rumpole

So these blokes spent 5 months while being paid good coin investigating a club's activities. Reckon they might look really smart if they spent that time and came up with nothing. If they have nothing more than what was written about in the media as their evidence, then the MFC doesn't need a smart operator like Finkelstein to defend it. A first year articled clerk will do.

What were the crowds like today. They were abysmal yesterday. Come on Taswegians - turn up if you want local test matches!

It's that time of year again when everybody is handing out annual awards. I think it's fair to say, based on the Demonland Player of the Year voting that Nathan Jones is our Demonland Man of the Year but what about other awards? My contribution is for Best Comedy Piece in the Media - Silly secrets from the 'vault'. Any others?

I think the penny dropped in the second half of the season for Colin and I trust that he realises that now that he's nearing the end of career, he needs to work damn hard to ensure that he's left his legacy in the game. Jared Rivers was a great servant in his time at the club and I hope that he qualifies for life membership. However, I think he had done his dash at Melbourne. As a tall in defence, there was a log jam in place waiting to take his space. We know their names - Rivers would also struggle to become a forward with our new recruits. He made the right move seeking greener pastures elsewhere.

Agreed. I don't need to read an article about something or other and have to put up with the claim that a particular club is supposed to have forfeited games or, when its about a Kangaroos player for it to mention that he plays for "cash strapped North Melbourne" or in the case of Dane Swan that he's been "associated with drinking and drug use". As long as Wilson does this however, every time she gets mentioned on Demonland we should add an aside that it's been alleged that she's a pretty arrogant and average human being who claimed to have bonked an international golfer in her younger days". Anyway, I've digressed. Congratulations to Emma Quayle - you write beautifully and I enjoy your work.

She's all over the shop now. Gone is this mysterious vault with its sinister shadowy figures plotting the end of the world with secret handshakes. It's back now to a player who wouldn't even call it tanking but rather "experimenting" which is exactly what Cameron Schwab said in her August 2009 article here ‘‘Our club’s very much about list management and experimentation with the team. It has been for much of the season but suddenly it’s become tanking." I'm really starting to smell the stench of some rats. Does anyone think a genius like Brock would remember these words almost exactly three years later? I wonder if he was worded up and I wonder why the On the Couch panel looked so flummoxed at his words when the show's promo indicated that the MFC was going to get a spray from them during the program?

Thank you for asking. She's on life support.

Darker reaches of the Internet as opposed to the darker reaches of the mainstream media like the Age where being feral is de rigeur if you happen to be the chief football writer and you have the Melbourne Football Club in your sights. Feral indeed!!

This post demonstrates everything that's frustrating about this sordid episode. The club is, despite what the media is saying, not guilty of anything. It may or may not be found guilty in the future of something it may or may not be charged with but for the time being the presumption of innocence applies. And for your information, in the event that some court, tribunal or other body hears charges and makes a finding that the "weight of evidence is not sufficient to prove tanking" then it will be a finding of "not guilty". This I advise. My brief fee is £250. Thank you.

The supposition of her tweet is an offensive slur in which she's suggesting that Dean Bailey and all those who stated the whole vault thing was no more than a 30 second aside are liars. Whether she's the real deal or not she should now put up and shut up by revealing her sources and indicating who gave her the "evidence" she's relying on and what was the nature of that evidence. After all, she claims to have information that the MFC and no other club breached AFL rules and that two of its employees are going to lose their livelihoods as a result.

I wrote this elsewhere but it's equally appropriate here. The entire investigation appears to be unravelling day by day with these revelations of Gestapo tactics used to frighten witnesses into changing their stories. My experience is that its rare for everyone who attended a meeting 3½ years ago to have identical impressions and versions of what went on at those meetings. I wonder if the UN interrogator hasn't considered the possibilty that the ones who provided the "vault" scenario of threats about their jobs are the wrong accounts embellished perhaps because they are being told by disgruntled ex employees who have it in for the club? The original "vault" stories spoke of the so-called dismissal threats as the major focus of the meeting. Now we learn that it was just an aside, a small part of a larger meeting making it even more plausible that it was all a part of Connolly being facetious - that's the man's sense of humour. In any event, after reading this latest story I'm convinced that no witness should go into a meeting with an interrogator who conducts investigations using these tactics without a lawyer in tow. Notwithstanding that, the interrogation is probably tainted already and these revelations and the leaks emanating apparently from the AFL have made the entire investigation problematic.

The entire investigation appears to be unravelling day by day with these revelations of Gestapo tactics used to frighten witnesses into changing their stories. My experience is that its rare for everyone who attended a meeting 3½ years ago to have identical impressions and versions of what went on at those meetings. I wonder if the UN interrogator hasn't considered the possibilty that the ones who provided the "vault" scenario of threats about their jobs are the wrong accounts embellished perhaps because they are being told by disgruntled ex employees who have it in for the club? The original "vault" stories spoke of the so-called dismissal threats as the major focus of the meeting. Now we learn that it was just an aside, a small part of a larger meeting making it even more plausible that it was all a part of Connolly being facetious - that's the man's sense of humour. In any event, after reading this latest story I'm convinced that no witness should go into a meeting with an interrogator who conducts investigations using these tactics without a lawyer in tow. Notwithstanding that, the interrogation is probably tainted already and these revelations and the leaks emanating apparently from the AFL have made the entire investigation problematic.

Good for the Irish PM for sticking up for Irishmen the world around, especially on whose great uncle stood side by side with Michael Collins. What I'm looking for now is an inquiry into yellow journalism in the Australian sports media and why they so willfully seek to expose what one club did when so many others have done exactly the same thing and much worse? Why did the AFL's investigation into Tony Liberatore's comments about the Kreuzer Cup last just 15 minutes? Why did the AFL not investigate Richmond about Terry Wallace's comments about the way he coached his team against St. Kilda? Collingwood 2005 anyone? Lots more? Let's also investigate the media's campaign against Melbourne and Schwab. Who leaked? How did the lie told about Mark Neeld and Aaron Davey get to see the light of day? These things might have dragged us into war with an ally. We need answers.

The opening paragraph which, of itself suggests that Melbourne is guilty as charged and the faux pas about the year in which the alleged tanking game took place, attests not only to her shoddy journalism but also to the malicious intent behind her article. It was reported recently that Junior told the inquiry there was no tanking. So what is she saying now? That he wasn't telling the truth to investigators? Like many clubs before it, Melbourne came into a game late in a season where nothing could be gained by winning or losing and shuffled its team around. Call it what you liked but the experiment would have produced a winning result but for the intervention of a 50 metre kick after the siren from a Richmond player. Unlike the 2007 fiasco in round 22 which the AFL continues to choose to ignore when Carlton players missed simple shots from 20 metres out and Travis Johnstone was prolific in his possession gathering and went all day untagged. Give me a break!

If this kid can come good and start playing regular football at AFL level, he could revolutionise our ruck and midfield set up.

The fact that it happens in a different sport which operates under different rules is totally irrelevant. The practice is calculated to manipulate and undermine the rules which the AFL put into place. Yet when someone made the suggestion last year that GWS could buy back its own mini draft pick the AFL knocked it on the head immediately. It warned Melbourne and the clubs that finished below it that a deal worked out over Jack Viney might be considered draft tampering. Yet this most obvious piece of manipulation is not only disregarded but Port Adelaide gets handsomely rewarded. It smacks of the AFL giving one of its basket cases a handout for fear that they will collapse if they don't get the help.

I'm having some trouble understanding the proposition that Moloney and Byrnes cancel each other out for the purposes of determining compensation under free agency. Shannon Byrnes was born 7 April, 1984 and is 175 cm 77 kg and has played 108 senior games. For the past two seasons, he's spent most of his time in the Cats' VFL team. He managed only 5 senior games in 2011 (47 disposals) while he played only 4 in 2012 (40). Brent Moloney had a stellar season in 2011 winning the club best and fairest and polling 19 Brownlow medal votes. He was born 28 January, 1984 and is 182 cm 88 kg. He has played 145 senior games (22 with the Cats). He featured in all 22 games in 2011 (509 disposals) and in 2012 he played 15 senior games (256), a fair result seeing that he was considered well down on form. He played only 4 games in the VFL but three were at the end of the year when it was clear that he most likely wouldn't stay on at the club. Remember, his manager made it clear earlier in the season that Moloney would pursue his free agency options at the end of the year. By what measure does the author of this piece come to the conclusion that their value is at par? Melbourne must not accept such a result. It would be a complete injustice.

Anything happening with this player. I'd be interested to see what happens with him.

The door for Goldsack remains slightly ajar because this article says he is finalising the contract - Goldsack set to stay a Pie. It's an outside chance but I'd be making a play for him ahead of Dawes or Wellingham.

... and so the idiot wind blows ... He makes the AFL look stupid with its two month long unfinished investigation based on the say so of this brainless imbecile who was set up by some mischief making ratings seekers on a television programme. Nobody on that show bothered to ask him whether his new club paid him more than his old club and whether that (and not the "experimentation") had anything to do with him leaving. They didn't bother to ask why someone of lofty principles who doesn't like the philosophy of "experimentation" ended up at Carlton. Neither did the AFL which somehow ignored the revelations in the Brendan Fevola book about "experimentation". Yeah, we know they investigated that thoroughly too. How long did that investigation take? Do they take seriously allegations from someone who twitters on about giving someone's mother AIDS? Really ... Idiots, all of them!

What sort of Micky Mouse competition is this SANFL? No clash jumpers?

Sports News First are all over the Roberts story Dale Roberts aims high

No Ratts ... No Rocket ... You must be the favourite for the job.

IIRC, Luke Ball was able to nominate his remuneration and, as a result he nominated front loaded terms which had been pre-arranged with Collingwood. Ball made himself unavailable for interviews with other clubs and his medicals were also off limits to everyone but the Pies. Ultimately, this made Ball a less appealing prospect to clubs that might otherwise have drafted him. Since the AFL allowed this to happen, it was not regarded as tampering with the draft and, in the end, Collingwood was able to pick Ball up with a second round selection after several clubs passed on him. My question therefore is whether a first year player is able to nominate his terms and, if so, could Viney and Melbourne agree to a front loaded contract for two years which would make it prohibitive for GWS or GCS to select him?

My money's on a very much changed AA selection panel in 2013.