bing181

Subtle?

Too easy ...

A bit more balanced report on the Hun: "Despite speculation the Demons could accept a fines of several hundred thousand dollars and a short ban, possibly suspended, against former coach Dean Bailey, no agreement has been made." http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/more-news/demons-appear-likely-to-dodge-draft-ban-despite-seven-month-investigation-into-tanking-claims/story-e6frf9jf-1226579121328?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+HeraldSunAfl+%28Herald+Sun+%7C+AFL%29

Same as Age article, no?

Plus losing draft picks, which isn't the case here. Perhaps it cancels out ... (if this is true).

Wouldn't be cheaper if we didn't have to pay the legal fees.

At least it can't get any worse for the moment ...

Wangaratta Chronicle (the Times is in Myrtleford)

Ben communicates?

Anyway, back on topic ... was an interesting article. Too easy to write players off who don't quite make it into The System as 16 and 17 year olds, or get drafted as 18 year olds. I suspect he will take most of this year to acclimatise, but if he continues to build as he's done over the last few years, could indeed be a useful pick up. Certainly a bit of a buzz around him from the players.

It's obvious you enjoy this, but difficult to see how you can offer that when Don - who presumably has a detailed knowledge of the contents of the 800 pages together with our response - has indicated that the key points of Caro's article are in fact entirely INaccurate. Or, as he put it, just plain wrong. As are you in this case. Though I accept, you don't do wrong.

Confirmation people. She reads Demonland.

I was pretty impressed as well, seems a natural. Will be interesting to follow his development - though as everyone points out, he's yet to even play a game of footy!

For those that way inclined, there are some posts on Bigfooty that perhaps suggest where things are, and even, what the hold up is. Speculation, perhaps, but no worse than anything we're not seeing here either. Basically, seems we're playing hard ball on an AFL-proposed compromise. "Apparently very close to an agreement, possible inclusion if we agree is that the AFL commits to a similar investigation into all other teams suspected of tanking." "Apparently we're still refusing to make a deal and firmly believe that there isn't enough evidence, keep hearing that we're offering to pay for Bailey's legal representation if it goes to court, which I'm very happy about, many cashed up supporters have come forward to assist with it." "Melbourne are continuing to turn down the offer, I strongly believe that they will definitely take it to the courts if it goes against them"

From a place pronounced Fah-ka-tah-nee apparently. Which is slightly odd given that the official spelling of his hometown, Whakatane, starts with a "W" ... someone pulling our legs? (slow day, sorry ....)

Pope's resignation? Gotta have a big impact as well ... Lots going down at the moment, we'll be pushed off the back pages yet.

Just to note, the team-wide withdrawals that have occurred in cycling have been done by the organisers - or the teams themselves voluntarily - not by WADA or their affiliates, or even (in the case of cycling) by the UCI, the governing body. WADA and related penalties only apply to individuals. Also worth noting, is that in the Festina affair, the biggest team-wide drugs bust in cycling, that there were no positive tests, nothing was found on or with the riders, and it was initially only the trainer who was driving the car carrying the "products" who was arrested. Riders subsequently confessed, and were banned based on those confessions.

No, but we don't need it to either. The big difference with a schoolyard dispute is that the school rules are (usually ...) clearly defined. "Tanking" isn't, it's just a point on a line somewhere between two extremes: at one end we have leaving no stone unturned to try to win, a the other, we have deliberately manufacturing a loss i.e. match fixing. As such, as with much that's involved with the AFL, the teams rely on precedence and accepted practice to establish what is and what isn't permitted, both within the laws of the game, but also, within the spirit of the game. It seems to me that the "they did it too" argument is important here, simply because it's one factor in establishing where the point on that line is between committing an offense or not.

Administered by a nurse, and taken off-site ... of course.

Not disagreeing, but actually, with the quarters that short (15 mins plus time-on), I thought pretty well everyone was in and out of the game, simply because there wasn't as much game to get into. Regardless, I thought Aaron looked fairly switched on and pro-active - let's hope he can carry it into the MFC games.

Perhaps what we could do with on Demonland is the equivalent of Bay 13 over on Bigfooty. A place where people can just go for it, no mods, no holds barred, where they can say what they REALLY think without hijacking every other thread with this internecine sniping. We could call it The Cage.

Jay Clark ‏@ClarkyHeraldSun Chris Connolly spent a long day at AFL HQ yesterday. Great footy person, would be tough if an individual took the brunt. Dees will fight.

Next week apparently: "Gill McLachlan has told triple M that the AFL will deliver its tanking verdict on Melbourne next week. Dees were at AFL yesterday"

Pot, kettle etc.

FWIW: Dees' secretive way 'best' " MELBOURNE president Don McLardy has defended the scarcity of information the club has provided to members about its response to the AFL's tanking investigation, insisting the secretive approach had been adopted ''in the best interests of our club''." etc. etc.