Lucifers Hero

All good preparation for getting our Women's Team AFL License. After all these ladies are the coach and captain of our Women's team. Preemptive signing up the talent.

Good point! An AFL oversight? Hawthorn or North may yet claim it!

The AFL has announced its funding plans for academies, effectively club 'zones'. http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2016-02-03/vic-clubs-handed-funding-for-academies The article says: "The clubs were consulted in the past 12 months and are understood to have accepted the allocation in general terms". Suitably vague making it hard to tell if clubs agreed or not! The zone allocations are: Western Bulldogs – Western Melbourne, Wimmera, Mallee, South West Victoria, Ballarat, (North Ballarat Rebels & Western Jets) Essendon – North West Melbourne (Calder Cannons), West Arnhem (NT) Melbourne – South East Melbourne (Dandenong Stingrays), Alice Springs (NT) Collingwood – Central Melbourne (Oakleigh Chargers), Barkly (NT) St Kilda – Inner Southern Melbourne (Sandringham Dragons), Frankston LGA North Melbourne – Melbourne and Wyndham LGAs (Calder Cannons & Western Jets) Hawthorn – Eastern/Whitehorse LGAs (Eastern Ranges), Gippsland (Gippsland Power), Katherine (NT) Carlton – Northern Melbourne (Northern Knights) Geelong – Geelong /Hampden (Geelong Falcons), East Arnhem (NT) Richmond – Goulburn Murray, Bendigo, Sunraysia, North Central (Bendigo Pioneers and Murray Bushrangers) I don't now why Vic 'power' clubs get so much of NT - yes I know it is big, but we are the ones that invested our team and games there and have built the relationships. Even having Dandenong Stingrays worries me (as a fan base) because Hawthorn will soon be moving to the neighbouring suburb of Dingley. They get Eastern Ranges and Gippsland Power and our bit of Dandenong Stingrays turf is hemmed in the middle. At face value that doesn't look very fair, especially if in time these zones bring 'academy draft bidding rights' with them No clues in the article how they were allocated! In light of recent decisions it could be the AFL looking after its 'pet' clubs and everyone else picks up the scraps. I would prefer we had a clear run at a zone rather than a team - hard to build an identity with a team, easier to do with a geographic zone. The allocations look a bit of a hotch-potch and not zones at all. Can't feel too enthused about our allocation (or lack of).

The Ox just reported that Port offered Jamar more money than EFC who had put a deadline on their offer. Jamar had to accept the lower offer. The deadline very conveniently ended before the AFL decision on top-up players. The 'handball' to Dillon and the other 13 clubs was simply a stalling tactic! How contrived!! Yep, let the cheats take the best available and b.....r the other 4 clubs!! I bet the AFL would have made a decision earlier and in favour of the other 4 affected clubs if one was Collingwood (Eddie would be squealing) or Carlton (we all know who the AFC Chairman played for).

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/stephen-dank-i-want-to-clear-the-names-of-the-essendon-34-20160202-gmjigs.html OMG!! Dank still wants to clear the 34 players!! A bit late I would think... That article contains so many Dank utterances contradicting what he has said in the past it isn't worth commenting. The only thing in the article I found believable was: "Dank, however, no longer has detailed documents outlining what the players were injected with, maintaining these were erased under the watch of the club's former administration". Very convenient. Bit by bit the truth comes out...

Looks like we may be joining the top-up party: http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-02-02/demons-seek-topup-rookie-for-suspended-melksham?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=RSS+feed%3A+AFL+Latest+News But we would upgrade a rookie to our senior list and top up the rookie list to maintain a full list. However, it seems we are not too fussed: "It is believed the Demons are in no rush to bring in a new player in place of Melksham, with the club under the impression the player would be inadequately prepared from a fitness point of view, as well as being behind in understanding the club's game plan". As Melksham was never really there, we are not going to miss him...its more a case of keeping the overall numbers topped up.

Further to that post. I can see the end result being: Jobe keeps Brownlow; players get all sorts of paid gigs by sponsors, media etc; players will get paid (hence why StK is making so much noise about who pays), take a nice holiday for the next 9 months and someone generously organises training for them at some exotic location. Then they come back to the game as heroes. So the only penalty is they don't actually play for a year...a bit like Hird not coaching for a year...no penalty at all really. Everyone wins: WADA get their conviction, CAS upholds the clean sport principle and sends a message to sports to not try the 'doped but duped'/'dog ate my homework' argument, EFC gets top draft picks, players get a soft landing. Losers: respect for ASADA and clean atheletes/sports. So much for 'cheats never prosper'.

http://www.theroar.com.au/2016/02/02/asada-says-sponsorship-is-an-issue-for-the-afl/ ASADA say: "it is up to the AFL to decide whether Dyson Heppell’s promotion of an Essendon sponsor is appropriate. But wait! When told of Heppell’s tweet, an AFL spokesman said it was up to ASADA to comment. Is this a case of 'pass the parcel'! More importantly it staggers me that: 'An ASADA spokesperson later said: “the sanctions are imposed by the AFL and any enquiries about appropriate activities should be directed to them'. My reaction is no, no no, NO! The AFL will push the envelope to advantage EFC and the players! Have ASADA learnt nothing about the AFL's potential for duplicity over the last 3 years? I understand that the AFL impose the sanctions but surely ASADA is there to ensure the sanctions are enforced! As a minimum I would have expected ASADA to say something like: the AFL impose the sanctions but they expect it to follow all the WADA/CAS rules for suspended players, to the letter and in the spirit of the law. I fear ASADA have gone soft, after all they were always in favour of the players getting off lightly. I'm beginning to think they have a 'now that WADA has its man/men convicted' lets give the boys a soft landing attitude.

This article is about Petracca http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2016-02-01/trac-back-on-training-track but there is a snippet about Jack's progress: Trengove remains in the rehab group but was running hard and testing his agility in drills at training on Monday, with a return to full training not too far away...."Jack's progressed every week with his running and he'll start to join in full training over the next little period, all things going well," Mahoney said. This appears to be on the favourable side of Jack's own expectations a few weeks ago. It doesn't say whether he is kicking but that he will start full training suggests he is just about there. A few more boxes ticked off toward getting him back on the park

You have to wonder what his manager was doing or not doing! You would think he would check out prospects with other clubs before letting his charge sign another contract. Cam played some good games before re-signing. His potential/ability was known. If nothing else his manager could advise him to wait a few months longer before signing. (That is exactly what Jesse's manager did. By all accounts Jesse was ready to resign with us during the summer but his manager had a word in his ear to hold off and let the season roll out. That is exactly the right thing for a manager to do). All very well for Cam's manager to shout from the rooftops that they will be back for a trade in 2016. He had options before Cam re-signed - the kid had just turned 19! The manager must share some responsibility here. Its his job to keep his charge out of these situations. What if Cam was your son or brother...would you be happy how it has played out. I'd be having a few stern words with the manager to be honest!!

There is much media discussion about top up players, payment of salary etc for the non EFC, AFL clubplayers. The press seems to have forgotten that we have one - articles like this one don't even mention MFC or Jake: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/essendon-to-pay-carlisles-st-kilda-contract-this-year-20160131-gmi4ai.html" I really like the position MFC has taken: An early, clear statement that Jake was recruited for the long term...nothing to see here folks. No hue and cry about top-ups or salary payments, no whinging etc. (that is not to say our lawyers are not having discussions with the AFL) Nothing to distract players, coaches, admin or fans from getting on with football. No attention from the media. No spotlight on us. We are quietly going about our business like a really professional club. People say a club needs to be successful off the field first to be successful on the field. Well, MFC is kicking an abundance of goals in most areas off-field, it is only a matter of time before the on-field results follow. I've moved beyond being hopeful; I'm finally ready to believe.

Four Corners, February 1 8:30pm - 9:17pm: Sarah Ferguson presents an investigation into the criminal networks that are threatening the integrity of sport, amidst the uproar over the match fixing revelations in tennis. For DL's concerned about corruption, conflicts of interest and mismanagement in sport this may make interesting viewing. The EFC saga may be mentioned as it was from an ACC investigation into criminal networks in sport that led to EFC's exposure in the first place. Sarah Freguson is an outstanding journalist who pulls no punches.

I can't get behind the paywall so am responding just to your comment. Does the article say anything about CAS rules on player payments? Or have they found some backdoor way around the CAS rules? As I understand those rules players cannot be paid by an entity connected to the AFL, while suspended. Hence why the AFLPA was trying to get compensation claims against EFC and AFL settled out of court - players would get money sooner rather than later. Those 3 organisations have gone very quiet of late...not sure what they are hatching. I don't trust any of them! Maybe CAS suspension and appeal rules are so watertight that players will have to take their medicine

I can't help but think the personal issues with McCarthy run deeper than 'homesick'. What budding elite player would sit out a year of football and do a dummy spit just to prove a point? What club would so readily give that player extended time out to move back to the other side of the country if the issues weren't serious? If he wasn't training well or unmotivated play him in the reserves instead. Maybe GWS underestimated his issues 3 months ago. Maybe there are things happening in WA that are very distressing for him. He may drop out of footy all together. I have no idea but this seems a very unusual situation. GWS deserve credit for now reccognising there is a real issue and looking after his overall health and wellbeing. I just don't see this as a Mccarthy ploy. I very much give him the benefit of the doubt, wish him well and hope he returns to football sooner rather than later.

Well said Dees2014.

But his son (from S&G), who is representing the bulldog players, is so to my mind there is still a conflict of interest between the Gordon family and the WB players. Others may have a different view.

An item on today's financial pages: Slater & Gordon shares plunge on concerns the firm missed deadline to update on cashflows. Shares have gone from $6 a year ago to 60c today. One ambulance chaser going after another: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/law-order/maurice-blackburn-launches-class-action-against-rival-law-firm-slater-and-gordon/news-story/6437bb1acd95f43c558ebfecd29843b3 One would be forgiven for thinking this may be driving Peter Gordon's eagerness to appeal for his two players. Under the circumstances the Gordon family and their legal firm should step way from the AFL case immediately and declare their conflict of interest. If they don't the AFL should step in as it seems extremely unfair to Crameri and Prismall: Peter Gordon is also their club President. Edit: I hope the directors of Slater and Gordon up to date with 'trading while insolvent' laws in this country.

EFC are rapidly becoming a protected species - Just reported that the fine from the Worksafe case is a paltry $200,000. It is wrong that the club is to get away very lightly from the whole saga: They will get their draft picks back by finishing at the bottom of the ladder. They will get the $2m fine back as the AFL will chip in coin to settle with the players. Their insurance and coterie will cover legal and other costs. Increased memberships have replenished the coffers. Overall, EFC get barely a scratch on the duco, blink and carry on whereas players are smashed, tarnished for life! The penalty imbalance is so wrong.

I had a look at his background and the legal firm he works for says on its website that it specialises in 'personal injury' cases. Maybe it is a preemptive application for a gig with any of the 34 players who are disenchanted with their current legal reps!!

nice circuit breaker there dc Feb 10 is the cutoff date. Edit: As WJ mentioned in his post: The Court will in the first instance hear whether the party lodging the appeal has valid grounds based on jurisdiction. So an appeal may not get off the ground if it fails at this stage which WJ suggests it will fail here.

Thanks WJ. Can they succeed in getting an injunction that will allow players to play while grounds for an appeal/appliction are being established?

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/essendon-34-banned-bombers-swiss-appeal-may-taint-afl-season-20160126-gme99r.html Well, a fine old mess this will be! The real reason behind an injunction and an appeal is now clear! Peter Jess: "The full hearing, if papers are lodged, could be two or three years away. It's not a bad idea, especially for the older blokes who may only have a couple of years left and could return to their clubs soon." Yep, lets appeal! By the time it is heard there will hardly be any players left playing for AFL clubs. But Jess ignores all the other players with football related careers who will lose their livelihood if the appeal fail. An issue: What if EFC win a premiership and in a few years the appeal fails? Jess: no problem, only the players lose the medal, EFC are still premiers. I thought he was a player manager! Don't know much about Jess but he isn't sounding to smart of late. From the article: The AFL Players Association is also considering an appeal, even through the NSW Supreme Court – as the CAS hearing was held in NSW – on behalf of the other 32 players. The article says: Both appeals would likely be funded fully or in part by the players' association. This really means the AFL as the AFLPA is funded by the AFL!! I thought EFC were funding players' legal action! Yes, it is very easy to appeal when using other people's money!! The players have a right to appeal but not to have it funded by the AFL. It will be a disgrace if the AFL uses money intended for the development of the game or other clubs for any of the 34 players. The AFL's silence atmo is deafening!

Charges were brought only against players who both: signed a consent form to receive Thymosin; and admitted receiving injections from Mr Dank. There were 34 players that met those conditions. So a player now says he stopped injections before TB4 was introduced. So one of 2 things happened: - He didn't say it in his ASADA interview so that evidence didn't go before CAS. I would say that is his bad luck. Too late now. - CAS rejected that evidence (eg CAS found plenty of evidence of player cover up so they didn't give much credence to what they said, or CAS found his injection dates did match up with TB4 dates). He gave consent to receive Thymosin, he had injections. And if no-one knew what was being injected how could the player be so sure he didn't get TB4. A very flimsy basis for an appeal, I reckon. The press will find lots of player anomalies in the coming weeks but I wouldn't put much cred on what they now say. They had their chance to tell their stories, the whole truth. That they didn't take that opportunity is unfortunate but that is how the law works, and should work.

I doubt it 'Oracle'. I reckon some, maybe a lot of players will take their medicine. Just get it over and done with. The Argentinian appeal case Gordon refers seems significantly different to this one. The odds of winning an appeal seem minute. I would hope Melksham sits it out even if there is an injunction. Then he will have 3 years clear run to fulfill his contract and repay the faith. I was wondering if mfc foresaw he might get suspended (for some months if not all season) and gave him a training program before the verdict just in case. We probably recruited accordingly - maybe it was easier giving Jones a rookie spot - experienced on baller for experienced on baller. I wouldn't be surprised by such proactiveness as we aren't asking for a top-up player. And we have been ahead of the game in other list management areas in recent years.

Interesting to read that Dr Reid gave evidence via video link to CAS - first time I've heard that. He has been completely exonerated by CAS. It is a bit shameful that the AFL went after him they way they did. Overall, it certainly reads like it was an open and shut case!