Yesterday I jumped on to the mfc website - and found myself greeted by a smiling Russell Robertson. Now I didn't think it was appropriate at this stage of the season to feature a mugshot of a player who is no longer on the list - but Robbo is a much loved life member who is now playing in the country- so I ignored it

The Stats Central section of the club site features those who were among the stats in the prior year..... and so it was that today I found myself looking at the smiling face of a Carlton player!I know the club websites are based on a standard AFL design, but why haven't we asked the design to be modified so that the stats table doesn't trigger photos of blokes who walk out to another club? Yes this morning I found myself greeted by the self satisfied grin of B McLean esq.

I wonder if Carlton supporters are still looking at photos of Fev?

This is a new season. Melbourne's No 5 is Jordan Gysberts - get his photo up their instead. Brock has moved on - so should our internet portal.

It's the not the club, the AFL does it

On the live stats the other night McLean still had his Melbourne jumper on

ahha i just went on Melbourne site then and saw robbos face, gave me a weird feeling.

Probably slightly 'nit-picking' given the context in which they are shown, but I understand what you mean Hoopla. I can live with it until the real action starts in a few weeks, by which time I expect the AFL will have moved on from showing last year's stats.

I don't think it is nit-picking at all. it is absurd that a bloke who tuirned his back on our club is still listed. It is absurd that we cannot get training times on in an accurate and timely fashion. Robbo is retired.

The club, as with 14 other clubs, made a grave error in handing over their main shopfront (website) to BigPond. Imagine if Myer sub-contracted their Christmas window to Apple, and said "you work out how our shiop should look this year".

The MFC rightly states that they do not control content and find it hard to make changes. That is because we handed over control. It is a stupid thing for a business to do, especially for a business as dynamic, social and emotion-driven as a football club. Essendon was the only club to maintain control over their website, and kudos to them for that. I do not know how long the MFC is tied to this agreement, but if I were boss, I would be getting out as quick as possible.

Probably slightly 'nit-picking' given the context in which they are shown, but I understand what you mean Hoopla. I can live with it until the real action starts in a few weeks, by which time I expect the AFL will have moved on from showing last year's stats.

It's the not the club, the AFL does it

On the live stats the other night McLean still had his Melbourne jumper on

I do not believe you are correct- Telstra Bigpond do it on behalf of many clubs..however I have had a [censored] about it for years, they can upgrade many sections themselves- FACT.

I believe the MFC, indeed all bar Dons, receive ~200k+ per year (?) for the rights. There would also be reduced costs.

I do not believe you are correct- Telstra Bigpond do it on behalf of many clubs..however I have had a [censored] about it for years, they can upgrade many sections themselves- FACT.

You said the word "Telstra Big Pond" that says it all. Useless organization, sad because they were once the best in the world.

Probably slightly 'nit-picking' given the context in which they are shown, but I understand what you mean Hoopla.

I hesitated before raising the matter - I wondered if I was nit-picking..... and then I thought 'what the heck - Brock McLean has been with another club for 5 months now' .... it is absurd that he still features on our site.

The website is the face of our club - and we shouldn't allow any outsourcing arrangement to compromise the image it portrays.The fact that it features a Carlton player makes the club look lazy and inefficient

Probably slightly 'nit-picking' given the context in which they are shown, but I understand what you mean Hoopla.

I hesitated before raising the matter - I wondered if I was nit-picking..... and then I thought 'what the heck - Brock McLean has been with another club for 5 months now' .... it is absurd that he still features on our site.

The website is the face of our club - and we shouldn't allow any outsourcing arrangement to compromise the image it portrays.The fact that it features a Carlton player makes the club look lazy and inefficient

Can't disagree with that hoopla, it could be interpreted that way.

I noticed that yesterday too. But just got on now and saw Matty Warnock in a hat instead. Maybe they read and did move on?

I don't want to look at Brock's face either, but Gysberts didn't get many touches for us last year, you'd think it would change when a ball is bounced in anger. Like him or not Robbo is part of the rich heritage we pride ourselves and sell our selves on.

What I find more offensive is the Company Line peddled by the AFL that we have to read and support, give us back our balls, give us our own damn website and our own voice.

Edited March 4, 201015 yr by The Man in Tweed

The club, as with 14 other clubs, made a grave error in handing over their main shopfront (website) to BigPond. Imagine if Myer sub-contracted their Christmas window to Apple, and said "you work out how our shiop should look this year".

The MFC rightly states that they do not control content and find it hard to make changes.

Yes, it's a ridiculous situation .... but obviously, they need the money. I would certainly contact the club though, to let them know of your feelings, as the current situation is mediocre at best. Ironically enough, for their money, Bigpond are getting nothing, as it only makes them look ... well, like what they are. Out of touch, out of date, and overall, just not up to it.

As an aside, maybe they SHOULD hand it over to Apple ... it would look better, it would at least work with a Mac (which it doesn't now ... no video content at all).

B

You said the word "Telstra Big Pond" that says it all. Useless organization, sad because they were once the best in the world.

Unfortunately (or fortunately for those who want to save money), that's what competition has done in this new world that's emerging. Once upon a time Telstra were the big boys in town with very little competition. Pride was taken in customer service but costs were high. It's the same in the aviation industry with qantas or American Airlines (which is an absolute disaster nowadays, but used to offer top notch service in the 70's and 80's). Now that there are multiple budget alternatives, the old school companies that used to offer great service have had to cut costs to compete and maintain their share of the market. This means cutting costs on customer service.

Telstra were given the contract years ago. Only Essendon were smart enough to work out the marketing opportunities of the web, and so control their own site.

The contract specifies enormous fees payable to Telstra if anything is changed. Their vanilla product means that 15 club sites all look the same. I think Collingwood has spent a lot trying to turn theirs into something slightly different, but it cost!

Telstra only allow a fixed amount of upload changes without cost. So if the club wants to put up new information, change the banner etc it can only do so within these limits.

And( and this is the real problem) 14 other clubs are trying to do the same thing!! It is doubtful that Telstra provide sufficient data entry people to do the job as there is no additional income to them for this activity. So the work piles up, and the clubs have to prioritise what they need up immediately.

Robbo's face has probably been at the bottom of that pile for months.

Exactly. It was so short-sighted and amateur of all other clubs to take the up-front money and lose proprietary rights over the biggest marketing opportunity there is.

I work for a membership organisation, and it would be a proposterous deriliction of our duty and goals to lose control of the best, most visible and dynamic tool to communicate with the members and world at large.

Telstra were given the contract years ago. Only Essendon were smart enough to work out the marketing opportunities of the web, and so control their own site.

The contract specifies enormous fees payable to Telstra if anything is changed. Their vanilla product means that 15 club sites all look the same. I think Collingwood has spent a lot trying to turn theirs into something slightly different, but it cost!

Telstra only allow a fixed amount of upload changes without cost. So if the club wants to put up new information, change the banner etc it can only do so within these limits.

And( and this is the real problem) 14 other clubs are trying to do the same thing!! It is doubtful that Telstra provide sufficient data entry people to do the job as there is no additional income to them for this activity. So the work piles up, and the clubs have to prioritise what they need up immediately.

Robbo's face has probably been at the bottom of that pile for months.

Telstra were given the contract years ago. Only Essendon were smart enough to work out the marketing opportunities of the web, and so control their own site.

GOTO, are you aware of when the contract may finish ? Just out of interest.

GOTO, are you aware of when the contract may finish ? Just out of interest.

It is my understanding we signed-or the AFL signed up 3 years ago-I believe for a 5 year contract. However as the AFL has told me- the clubs can or organise change anytime. I know for a fact that alot of things that are very much changable we can do ourselves. It s called communication-- either Melbournefc with us or the MFC Communications dept with Bigpond.Therefore management of communication is needed.We will never ever be in a position to do all ourselves due to the sponsorship available.

Edited March 5, 201015 yr by jayceebee31

Exactly. It was so short-sighted and amateur of all other clubs to take the up-front money and lose proprietary rights over the biggest marketing opportunity there is.

I work for a membership organisation, and it would be a proposterous deriliction of our duty and goals to lose control of the best, most visible and dynamic tool to communicate with the members and world at large.

Oh please. Spare us your 'professional' indignance. You can't really believe that a footy Club should've turned down a quarter mil per year (in a deal that the AFL leaned heavily on the Clubs to take) at a time when they were $5mil+ in the hole because it was just vital we were able to update training session timetables on an up-to-the minute basis.