Ruckus wrote:
Given the state Carlton were in, and the multitude of things also on Fitzpatrick's plate at the time, the timing simply wasn't right for either party.
I'm well aware that several club presidents walk in similar shoes, but the task of 'rebuilding' Carlton required serious time commitment, and this was a commitment I believe Collo's day-to-day Telstra Dome duties permitted (in relative terms). We didn't want or need a figurehead president, or one who simply rallied the troops and gathered together the board to meet and make decisions periodically. Collo's role was very hands-on and involved, from everything we've been lead to believe, and there's nothing to indicate Fitzpatrick was available to make anything like that sort of commitment. Nor would he have wanted to do a half-arsed job of things, I suspect.
Having said all that, Fitzpatrick is still relatively young, and there's been nothing to suggest that any bridges have been burnt, doors closed etc.
No bridges burnt, doors closed but he would never take on something like Carlton because he doesnt want to be associated with an entity that stinks in the corporate world.
Wouldnt do the hard yards for us because his reputation is more important to him.
Fitzy will never jump on board to turn the club around. He has been asked by a heap of people and is not interested.
Nothing to do with what was on his plate.
More to do with his image... taking on Carlton means you probably wont come out smelling of roses.
Kudos to the person who did take on the job.
Thats why all this anti Collins rubbish is just that... noone wanted it and noone wants it except maybe Smorgan who in my opinion has been riding on Collos coat tails