jnrmac

Yep. You could say BHP are a bunch of thieving murderers and they couldn't do anything about it (in Australia).

You are probably right. However my understanding that is Schwab while not actually responsible for the payments allowed them to continue hence his termination from Melbourne. In any case in regard to defamation proceedings I think it would be very difficult for him given those circumstances. Barrister: 'Sir you knew about illegal payments and allowed them to continue?" Man in dock: "yes Sir" Barrister: "then what kind of reputation do you think you have sir?" etc etc Having been in a dock its not pleasant (as a witness mind you)

It's National I believe (but stand to be corrected on that point).

FFS the "meeting in the Vault" was a routine weekly footy meeting. It has been speculated (there are no direct quotes alleging players being told to lose - in fact the opposite. DB has cleared the air) that an aside was made by CC about losing and getting draft picks. There is no smoking gun Calm down everybody. It will eventually go away,

Thanks for the training thread guys. Love reading it,

I heard Hankook stopped supplying Brock's tyres and he couldn't afford to do burn outs any more. Just sayin....

I daresay you have never run a case against someone in court. It is draining, expensive, time consuming and incredibly emotional and difficult. And we have no case. I repeat again - a company cannot sue for defamation any more. The law was changed about 6 years ago. Connolly possibly could but he shouldn't touch it with a barge pole. As for Schwab he was outed as a party to salary cap cheating under Gutnick so arguably would be pretty difficult to defame him over this as his reputation is already somewhat 'sullied'. The court of public opinion will side with Caro because most people think we tanked. There is nothing to be gained. Forget it and move on. And quickly. The best revenge is to win games. Make them fear playing us. It has never happened in my lifetime and I would love to follow a team where that was the case. Our meagre energies are much better spent doing that.

Bail could be a great player but he can't kick and that's what holds him back

Thats what he was recruited for. Our midfield is the worst in the comp.

He means we have seen the best of Davey and that his career may well be over.

Brad Miller played 130 gams at the Dees....

Ex Pom politician Michael Foot on his new job: Foot, heads arms body.

I don't get this. If Folau was contracted (and walked away) don't they still have to include the money due to him under the salary cap??

Companies can't sue for defamation any more. Connolly, Schwab and McLardy potentially could. The problem with legal cases is that under the 'discovery' process a lot of stuff might come out that the club. AFL and people might not want to see. The AGE would be thrilled with that. There is no smoking gun. Not one public statement has said 'I was told to lose". It didn't happen. The other stuff is like experimenting etc is not a crime nor a breach of rules.

Written and spoken by Guy Jalland

We are the only team to win a game that losing would have given us a priority pick and we did it twice. Nice pick up Redleg. But reporting that wouldn't sell papers would it?? If we were tankers we would have got 3 picks instead of the one PP we did get.......

Not a Morton fan but if I remeber correctly he slaughtered Goodes on that occasion. Great match up.

Well said.

No one has stated publicly they were told to lose games. Full stop. The media hasn't quoted anyone saying it - and believe me they would if they had that admission. It is a juicy story that is being sensationalised in the quiet footy period. The weekly meeting room suddenly becomes 'the vault', player experimentation becomes 'trying to lose', Bailey addressing players to explain how the second half of 2009 will unfold - ie the experimentation that went on - is all of a sudden 'nudge,nudge, wink wink, we are trying to lose but I just can't say it'. Its very difficult watching us get pilloried in the media every day but take a leaf out of Julia Gillard's book and the slush fund affair 'I've already addressed that' she said. She did nothing of the sort but until they have a smoking gun she is scott free. The club is denying the story oxygen and will respond when the AFL investigation is finished. Any other strategy at this point is foolish, Get on the front foot after the investigation and slam this who are sticking the boots in. Caro, Robbo, Kennett, Gardner, McLean, PJ etc. Gather the troops and rev them up.

Interesting that there is two R's...

What he said.

Patrick Smith, Caro and many others writes opinion pieces . If you don't like them don't read them.

Reflecting on this overnight.... Andrew D has made a huge song and dance about anyone proving tanking will have significant and major ramifications - 'they'll never work in this industry again' etc He is clearly saying to the general populace 'we are serious about tanking' but he is also saying to industry participants 'don't go there or you will be crucified'. Only an idiot would admit they weren't trying. Sadly we seem to have a few of those. Without a smoking gun this goes nowhere. The can of worms would be horrendous for the AFL if it was opened. The AFL would lose control of the agenda because the Govt and bookies would have massive legal claims against them. AD would be under severe pressure in his job and he is intent on keeping it so it won't happen. Sit back absorb the media crap. Say nothing. Move on to next weeks story. Hopefully it makes us stronger.

At least we always win

Disagree. Its the same thing as a club not trying its best to win a match.