Roos under investigation (-> Cleared)

[CureTheSane]

I reckon, just for fun, that the club should put out a message "is there a lawyer in the house who would take on a defamation case gratis" a civil cases against Andy & Adri personally, instead of them hiding behind the AFL facade - I'd like to see that. To see the Statements of claim served on those two would be priceless - the looks on their faces "oh @@@@, we have pushed Roos and the Swans too far this time"! ok its just my sick mind - But I hope that one day someone will take them both to the cleaners.

As far as I am concerned, the AFL and those who work for it were completely justified in investigating the events.

You would expect nothing less from a well run organisation.

Ross correctly got off and hopefully learnt a lesson.
Cases against the AFL or individuals for whatever reason would never be considered because there would be no hope whatsoever for a win.
Why?
Because investigation was justified.

This thread should probably be in the paranoia section of RWO

[Wardy]

As far as I am concerned, the AFL and those who work for it were completely justified in investigating the events.

You would expect nothing less from a well run organisation.

Ross correctly got off and hopefully learnt a lesson.
Cases against the AFL or individuals for whatever reason would never be considered because there would be no hope whatsoever for a win.
Why?
Because investigation was justified.

This thread should probably be in the paranoia section of RWO

Did you not read the bit that said "just for fun?" perhaps I should have put the "wink" thing in.

[Legs Akimbo]

As far as I am concerned, the AFL and those who work for it were completely justified in investigating the events.

You would expect nothing less from a well run organisation.

Ross correctly got off and hopefully learnt a lesson.
Cases against the AFL or individuals for whatever reason would never be considered because there would be no hope whatsoever for a win.
Why?
Because investigation was justified.

This thread should probably be in the paranoia section of RWO

What lesson? To keep his mouth shut about something everyone can see but which Andy doesn't anyone to talk about?

The bigger point is that the basic incompetency of AFL management, which created this farcical situation in the first place. Introducing a different set of rules for pre-season competition and allowing betting on these games, introduces clear conflict of interest for coaches.

Why was there no investigation of Carlton in the season proper? Why no investigations into half the other teams in this so called 'competition' who clearly, deliberately, performed below par? Paul Roos cracks a joke and they proceed to clock up tens of thousands in legal fees investigating him. What exactly, were they investigating?

It comes down to this. Allowing gambling on a meaningless and trivial competition shows poor management insight. Such a situation is rife for corruption. Betting scandals on one day cricket comes to mind.

Someone should investigate Demetriou for shoddy management and his fitness to act in the role of a company executive. Someone should scrutinise the board and increase their accountability.

This whole episode is more evidence that the AFL has stopped regarding footy as part of the fabric of life for fans and the community and simply as a commodity and product, where the goal is revenue and profit. Their principals and standards are now questionnable. They have lost their way.

[TheGrimReaper]

What lesson? To keep his mouth shut about something everyone can see but which Andy doesn't anyone to talk about?

The bigger point is that the basic incompetency of AFL management, which created this farcical situation in the first place. Introducing a different set of rules for pre-season competition and allowing betting on these games, introduces clear conflict of interest for coaches.

Why was there no investigation of Carlton in the season proper? Why no investigations into half the other teams in this so called 'competition' who clearly, deliberately, performed below par? Paul Roos cracks a joke and they proceed to clock up tens of thousands in legal fees investigating him. What exactly, were they investigating?

It comes down to this. Allowing gambling on a meaningless and trivial competition shows poor management insight. Such a situation is rife for corruption. Betting scandals on one day cricket comes to mind.

Someone should investigate Demetriou for shoddy management and his fitness to act in the role of a company executive. Someone should scrutinise the board and increase their accountability.

This whole episode is more evidence that the AFL has stopped regarding footy as part of the fabric of life for fans and the community and simply as a commodity and product, where the goal is revenue and profit. Their principals and standards are now questionnable. They have lost their way.

There's a couple of questions I asked in my article, and got blasted by Cure the Sane.

In fact, he questioned my authenticity as a Swans supporter.

[AnnieH]

Someone should investigate the Fat Controller's 80% pay-rise (over two years).

[Lucky Knickers]

What the AFL got wrong was not investigating the evidence before making the charge - if they had done the investigation with all the witnesses and viewed the footage I think there may have been a different decision than the one to shoot off the please explain letter formally to the club. By the Swans responding via affadavit, this forced the AFL's hand into formalising the investigation and have made them look very silly.

I still believe the AFL was right to investigate but what a poor effort - talk about shooting first and asking questions later.

[CureTheSane]

There's a couple of questions I asked in my article, and got blasted by Cure the Sane.

In fact, he questioned my authenticity as a Swans supporter.

Uh-huh.

You mean here Roosgate: My view on the BS!!! - RedAndWhiteOnline.com Messageboard

where I stated that I did not question your authenticity as a Swans supporter.

You got blasted?
Sure, I gave my opinion, which you couldn't handle and then the 'article' sunk into oblivion.

I had no problems with you, but if you're going to PURPOSEFULLY misstate what I said, even after I had clarified it, then I have no time for you.
And you will surely lose whatever credibility you had around here.

[AnnieH]

Credibility???

At RWO????

[CureTheSane]

What the AFL got wrong was not investigating the evidence before making the charge - if they had done the investigation with all the witnesses and viewed the footage I think there may have been a different decision than the one to shoot off the please explain letter formally to the club. By the Swans responding via affadavit, this forced the AFL's hand into formalising the investigation and have made them look very silly.

I still believe the AFL was right to investigate but what a poor effort - talk about shooting first and asking questions later.

I agree, but I'd suggest the AFL was making a very strong point with this whole saga.

They won't tolerate ANYTHING that could be considered inappropriate in this area.
And I think that as a whole, that stance is the right one.
Sure it was our coach that became the 'test case'. Had to be someone.

[CureTheSane]

Did you not read the bit that said "just for fun?" perhaps I should have put the "wink" thing in.

Fair enough.
Sorry.

[TheGrimReaper]

Uh-huh.

You mean here Roosgate: My view on the BS!!! - RedAndWhiteOnline.com Messageboard

where I stated that I did not question your authenticity as a Swans supporter.

You got blasted?
Sure, I gave my opinion, which you couldn't handle and then the 'article' sunk into oblivion.

I had no problems with you, but if you're going to PURPOSEFULLY misstate what I said, even after I had clarified it, then I have no time for you.
And you will surely lose whatever credibility you had around here.

You asked me to prove it, when i said I was a true supporter.

Isn't that questioning my authenticity? When you ask me to prove I was a true Swans supporter, to me, that is questioning my authenicity.

You're the one that's lost creditibility defending the scum that is the AFL and Carlton.

Of course Carlton would never cheat, they're innocent. Just ask John Elliott.

The more you defend Carlton and the AFL, the more you look like an IDIOT!!!

[CureTheSane]

What lesson? To keep his mouth shut about something everyone can see but which Andy doesn't anyone to talk about?

The bigger point is that the basic incompetency of AFL management, which created this farcical situation in the first place. Introducing a different set of rules for pre-season competition and allowing betting on these games, introduces clear conflict of interest for coaches.

Why was there no investigation of Carlton in the season proper? Why no investigations into half the other teams in this so called 'competition' who clearly, deliberately, performed below par? Paul Roos cracks a joke and they proceed to clock up tens of thousands in legal fees investigating him. What exactly, were they investigating?

It comes down to this. Allowing gambling on a meaningless and trivial competition shows poor management insight. Such a situation is rife for corruption. Betting scandals on one day cricket comes to mind.

Someone should investigate Demetriou for shoddy management and his fitness to act in the role of a company executive. Someone should scrutinise the board and increase their accountability.

This whole episode is more evidence that the AFL has stopped regarding footy as part of the fabric of life for fans and the community and simply as a commodity and product, where the goal is revenue and profit. Their principals and standards are now questionnable. They have lost their way.

I'll come back to that.
Gotta go feed birds up in the hills with my family

[TheGrimReaper]

I agree, but I'd suggest the AFL was making a very strong point with this whole saga.

They won't tolerate ANYTHING that could be considered inappropriate in this area.
And I think that as a whole, that stance is the right one.
Sure it was our coach that became the 'test case'. Had to be someone.

They won't @@@@ing tolerate anything except for Carlton's tanking during the season's proper, for which you deny ever happens.

And yet convinced that Roos, throwed a game in the NAB Cup.

[connolly]

I agree, but I'd suggest the AFL was making a very strong point with this whole saga.

They won't tolerate ANYTHING that could be considered inappropriate in this area.
And I think that as a whole, that stance is the right one.
Sure it was our coach that became the 'test case'. Had to be someone.

But not just anyone. And why not Carlton in the last six matches of 2007 when they lost from winning positions they held going into the last quarter in four of those matches. That pattern of losing needs investigation. But sorry the oily one has already declared that clubs don't tank for draft advantages. Must be all ridgy didge

[Legs Akimbo]

I'll come back to that.
Gotta go feed birds up in the hills with my family

Sounds nice. Too hot here to do that. Might have to crack a VB soon though.

The potential for abuse and corruption exists because the AFL created and has now nurtured the conditions for it.

I find it discomforting that there is an investigation when someone TALKS. Everything is okay, as long as the manipulations of game outcomes (that is what it is) is not discussed in the open.

What would have happened if Roos had come out in advance and boldly stated 'we do not wish to win this match'? Would he have been fined? I think he would have been in deep @@@@. Yet, he can play 8 year old kids and tell them to run in circiles playing kick to kick and that's okay as long as he doesn't SAY what his actions scream to the world. Meanwhile, people are betting money on the outcomes of these games.

This is an appalling state of affairs and very unhealthy for the competition. Tennis and cricket are two sports that have suffered damage recently because administrators turned a blind eye. In the case of the AFL, it is worse than that. Its management have actually sowed the seeds of the disaster themselves.