The Chazz

How have I contradicted myself? I am the first to admit that if a bulk of the evidence is what has been reported in the media, then absolutely they have minimal chance of proving we are guilty of losing games on purpose (through the fumbling comments, not playing Watts, etc). If that's their evidence for that subject, then I find it quite amusing to think that they would try and get that to stick. However, if as reported, a number of people have mentioned CC making those comments, then I'm concerned. I, like every single person on here, am only juding my opinions based on what the media is feeding us, as dangerous as that is. I'm as one-eyed and as passionate as anyone on here, but I'm also realistic. I can't see how it is at all possible that we will be found guilty of "tanking", however, CC is in serious crapola. I'm interested to know which posts you refer to there WJ? From my observations, a massive majority of the posts from day 1 of the investigation, especially from those posters who think this whole thing is a joke, have frequently suggested that "if we're guilty, then so are other teams". I don't think there has been one occasion that I have used in my defending of the Club that if we are found guilty then everyone else should be, because in my opinion, it is a weak and childish defence, which is the opinion shared by Kero. The only time I even talk about other teams doing it is well is when I say that we were the stupid ones that got caught out. Don't get me wrong, I have a strong disliking for Kero, but I just can't see the point in getting worked up by what she publishes. It's quite a simple thing - if she's right, we probably deserve what's coming, if she's wrong, then I will happily assist with the funding required to ruin her career. The thing that does concern me out of that article however, is the fact that she has been very exact with her view and hasn't held back in any way. But, by the end of the article, she has given us none of her regular CS hate. I ask myself, why is this article any different to the ones that she has published is the past? Nothing in the past has stopped her from knifing CS, and she has done it with great moisture, but this one he's barely mentioned...

Jnr, just interested which pages of the 800-odd that the AFL presented to the MFC have you read? I'm amazed at how people think that CC is innocent, and that any charges against him should be fought. FMD, joke or no joke, he made comments about ensuring we don't win a certain amount of games, he indicated this on numerous occasions. He is a major reason why we are in this mess, having to put up with a 7-month investigation, yet we want to spend as much money as required to try and clear his name? I'm sure that will go down well with new/potential sponsors.

How would this stand up in court?

I think Vlad has made it quite clear what he expects that punishment to be should anyone be found guilty.

Nutbean, it's my opinion, and it won't change given that none of us have seen any evidence. My argument would be that if the AFL were to ban him for life, they would believe they have a very strong case, just in case it gets taken further, and I have absolutely no doubt they (the AFL) would've received strong and accurate legal advice. And if CC went to court on his own after we "threw him to the wolves", I'd be very confident that he won't have some choice words. What's he going to reveal that could harm us, given that he has been interviewed/interrogated multiple times during this investigation? I don't think the judge would like it if he brought new stuff to the table that he must have "forgotten" to mention during his initmate chats with Clothier and co. IF it were to happen, proving CC's innocence will be a lot harder than his guilt. If it got to that stage, I'd imagine the AFL have done their due diligence in ensuring they won't lose. With all that said, I'd doubt the MFC will let him fend for himself, but I'd like to think they wouldn't have a "win at all costs" attitude.

If we are done for tanking, or any individual associated with the club for that matter, then we fight to clear our name. If CC is done for bringing the game in to disrepute for his imbecilic "joke" about us needing to lose games to "stay the course", then I'm sorry, he can go it alone. It could end up being a case of CC being responsiblie for the crap we have had to put up with over the past 7 months. I will have no sympathy for him if he faces a life ban. For me, how far we take this will boil down to who is charged, what the charges are, and what was in that 800-page document.

While I admire your passion for our history, our survival will not hinge on us being the maker of the game.

It's not that he doesn't want to Cowboy, it's more that he can't find needles sharp enough to puncture his skin.

Not when we're winning.

That's BS B59 and you know it.

WYL - what are we fighting for? In my view there are 2 things; 1. The Melbourne Football Club 2. Individuals (i. Schwab ii. Connolly iii. Bailey) If we are charged for tanking, bloody fight like there's no tomorrow. We can't bend over, I do agree with that. It's the individuals that is not so easy to fight. Based on the reports that we've all heard, I don't think it's worth fighting for CC (fighting = take it to court). This is in absolutely no way that I am bedning over, it's just that I refuse to fight a case that we won't win. Nb. If Bailey is charged, I think we should take that to court as I would expect the AFL don't have sufficient evidence to prove him guilty.

Absolutely RP. If we can get out of this with a fine and the AFL banning CC for life, then I think we've dodged a bullet. I am in total agreeance that if we are found guilty of tanking, that we should take it to court. I also strongly believe we won't have a case to answer in regards to tanking (due to the fact that it's impossible to prove). I have no doubt tha tif we took it to court, we would win, hence why the AFL will give us the no case to answer comment. If what I expect happens and CC is banned, I can't see how anyone would want to take this to court, as we will not win. It will be up to us to prove comments from witnesses wrong, and I think that's something that we couldn't do. If one or more persons were offended or felt bullied by CC's "joke" about losing their jobs if they don't stay the course, then we have got zero chance of winning that. End result, the main players are happy; AFL - got some form of outcome by banning CC, and knowing that they won't be going to court MFC - dodged a bullet because there is no proof of what everyone knows we did (and we're not the only club) Media - have got some blood out of the MFC, not the main target in CS, but enough to satisfy

You shouldn't have gone in with expectations of Whitney saying anything relevant anyway! Harley on the other hand, it was quite noticable given what he is normally like.

In pic 11 it is nice to see Jack Grimes holding hands with Couch, but does he realise he's meant to be an opponent in that drill?

Time will tell WYL. I hope to Chirst that you are right, because I know that I will proudly tell all of my mates that we have been cleared of tanking, and show them the ladder to prove we are definitely not on performance enhancing substances!

Did anyone see Tom Harley/Jason Stevens/Mike Whitney on Sunrise this morning? I found it to be quite interesting, especially between the two ex-footballers. Jason Stevens was absolutely stunned that this was happening in sport. It was clear that he was surprised, and that it was happening in the sport he played was really upsetting for him. Harley on the other hand, I have serious issues with (apart from the fact I think he is a first class [censored], up there in the Barrett league). Firstly, he gave the interview absolutely no emotiion, no personal opinion, and anything that he spat out was pretty much a cut and paste from what he had read in the paper or heard on the news. This doesn't surpirse me, but that's my personal view on him. The thing that stood out the most for me was the fact that he didn't show anywhere near the shock that Jason Stevens showed, he didn't mention anything about his time at the Geelong Football Club, and the only thing in terms of his own opinion that he said was that it would be tragic if players were taking stuff that they didn't know the full extent of. Now, I may have already slipped in to that rut of questioning-every-single-person-until-we-know-facts, but I found it quite amazing at just how uncomfortable he looked in front of a camera talking about it. Especially given that you can't shut him up when talking about himself or how good Geelong is. Just curious to find out if anyone else saw it.

Damn Satyricon, I am amazed you are that naive. Your not related to Vlad by any chance?

This is the concerning part for me WYL, especially with our own investigation still lurking. Pre-yesterday's events, the AFL had more reason to close the case as quetly as possible. Now, given that the integrity of the game is being questioned by many, they have a chance to go hard on us, just like they will have to go hard on Essendon. I have a gutfeel that if they had any intention of punishing us, there is greater opportunity, and probably expectation, that they will ramp that right up. It will be an interesting year in football, season 2013.

Barndee, I really don't know if your post is taking the pi$$ or not. I hope for your sake it is, but I'm unsure if you would be capable of doing that, given that you totally missed that I was in my post.

It was an AGM, not a press conference. Nothing wrong with the question asked, just like there was nothing wrong with what I asked.

So it was Rhino who deleted my post of what Jobe Watson could look like in 5 years...

So, you wear number 39? That could make you a Doug Koop fan for all I know. Yes, you are entitled to ask whatever you like, which is not what I challenged. I was just unsure about such a question in such a forum. Is it an issue that I would discuss in an open forum at our AGM? Absolutely not, but that's my view, and you have your own. That said, I admire you asking a question that they wouldn't have had a pre-worded answer for, or do they? Couldn't imagine Craigy saying that there is no place on an AFL list for Aboriginal's.

Considering our current coach was a former assistant of one of said premiership-winning power clubs, and has continually compared where we are at as opposed to where the power clubs are at, I'm not sure if that means Collingwood are on the juice. Perhaps it may be a handful of players, rather than every man and his dog in red and black, but you wouldn;t think Neeld would be demanding our players to get to the fitness levels of the pies if he knew they were on it and we weren't. Perhaps that's just it...if he knew Collingwood were on it.

Hope Rhino's fav gal isn't Sheryl Crow, otherwise I'm off on a holiday too...!!! DC - PM me what what was said. Poor Rangey, it's like that fling you have on a footy trip with a hot backpacker. Great while it lasted, but out of our lives far too soon.

That's my point. We might be asking Jobe the same thing in weeks to come. For Lance, the many years of lying probably was worth it - was treated like royalty for most of that time, plus got to throw one in to date Sheryl Crow for a while! I want a clean premiership, but is that possible these days?