So the wrath of the football world is being felt by the West Coast Eagles over their handling of Ben Cousins and rightly so - the Eagles have failed to curb their rock star and the chickens are coming home to roost.

But if the Eagles have been a party to bad behaviour by allowing Benny to put the game into disrepute, what about the Blues who have a history of leaders involved with rorting the system? Drug taking by individual players is certainly bad news for football but doesn't it also bring the game into disrepute if a club's leader is involved in large scale rorting of the system in the business world? This is especially so since good corporate governance is so vital to the orderly conduct of our football competition.

Should the AFL look at taking away Carlton's draft picks?

Not this time, due to pratt doing this well before joining the blues and the fact that it has nothing to do with carltank, but he should not be able to be the president as he is no longer a trusted business member.

Not this time, due to pratt doing this well before joining the blues and the fact that it has nothing to do with carltank, but he should not be able to be the president as he is no longer a trusted business member.

Greg Swann is running that club on his own. The board are a rubber stamp. Pratt may now walk away given he set them up with Swann, Ratten, Judd, Kreuzer and a nice donation, which will probably continue.

Greg Swann is running that club on his own. The board are a rubber stamp. Pratt may now walk away given he set them up with Swann, Ratten, Judd, Kreuzer and a nice donation, which will probably continue.

Correct.

Anyway Carlton have had a fine and long history of Club Presidents getting in strife with the law......

George Harris

Ian Rice

John Elliott and now

Dick Pratt.

Its clear Ian Collins and Graeme Smorgon were never going to succeed without a comparable record.

You make an interesting point Rumpole - to be consistent Carlton need to be cautioned first before being penalised. But it's difficult to see how Pratt can remain as President without bringing the AFL into disrepute.

if pratt is found guilty and is no longer allowed to be a business director etc does that mean he has to step down from the carlton job? and if he loses visy, does judd lose his money?

if pratt is found guilty and is no longer allowed to be a business director etc does that mean he has to step down from the carlton job? and if he loses visy, does judd lose his money?

Pratt owns Visy. So Judd should be safe on that score and presumably have a contract to cover his position.

if pratt is found guilty and is no longer allowed to be a business director etc does that mean he has to step down from the carlton job? and if he loses visy, does judd lose his money?

You'd think at the very least in concordance with past musings the AFL would call upon Carlton to justify how Pratt could remain as a board member.

Doubt they will though !! lol >>> AFL ..... Absolutely F'n Laughable !!

if pratt is found guilty and is no longer allowed to be a business director etc does that mean he has to step down from the carlton job? and if he loses visy, does judd lose his money?

I don't think cartel price fixing is a criminal matter under the Trade Practices Act. It's a fine on corporations for breaching the provisions of the Act. Therefore I also don't think it can lead to disqualification as a company director ... because it's neither a criminal offence (for example fraud) nor an offence against the Companies Act (for example trading while insolvent or improper use of one's position).

I'm sure the barristers will correct me if I'm wrong.

I don't think cartel price fixing is a criminal matter under the Trade Practices Act. It's a fine on corporations for breaching the provisions of the Act. Therefore I also don't think it can lead to disqualification as a company director ... because it's neither a criminal offence (for example fraud) nor an offence against the Companies Act (for example trading while insolvent or improper use of one's position).

Correct. And there will be more to come through a Class civil action being prepared by customers of AmcOr and Visy who are looking for, some say, another $200M in compensation which would start now the fines are out of the way.

In the U.S. you get jail for this. Only fines over here. Big problems trying to get the Pollies to enact the appropriate laws and penalities.

...

...

thanks guys, that was what i was trying to clear up.

and rhino for the owns visy thing...carlton might be lucky that they get off here unscathed...

OH, AND A QUESTION ON NOTICE ABOUT DICKY

BARRIE CASSIDY: Just one final question. Dick Pratt, guilty of price fixing on a massive scale. Is he a fit and proper person to remain President of the Carlton Football Club.

PETER COSTELLO: Look, that's a matter for the Carlton Football Club.

BARRIE CASSIDY: Hang on, why is it? When you say that it's a matter for ... the government has an interest in what players, whether they ought to be suspended for smoking marijuana, but for a president it's a matter are for the club?

PETER COSTELLO: Well, the club elects its president, they can elect who they like.

BARRIE CASSIDY: Clubs choose their players.

PETER COSTELLO: But if you want my view on this episode, fixing prices is against the law. Nobody should do it. Our ACCC (Australian Competition and Consumer Commission) has successfully investigated it. It's been the most successful investigation of a cartel ever. It's a serious contravention of the Act. It will go to the court. The ACCC has recommended an extremely large fine, which could well be the largest fine in Australian history and the court ought to decide what the fine should be.

Haha, nice question.

Should the AFL look at taking away Carlton's draft picks?

As much as it would be nice it's laughable to suggest that a football club should be sanctioned for the criminal behaviour of it's President. Carlton have done nothing wrong (in relation to price fixing).

Should Pratt be President of a footy club? Poker machine gaming license aside, that is a question for Carlton and the AFL and the answer is clearly "no".

But the AFL have dropped the ball in recent times. They were party to letting Cousins play football again this year and are now beating their chest whilst holding WC responsible. What rot. It was as much the AFL's decision as WC. And now they should act against Carlton to remove Pratt as President but won't. They want his money at Carlton because whilst Pratt provides it they won't have to.

Added to this is the fact that the AFL have a lawbreaker who is President of a club that tanked games to gain an advantage in the draft.

Carltons punishment? Judd, Kreuzer and a fist full of dollars.

Responsible? The AFL.

thanks guys, that was what i was trying to clear up.

and rhino for the owns visy thing...carlton might be lucky that they get off here unscathed...

How does the criminal behaviour of its President in running a cartel in the paper industry impact on the the operations of Carlton?

If Pratt is guilty then he should step down as President. However, I understand that the Club is effectively run by others and Pratt is a financial contributor and titular role holder.

I dont see Pratt stepping down as President as being a long term worry for Carlton.

Fan has put together a fantastic post on Carlton and the AFL.

quote name='Maurie Lithen'

Maurie, wasn't Pratt deeply involved in the collapse of "Occidental" and "Regal" Life companies in the early nineties? Many people lost their life savings.

Isn't there still some legal investigation,(and possible conviction of Pratt) going through the slow legal process. Or has that been settled?

On a lighter note....... did you hear that Pratt's not worried about the $36m. fine? He can get it back by sueing his wife's plastic surgeon!

I'm sure Mike Fitzpatrick will deal with Richard Pratt's suitability to be Carlton president in a fair and just manner.

quote name='Maurie Lithen'

Maurie, wasn't Pratt deeply involved in the collapse of "Occidental" and "Regal" Life companies in the early nineties? Many people lost their life savings.

Isn't there still some legal investigation,(and possible conviction of Pratt) going through the slow legal process. Or has that been settled?

On a lighter note....... did you hear that Pratt's not worried about the $36m. fine? He can get it back by sueing his wife's plastic surgeon!

I think you will find that Pratt owned Battery Group that was subject to an infamous fraud in the transaction to sell the companies. As detailed below there were limited losses to investors. Although a Battery Group director, I am not sure Pratt was "deeply involved" in its collapse.

This collapse happen 16 years ago and there is no current litigation outstanding. Nor is Pratt subject to any convictions relating to it. The situations that brought the collapse have lead to changes in life insurance prudential supervision and legislation.

Mre info here: http://fsi.treasury.gov.au/content/downloads/suppsubs/66.doc

I'm sure Mike Fitzpatrick will deal with Richard Pratt's suitability to be Carlton president in a fair and just manner.

The Age Real Footy this morning:

Probe puts Pratt's presidency in doubt

The apparent issue is the Victorian Gambling Regulation Act and an application by Pratt. Carlton has about 100 poker machines.

I think you will find that Pratt owned Battery Group that was subject to an infamous fraud in the transaction to sell the companies. As detailed below there were limited losses to investors. Although a Battery Group director, I am not sure Pratt was "deeply involved" in its collapse.

This collapse happen 16 years ago and there is no current litigation outstanding. Nor is Pratt subject to any convictions relating to it. The situations that brought the collapse have lead to changes in life insurance prudential supervision and legislation.

Mre info here: http://fsi.treasury.gov.au/content/downloads/suppsubs/66.doc

Thanks Rhino, I searched unsuccessfully for such info on the web.

When people lose life savings(as with Pyramid and these companies), the victims do not regard the matter as trivial, and do not forget the role of directors even loosely associated with their losses.

I'm interested that Pratt has priors, which have been swept under the carpet.

Thanks Rhino, I searched unsuccessfully for such info on the web.

When people lose life savings(as with Pyramid and these companies), the victims do not regard the matter as trivial, and do not forget the role of directors even loosely associated with their losses.

I'm interested that Pratt has priors, which have been swept under the carpet.

Having had professional experience cleaning up a financial disaster I know that too well.

Unfortunately people like Pratt do not necessarily get to the top without a few skeletons.

While he was not formally charged with anything regarding that matter, the levels of corporate governance, regulatory requirements and Insurance law would challenge those past behaviours on today's standards. If so, he would not be the first President caught up in these matters. MFC had one of its own like that who blonked a bit of money in the Club and was misguidedly labelled a "saviour".