P-man

We've definitely been the sacrifical lamb to ensure the AFL never have to admit tanking existed. A non-guilty verdict, but a hefty fine attached to being guilty of a conversation and a coach "feeling pressured", just to warn the other clubs that "tanking doesn't pay...if you tank, which we know you don't cause it doesn't exist.." One good thing to come out of it is the AFL emerging as the greater villain in the eyes of the footy public. Their farcical mishandling of it has all but overshadowed the actual events of 2009. Fear not Sloonie, everything will wash away the moment Hulk takes his first big grab this Friday.

Joke has been reported to the relevant bodies.

Doubt it will even cause a ripple. Everyone is tanked out. Need to get used to the idea that we are the only club that will get whacked.

...footy? Oh right! Footy! I remember that.

It's a fair point you make, but it was generally accepted practice as long as clubs were subtle about it. Clubs became increasingly less subtle, and of course it was Melbourne who broke the non-subtlety mould. Lets not forget that he media didn't just start beating this up this year. The evils of tanking was being raised back in 09, it was just assumed that nothing would come of it, because how can you prove it? How indeed.

I can't bring myself to hate Robbo, even when he's taking a swipe at the club. The key difference between Robbo and Caro is one has a genuine love of the game and wants to see what is best for It. The other is a vindictive, nasty individual, who uses her own personal grudges as motivation for her "journalism".

Remind me again why Caro gets paid more than Emma.. http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/dees-winners-well-know-in-about-2015-20130219-2epmj.html A very reasonable analysis. I imagine The Age to be a bit like Oz, with the wicked witch and the good witch exchanging pleasantries by the water cooler.

I think this puts one thing beyond doubt...the song that we run out to on match day has to be the Benny Hill theme.

It literally never ends.

What if someone takes my joke seriously, do they get penalised too? I want to be clear on this new rule. Perhaps if we can define what "joking" entails..

In GM's defence, this was AA's mess, not his. He was left to clean up what was a total farce with more holes than plugs. The verdict and resulting presser was alway going to be a circus with some bizarre jumps in logic.

I almost fell off my chair when Caro asked GM if the AFL accepted some responsibility themselves for creating a flawed system and doing nothing. I thought a Caro impersonator must have snuck in.

That was so confusing, I'm not even sure if my interpretation of the finding is correct. My interpretation is they found Conolly made a comment in an FD meeting, Bails felt pressured and responded by making selection changes, but these changes were made for the purpose of appeasing Connolly and not actually trying to lose the match(es). Therefore, both acted in an way unbecoming etc, but there was no engineering of losses. The other interpretation is that Bails responded by making selection changes with the aim of losing matches, but this did not carry through to decisions made on match day. This second interpretation means the AFL is effectively saying that pre-planning is immune from allegations of tanking, and it is only moves on match day that must come under scrutiny. This would be, frankly, a farcical position to hold. Baffled by this, but our name in a technical sense is cleared so that's a good outcome I suppose. Bails deserves a bit better than this rubbish though, and the AFL still has alot to answer for in how it has handled this matter. Bring on the Carlton investigation now, if indeed the integrity is of utmost importance. Me thinks sweeping under the rug will be the preferred course of action.

I have never nor would I ever abide by "we are [censored] and alway will be". We aren't Richmond. To infer that my refraining from showering Neeld with praise demonstrates a lack of support, is a stupid notion in my view. I agree the personal nature of posts becomes a bit much but I couldn't let that one slide because I do support Neeld, I just refuse to label someone with his win/loss record as "the one" just yet. Let's not forget that he received heavy criticism last year for not just the losses, but the nature of them. The scope for improvement on last year is enormous. He's done everything right this off-season. Now let's see how much it translates onto the field.

As am I satyr, so we agree on each of us having the right to express our opinion in equal measure.All I would say I don't confuse my perspective for negativity. I'm saying that the time for sitting on our hands is over. Expectations from last year must lift. What matters ultimately is results. You are saying "go along to footy and if we lose, oh well, there's always next week", a mentality which our supporters have had to adopt through necessity. Whose the negative one here?

Stupid post. He has my full support and I've defended him tooth and nail to those who say unequivocally that he "can't coach". The fact is we're yet to see if he can, but will have a much clearer indication this season. This is obvious I would've thought, nothing to do with not supporting him. I care about winning matches and looking half decent doing it. Until he does that, or indeed anything close to that, I'm not calling him the messiah, and I make no apologies for that.

Patrick Keane ‏@AFL_PKeane AFL will hold a media conference at 2pm today with Gillon McLachlan and Andrew Demetriou, regarding the Melbourne FC investigation.

I think that's partly what it boils down to, is the fact we've been conned before. No many clubs have to endure two complete rebuilds back to back. Putting that aside, as well as the abysmal performances of last season, he's brought in what appear to be the right mould of players to bring us out of the mire that we find ourselves in. Right now, even if he can make us no longer the laughing stock of the entire competition, I'll love him forever. But he has the stock he wants now, and he's had time to instill confidence in the game plan. I accept we're not a finals side, but wins matter this year. They matter big time. If there isn't a fair degree of improvement on 2012 I'll be disappointed. If it's more of he same, I don't care how great a bloke he is, I'll walk him to his car myself. The days of being the team no-one takes seriously need to end as of now.

He's been good behind a microphone from the start. He's an impressive fella. I'll start entertaining the idea he is "the one" when he starts winning some games. Legitimate wins, not the handful of mickey mouse ones of last season.

Port all over the Saints. Might have our work cut out for us in Round 1 of the season proper.

Just an incredible shame. What else can you say really.

http://demonland.com/forums/index.php?/topic/32203-col-sylvia-in-2013/?hl=sylvia

Couldn't disagree with this any more. Given the situation I think he conveyed the frustration of the Melbourne faithful without crossing the line. In fact the only time he really got his back up was when she decided to question his credibility. "Made for uncomfortable viewing"? Sorry, but get real mate. Someone had to hold her to account, and I salute Garry for the way he did it.

Definitely softened in that article, but if she had any dignity she would admit that McLardy was fully entitled and correct to respond in the manner he did. This "unofficial" nonsense warranted response. She can't admit to that, and won't, because that's just how Caro operates.

Wouldn't trust her as far as I could throw her. Will await the actual verdict.