... it looks like she's going to do it!!

Natural justice means the Club gets a chance to assess the evidence once it is presented and then has a chance to prepare an answer. The Club's lawyers as a matter of natural justice should be able to review any report in great detail and to interview all of the people who's evidence is being relied on.

It also means that the club expects to be treated the same way as all other clubs - and is entitled to have factored the law-makers' approach to similar situations into its actions.

I think it is a subtle reminder of the club's legal rights - and of the fact that the club has already purged itself!

The concerted media attack has already caused considerable damage to the club and its potential future revenue streams . I'd like to think that the statement is a subtle reminder to the media of its responsibilities.

Good one Don. Thanks

possibly the best post ever

just about!!

Again i ask - are you serious? Of course people being interviewed could say i don't remember but they have been warned that they will be heavily sanctioned (including not being able to work in the industry) for misleading testimony. But yes they could try to plead ignorance.

But that is not the point! Based on a television interview with BM the AFL launched what is clearly (and contrary to expectations) a very robust investigation. Surely for consistency they are compelled to at the least formally interview Fevola on the back of his comments and fully investigate the matter.

And by the by if they do it won't be just current Carlton boys they interview. Ex employees will also be interviewed. And thanks to Malthouse they now have a raft of seriously disgruntled ex employees (at least one of which who is threatening legal action) who may well be more than happy to tip a bucket or two

Absolutely correct!!

Big test for the AFL - one set of rules for the power clubs - and another set of rules for the weaker clubs?

honesty is always helpful, in the end.

Not sure how this follows

Trouble with this garbage on here about the Gardner board v the Stynes board is it is hijacking what should be a serious debate about where the club stands now and what it should be doing going forward. The Gardner board in the end was a failure so lets not try and point score (my board is better than yours) now at a time when the club is in trouble.

Agree that this stuff is garbage - especially as many of good things the Stynes Board has done - realigning us with the MCC, getting us to AAMI and setting us up in Casey - were started by the Gardner Board

My best indicator as to what sort of trouble we are in and the determination of the AFL to do something is all to do with timing.

November 22nd is draft day - if the AFL wind up their investigation in the next week and give the MFC 7 days to explain leaving the AFL a couple of days to hand down the penalties BEFOREdraft day then I believe this indicates that the AFL are going to go us hard and we are in deep do-do. It will tell me that the AFL think it has enough to convince the football public/media etc that it has the MFC cold and they can also differentiate between solid evidence they have against the MFC as opposed to the very subjective and untested/unsubstantiated information they have on the likes of Carlton. (I am not convinced that people from other clubs would not sing like canaries if the blow torch was applied as well)

Compare this to the issue dragging on until after draft day - the immediate sting and high emotion charged action of losing immediate draft picks has gone. I believe that if it drags after the draft date the please explain will come and then we will have 3 months of argie bargie followed by a revision of the draft process, maybe a couple of resignations at the MFC.

Aah back on topic - and with a very valid point.

A hasty conclusion means they are set on the MFC - rather than on the tanking issue as a whole - which demands investigation into the behaviour of other clubs

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.

When they decided to follow up McLean's self-serving little assertions they set themselves on a dangerous path. Perhaps they are hoping that Melbourne doesn't have the money to look to the courts for protection.

If the principles of natural justice force the investigation into the Kreuzer Cup - and a bit of Carlton money starts heading the courts way - the legal bun fight would supply Caro with articles well into her retirement!!