royal parade wrote:
No surprise, or surprises here from Smith. Reckons the AFL didn't initiate action because of Pratt and calls him the Price Fixer a couple of times again.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/st ... 83,00.html
Ah Fatprick's laughable attempts at journalism never cease to entertain me.
1. if he had any sort of journalistic integrity he would have finished the sentence "former brownlow medallist with the Bulldogs" with "who was recently let go by Carlton", so that everyone can make up their own mind about where Libba's credibility stands.
2. in Roos' case, four seperate people overheard Roos instruct a player to not score. That is a specific allegation worthy of investigation. Not worthy of stringing him up over given it was the pre-season and all, but worthy of having a chat to him about.
3. Libba's comments were nothing like the Roos case. They were a heap of unstablitated blubbering what basically amounted to "my vibe was that Carlton tanked the end of last season". And he had to be lead by the journalist to get that much out. News flash, half the football world has that vibe already. You don't have to be an ex-assitant coach of Carlton to arrive at that conclusion. But it's not an allegation.
4. The AFL, quite rightly, asked Libba to make a proper evidence-based allegation or flower off and stop wasting everyone's time.
5. If the same had happened in Roos' case ie, someone had come out and said "I think the Swans tanked their preseason game against the Hawks. I never heard Roos instruct this, and I have no evidence that the players tried to lose, it's just this "feeling" I have" .... then the AFL would have, presumably, given the non-allegation as short as shrift as it gave Libba's comments.
If Libba's comments had been about, say, Essendon*, and didn't validate his own prejudices, Fatprick would be pointing all of the above out I'm sure. Moron.