hoopla

One thing the AFL did to try to even up the competition was to introduce priority picks !! Eddie's abuse of power continues - even down to the symbolism of holding the function at Silks. To think that there was a time when he criticized us for spending time at ski lodges!!Rather than wasting club's his money touting its wealth , he should be giving all his supporters dental vouchers! The fact is that an even competition is in everybody's best interest

I think you need to revise your understanding of the facts. The Gardiner Board took over an absolute "basket case" - remember the PAYG tax bill in s secretary's desk drawer? They got us back on our feet - began the reconciliation with the MCC, solidified our influence at the Bentleigh Club, initiated the AAMI deal - and initiated the Casey alignment. Unfortunately they over-rated our list at a time when Sports Science was making its mark - and we were stuck in a hole at the Junction Oval. This undid a lot of their good work - but strategically ( with the critical additions of fund-raising) they pointed the way to the current board. As I have noted above, the bone is now pointing more clearly at former employees than former directors Anyway ... back to topic. Let's see how wrong Wilson can get Essendon !!!

WJ's information is consistent with my own. Certainly one disgruntled ex employee - whose extreme bitterness was known at the time of his termination - was instrumental in escalating the investigation. We can condemn that person's vitreole - but it is not uncommon for ex-employees to carry deep-seated grudges and it is not something human resource management expertise can necessarily prevent. The club knows who that person is - and it is reasonable to conclude that he ( and his fellow stirrers) will never get close enough to the club again to do any more damage.Wilson may not be a scrupulous journalist - but I think she's shrewd enough to know when she has played all her cards - and when it is time to move to the next game. If we begin a steady climb up the ladder this season - our detractors will pull their heads in - hopefully never to reappear. This morning - notably under the "Analysis" banner - Wilson nominated Robson and Thompson as Essendon's two scapegoats with Hird the survivor ( even though a couple of weeks ago she said Hird's position was untenable). Nothing against James Hird - but there are a lot of Melbourne supporters who would love it if his head is the only one to fall in the end.!!

The AFL has to be careful. Its one thing to decide that you won't employ a person .......... but its something else to try and prevent that person from picking up work with someone else. Casey is a separate entity outside the AFL competition.You can't deprive a person of their right to make a living.

You always have to take the bad with the good CC's 'speak first - think second' persona did make him enemies - some of whom got into Wilson's ear. Whether or not the whole investigation would have petered out if he hadn't made those colorful statements is problematical. Yes - he should have been more careful - but that is the price you pay for deciding you want a big personality as your Operations Manager. I don't blame him or indeed any other officials for our list management strategies in 2009. The fact is that the AFL encouraged teams to bottom out - and a high percentage of supporters would have been furious if we hadn't got that priority pick.Connolly and Bailey have been damned because they did - but they would have been damned if they didn't as well. The AFL's final ruling may have been farcical - but the real farce was in ignoring LIbba and then jumping all over McLean ! Having decided to make Melbourne a scapegoat , it was inevitable that the AFL would make an individual within Melbourne the scapegoat's scapegoat - and Connolly was the always obvious candidate. Ironically he'll pick up sympathy through all this ............ and may eventually emerge a more respected figure than he was previously. How ironic would that be?

Rather than a "kill", I'd prefer a quick - quiet - surrender. The club has been through enough pain in the last few years to last at least until its next centenary. Those members of the Gardiner Board hurt by Jim's bloodless coup can rightly claim a good chunk of the credit if we can grow from here into some sort of power........ and that is how they must see it. Let's face it ......... it all comes back to achieving continual improvement on the field

From the AFL's point of view its a "no go zone" because " fully blown tanking" represents throwing matches - which is a form of match fixing - and hence a threat to gambling revenues.I'm sure this is why AD has always been so keen to say that tanking doesn't exist.( Pity Anderson couldn't get that into his thick skull!) From the newspapers point of view its probably a " no go zone" because readers are utterly sick of it. The drug bust - and the equalization debate - are today's stories.( unless Wilson finds out that CS ran over his neighbours cat!)

Agree ........but more than that we have no option but to present a united front after years of upheaval. I know that members of the former board are still aggrieved by the manner of Jim's takeover. To an extent their bitterness is understandable - but to continue to gossip about times past is just going to hurt what they worked hard to save and rebuild. The club must be bigger than the individual ..................... We desperately need some on-field success now to keep us together.

............and in doing that ( and in pushing fading players out the door) he made enemies. Hopefully those enemies will now feel that their man has had his punishment. In the late 80s , we won the pre-season premiership. I can recall acting captain , Danny Hughes, jumping up on the dais to accept the cup announcing that the team wanted to "dedicate the win to their teammate Chrissy Connolly who had just gone into hospital for more knee surgery" . He has always been a personality and a presence. Chris wanted the coaching job - it must have hurt when he was passed over for a rookie in Bailey. Though I thought it was a good move at the time putting him above Bailey as Operations Manager was a recipe for conflict. Only a month or two before McLean fed Wilson the dirt she had been craving, I was at an Institute of Directors function on bequest funding ............. and who do I see in the corner but CC. He couldn't have been more friendly - " We've got the oldest supporters and the richest supporters - bequests is where its at he told me" He's certainly is a passionate Melbourne man.

Seriously mate - you have become so cynical that you need a break from the game. Instead of cheering when we beat Essendon last year, you were probably abusing us for losing the previous week! "The prospect of being there just to make up the numbers doesn’t appeal to me so much these days" If that's how you see it I suggest you take up bowls - or , more appropriately - clay pigeon shooting!

Thankfully the conversation has moved on - but I couldn't let this nonsense just sit there! How can you seriously say that the Board has been spineless in all this ?. They have held firm - and they have got the AFL to say unequivocally that the MFC didn't tank. We've stood tall in the face of scurrilous negative publicity and retained our draft picks.- nothing weak about that. What was left for us to challenge in court ? The AFL's view that Connolly acted against the AFL's best interests or the AFL's right to fine its member clubs? Months and months of distraction - backbreaking costs - no guarantee of success - and an enemy capable of sending us to Etihad for half our games and witholding our equalisation monies. Pragmatism has it all over suicide. Well done Don and the Board. Now if we have to fight the Gaming Commission, we'll be able to do it with the AFL's money!!

Agree Every-time someone has a dig at us for tanking , we can simply say " We didn't!! The AFL ( which is the only body which knows all the facts)said we didn't - and that's good enough for me!! Let's just laugh it off - and move on. (( Back to topic)... as long as the VCGR doesn't say anything different...........)

He needs about 5 years in Pakistan to get him up to speed for the job. Perhaps he'll headhunt Clothesline and Saddam.

As a lifetime Melbourne supporter, I have got used to us rolling straight out of one disaster into another. Perhaps that is why I tend to agree with you. The VCGR is a conservative box-ticking bureaucracy which would love to upstage the AFL. It is answerable only to the Minister (Michael O'Brien) who ( for all we know) might drink at the same water cooler as Ms Wilson. In our favour is the fact that if they overrule the AFL on us then they will be duty bound to look at the whole AFL competition. They will also have to factor into their findings the effect of the priority pick system which has now disappeared.Thinking it all through - I think you are probably drawing too much of a long bow. But you are right in alerting us to the potential seriousness of the development. It is not something we should dismiss lightly

Somehow in the last 24 hours, she's managed to cobble together something a bit like the final settlement .......... to the point that Harford on SEN wondered how she always seems to "get the story" . So be prepared from some more arrogant self-promotion - which conveniently overlooks all her blatant errors..No one presently at Melbourne will talk to her again - so with a bit of luck tomorrow might be her last last article about Melbourne for several years. PS I'm meeting the Newspaper Disposal Manager at the recycling depot tomorrow. He's agreed to put aside all copies of Wilson's articles for me. I'm donating the money I save on toilet paper directly to the club.

No .... I agree with WJ - brilliantly crafted settlement At the end of the day, the AFL has all the power - it has the money - it controls our draw - it controls our equalisation dividend . The AFL were always going to dish out some sanctions to justify an 8 month farce. $500k is a killer - but it is to be paid in instalments almost certainly timed to follow the receipt of full (perhaps even premium) AFL dividends. To resist this settlement would certainly have come back to bite us one way or another, The club has been found not guilty - it can hold this out to sponsors - to the issuers of gaming licences etc. The club can go forward. Well done to Don and his Board. Having said that I have great sympathy for both Connolly and Bailey - especially Bailey who was in a no-win situation in 2009 - and whose sanction seems riddled with holes and inconsistencies.How can behaviour which didn't affect the outcome of games be prejudicial to the AFL? If Adelaide got out of the Tippett gig lightly - they have been a bit stiff here! PS. What an absolute farce The whole investigation has been flawed from Day One. McLean should be sanctioned - Wilson should be sued - Anderson should never be given managerial responsibility for anything - and Vlad should lose all his leave entitlements. Now we can move on ..................... at last.............

Fair enough Doc................ looks like we might be on the same page after all !

Good third post Disgruntled former employees - starting with McLean who should be sanctioned for an outburst he couldn't sustain - drove this. I like the way some people say this is because our HR practices were unprofessional. What do you say to a big head like McLean who couldn't accept that he was too slow to win a place in our first choice midfield?

I happen to believe that in a "grey area" you can only define a crime by reference to established practice. Even if you are not prepared to accept that - you must agree that it is a compelling defence against "bringing the game into disrepute". What have we been charged with? Not right - the football world and most Melbourne supporters expected us to get that priority pick. In fact a lot of people thought that we were amateurish in losing the Kruezer Cup. Under the standards of the AFL in 2009 we did nothing wrong. We are being judged by the AFL in 2013 when "integrity" is the flavour of the month. I think you'd find that Connolly's strategy in 2012-3 would have been based more on injuries at training than on playing people in unfamiliar positions. The whole beat-up has been unjust. full stop.

I guess the thrust of the article is the fact that Bailey and Connolly's sentences will not be suspended - so the "manipulation bit" might not be right.I must say I didn't even know that it was a possibility. If it is manipulation we have to fight it ! As you say we weren't good enough to manipulate anything!!

So that's it is it ? "Manipulating results" is a damning charge - which sounds too much like match fixing to me. How will that effect our sponsors - and our gaming licences? $500k on top of our legal fees is bad enough ---------------- but that is utterly devastating!! Might just have to be off to court !! (Well at least Caro didn't break the final story)

Surely the charges are everything .Its not just wording - it's actually defining our" crime" - from which the penalty should follow. If they can't decide on a charge - then the question of a penalty should not arise. We should be holding out accordingly. Simple.

Strange .............. and unacceptable !! It'd have to be a straw house circled by an out-of-control bushfire!! Even a serious comment in an a internal operations meetings - does nothing to the reputation of the "game". Attempted draft tampering would be the only possible charge - and as the draft nominations weren't open at that stage - that's stretching a long bow as well. I agree. In year's to come we don;t want to be one of a handful of clubs convicted of bringing the game we invented into disrepute !! We have our integrity to defend What's the charge Mr McLachlan??

I've just watched AFL Outsiders - and seen Wilson's latest effort to retain her credibility ..... " I've always expected a negotiated settlement" Rubbish - how about "CC and probably CS will go" But again - after throwing up in the air a penalty of $500k ( "possibly watered down") she made the extraordinary admission that she didn't know what the charges would be - "probably disrepute" !!! Hang on Caro , the charge comes first - then, if appropriate, the penalty. You don't decide on a penalty - and then look for a charge !!Would you accept a penalty when you don't even know what you are being charged with? Where's the evidence that Melbourne brought the game into disrepute? It would take a court 5 minutes to throw out that charge ................ no costly legal battle in that! Come on Caro - you're still missing the point!!. You really are such a stupid woman............

Hardly ---------If she had more evidence she would have used it before now. The only information she has lead has been the "Connolly gaffe" from her "infamous vault meeting" ......... and that was hearsay from someone now outside the club> What is pathetic now is that she is using the "go easy on the weak club line" to justify herself." I was right - Melbourne tanked - the AFL know Melbourne is guilty - they have just taken pity on that weak club" She is just plain dishonest