God it is nice to be on the other side of this conversation...

10 hours ago, RalphiusMaximus said:

It's Carlton.  They get special rules just for them.  Bonus Friday night games, priority picks, immunity from investigation even when one of their coaches comes out and says they tanked to get Kreuzer... 

I wouldn't be surprised if they wound up with the top three picks this year. 

I get so tired and worn out hoping that the AFL would at least try and attempt to be fair in their handling of the competition. 

They invent a reason for every baffling decision.

 

32 minutes ago, Redleg said:

I get so tired and worn out hoping that the AFL would at least try and attempt to be fair in their handling of the competition. 

They invent a reason for every baffling decision.

 

Their motivation is $$ no matter what they say publicly.

A strong Carlron is more $

11 minutes ago, Unleash Hell said:

Their motivation is $$ no matter what they say publicly.

A strong Carlron is more $

You're right and this is why we should use every tactic we can to move past Carlton while they're down.

Chances like this do not come along often.

I love how Neil skips over the fact we didn’t get a priority pick and links us giving up an AA fullback as the same thing. 

We did receive pick three but too much has been made of the pick that is received by the media. The AFL (correctly IMO) linked the pick to the clubs current draft position. This was to over compensate a club at the bottom, if the top echelon clubs continued to pick off their free agents. 

 

 

34 minutes ago, Unleash Hell said:

Their motivation is $$ no matter what they say publicly.

A strong Carlron is more $

What a lot of younger AFL Supporters don’t quite understand. 

There is a lot of money ? still connected to Carlscum, the AFL are well aware

They want Carlscum back up near the top. 

The treatment of Chris Judd tells everything. The guy eye goughed opponents and still won Brownlows

We have no reason to complain about other clubs getting a helping hand.

Without AFL assistance we may not even be around. 

21 minutes ago, hemingway said:

We have no reason to complain about other clubs getting a helping hand.

Without AFL assistance we may not even be around. 

thanks, dr who

20 minutes ago, hemingway said:

We have no reason to complain about other clubs getting a helping hand.

Without AFL assistance we may not even be around. 

Fair point, but I also think this is about some sort of appropriate justice - that is fairness in how the rules are applied.  No one came out and wanted us to get anything after 186, we were just pilloried as a terrible club with lots of problems.  Carlton lose by 109 to us, and all of a sudden everyone wants to give them a leg up.  

But I get it, they are the ‘mighty blues’.  If it is not paper Visy bags, then it needs to be something else.  They have recruited terribly, fed off the dregs of GWS (Grand Sale, Grand Sale!) and been shyte for ages.  I would only be happier if the bombers had the length of suffering that these buggers have.

Honestly, a few additional draft picks are probably not going to make a difference.  I think they need to boot SIlvagni and change some of their admin.  I think Bolton could be a good coach, and there is enough talent in just Cripps and the Curnow boys to build a team around.  They just need to get their heads out of their arses.

I think assistance is appropraite where necessary, but think they have the ability to carry a couple more seasons before they need to be rescued by the AFL.  I would think Gold Coast needs a lot more than these buggers in terms of assistance right now.

32 minutes ago, hemingway said:

We have no reason to complain about other clubs getting a helping hand.

Without AFL assistance we may not even be around. 

That’s true but I don’t believe it was the AFL’s nostalgic desire to "save the oldest football club in the world" but rather because they had signed a media deal to provide 9 games a week.

I think the only bit of decent timing we had over that time was not to have our near death experience in the last year of that deal. 

Pretty much the prlcks had no choice but to throw out the life bouy 

3 hours ago, buck_nekkid said:

Fair point, but I also think this is about some sort of appropriate justice - that is fairness in how the rules are applied.  No one came out and wanted us to get anything after 186, we were just pilloried as a terrible club with lots of problems.  Carlton lose by 109 to us, and all of a sudden everyone wants to give them a leg up.  

But I get it, they are the ‘mighty blues’.  If it is not paper Visy bags, then it needs to be something else.  They have recruited terribly, fed off the dregs of GWS (Grand Sale, Grand Sale!) and been shyte for ages.  I would only be happier if the bombers had the length of suffering that these buggers have.

Honestly, a few additional draft picks are probably not going to make a difference.  I think they need to boot SIlvagni and change some of their admin.  I think Bolton could be a good coach, and there is enough talent in just Cripps and the Curnow boys to build a team around.  They just need to get their heads out of their arses.

I think assistance is appropraite where necessary, but think they have the ability to carry a couple more seasons before they need to be rescued by the AFL.  I would think Gold Coast needs a lot more than these buggers in terms of assistance right now.

Some good points Buck.

My comment was a just a general philosophical view.

Part of the problem seems to be that AFL exercises its largesse along discretionary lines rather than established principles or rules,  giving rise to argument over fairness etc. . 

3 hours ago, FarNorthernD said:

That’s true but I don’t believe it was the AFL’s nostalgic desire to "save the oldest football club in the world" but rather because they had signed a media deal to provide 9 games a week.

I think the only bit of decent timing we had over that time was not to have our near death experience in the last year of that deal. 

Pretty much the prlcks had no choice but to throw out the life bouy 

harsh but probably true.

The great era of Dominance for the MFC happened before TV ? Coverage. 

If we had claimed Flags in the 70’s we would be in a much better bargaining position. 

This current surge of form must be sustained, we can overtake the Carlscum’s and Essendrugs, if we keep winning. 

Hard Work yes, but nothing this club can’t do

28 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

The great era of Dominance for the MFC happened before TV ? Coverage. 

If we had claimed Flags in the 70’s we would be in a much better bargaining position. 

This current surge of form must be sustained, we can overtake the Carlscum’s and Essendrugs, if we keep winning. 

Hard Work yes, but nothing this club can’t do

not just win... we need to lobby the AFL (or is that nobble the AFL) so that we are seen as the power club to replace Carlton.

From the time of Dick Pratt and the "Saturday Takeover Cub" mentioned more than once by the NCSC (the predecessor to ASIC) Carlton have had the reputation of being a club for the money movers. Time to convince the AFL that those days are over.

BTW I had forgotten that Fitzpatrick's fund Hastings were one of those that took a loss on Docklands. Caro mentioned it today on 3AW.

23 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

not just win... we need to lobby the AFL (or is that nobble the AFL) so that we are seen as the power club to replace Carlton.

From the time of Dick Pratt and the "Saturday Takeover Cub" mentioned more than once by the NCSC (the predecessor to ASIC) Carlton have had the reputation of being a club for the money movers. Time to convince the AFL that those days are over.

BTW I had forgotten that Fitzpatrick's fund Hastings were one of those that took a loss on Docklands. Caro mentioned it today on 3AW.

Winning is the only way. All the other bits will follow

45 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

not just win... we need to lobby the AFL (or is that nobble the AFL) so that we are seen as the power club to replace Carlton.

From the time of Dick Pratt and the "Saturday Takeover Cub" mentioned more than once by the NCSC (the predecessor to ASIC) Carlton have had the reputation of being a club for the money movers. Time to convince the AFL that those days are over.

BTW I had forgotten that Fitzpatrick's fund Hastings were one of those that took a loss on Docklands. Caro mentioned it today on 3AW.

 

21 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Winning is the only way. All the other bits will follow

Along with finals appearances.  Then increased member base.  Need to overtake the Blues before the AFL will take any notice.  They are still 10,000 ahead.  As yoy say SW, must keep winning

10 hours ago, Danelska said:

God it is nice to be on the other side of this conversation...

Isn’t it though.

This topic created some very heated debate around here over the years. Looking back it was entertaining in a weird kind of way, but thank god those days are behind us.

Strange how the Bluze only lost by 28 points at that AFL advantaged ground tonight !

23 hours ago, FireInTheBelly said:

I thought clubs were supposed to 'earn' prime time games. With the Blues getting all these Friday night spots surely they aren't going too bad?

Let's look at this Friday nights game, only 38000 for a collingwood game would not have rated how many would there have been as against Adelaide last Friday? Magpies, Carlton even saints all have more Friday night games then as how does that happen were higher up the ladder then them all last year and now, magpies I can understand Carlton also, but [censored] saints ? Why does the saints have more???????

14 hours ago, hemingway said:

We have no reason to complain about other clubs getting a helping hand.

Without AFL assistance we may not even be around. 

Bull we would still be around the AFL gave us [censored]  all what a extra 1.4 mill other teams got way more then that, example port got a extra 9 mill over 3 years. The MCC has done much more then the AFL they give us a extra mill every year being part of the MCC banner, and it was not PJ who got us back together with the MCC, it was CS And the thing about buddy to Sydney the hawks could have done what the crows did with danger, and Sydney would have had to give the hawks more picks. PJ has been a good CEO but we still had to pay him, there are a number of CEO that would have done a good job, do you know even Cameron shwab, was asked to go back to us BY the AFL. No they did not do much at all it's over exaggerated how much they did. Do you work for the AFL? we won 10 games over 3 years  and got no PP, that now has to be the bench mark for a. PP

On 5/26/2018 at 4:13 AM, olisik said:

Murphy will leave as a FA and they will get band 1 compensation giving them pick 2 anyway. 

Which is what happened with us and Frawley. Gil will make sure Carlton is looked after in the FA department.

23 hours ago, Sir Why You Little said:

What a lot of younger AFL Supporters don’t quite understand. 

There is a lot of money ? still connected to Carlscum, the AFL are well aware

They want Carlscum back up near the top. 

The treatment of Chris Judd tells everything. The guy eye goughed opponents and still won Brownlows

To be fair to the AFL, Judd won his Carlton Brownlow despite only elbowing Pavlich in the face.

Just now, Tony Tea said:

To be fair to the AFL, Judd won his Carlton Brownlow despite only elbowing Pavlich in the face.

Yes, sorry for my oversight Tony!!!

Injuries to key players, a bevvy of recent top 10 picks, and a history of blatant tanking. Ridiculous that anyone might ask for a PP for them.

On 5/26/2018 at 1:04 PM, hemingway said:

We have no reason to complain about other clubs getting a helping hand.

Without AFL assistance we may not even be around. 

Without AFL MFC was gawnnnnnnn - shut the doors last to leave the building to switch the lights off forever.