ALP approach Mike Fitzpatrick

Ruckus · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 3:17 pm **Posts:** 333

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.

frank dardew · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 12:38 pm **Posts:** 7640

legs 11 and the pressures of the corporate world are nothing compared to living under the regime of SWMBO

Synbad · **Posted:** Tue Aug 16, 2005 4:25 pm

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

Sydney Blue · **Posted:** Tue Aug 16, 2005 4:43 pm

Synbad wrote:

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

Jack wanted it :shock:

Synbad · **Posted:** Tue Aug 16, 2005 4:50 pm

Jack had nothing else...

If i hear anymore people complaining about Collo ill throw up..

IF people dont like him i really dont understand why they just dont go out and find somebody else that can do the job.....

(That was aimed at you in particular Surrey)

I dont think Collo is perfect to do the job in EVERY sense of the world either.. he isnt charismatic to attract sponsors and he is more of a bean counter .. BUT!!!... if Mr Mike 'charismatic Fitzpatrick or noone else wahts to do the job because they have more pressing appointments with fate than the Carlton Football Club at a time we most need people to put their hands up... then im not going to sit there and make up excuses for them...
At the end of the day the club is not Fitzpatricks priority... the AFL commision seems to be more his thing... its alot cooshier!!

RoK · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 6:31 pm **Posts:** 295

Ruckus wrote:

Some of the nonsense that is said here absolutely baffles me. For those concerned with the truth:

Hastings was booming at this key juncture, and approaching the second phase of a major upheaval, with Fitzpatrick putting the pieces in place that eventually allowed him, as of July 1st this year, to sell his remaining stakeholding to Westpac. He was never going to leave without completing the handover in the appropriate fashion, and nor would he have had the substantial time to commit to other causes. Causes, mind you, that Fitzpatrick was well aware would take more time than he had available. His circumstances have since changed, of course, so it's no surprise that there is now public conjecture as to what he'll next undertake.

To believe Fitzpatrick wouldn't do everything within his means to assist Carlton is misguided.

Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh don't let fact's get in the way of bitterness.

RoK · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 6:31 pm **Posts:** 295

frank dardew wrote:

but Eddie Mcchins also had a lot on his plate too when he became president when the carringbush were in a parlous state - would Fitzy be any busier than him - he might be doing other things than Mcchins but doubt he would be busier

Frank Fitzy could by and sell Mc chins.Different leauge all together as far as time Eddie would be able to rap T.V un in only 2 maybe 3 day's a week.

Synbad · **Posted:** Wed Aug 17, 2005 1:41 am

RoK wrote:

frank dardew wrote:

but Eddie Mcchins also had a lot on his plate too when he became president when the carringbush were in a parlous state - would Fitzy be any busier than him - he might be doing other things than Mcchins but doubt he would be busier

Frank Fitzy could by and sell Mc chins.Different leauge all together as far as time Eddie would be able to rap T.V un in only 2 maybe 3 day's a week.

Dunno what youre trying to say but i do know that out of Fitzy and McChins .......one of them works hard for the club he supports and helped turn it around....and the other isnt involved in his club even though he played for them and was a premiership captain.. and that club opened alot of doors for him... and he prefers to work for the AFL... where its all nice and cushy.

RoK · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 6:31 pm **Posts:** 295

Synbad wrote:

RoK wrote:

frank dardew wrote:

but Eddie Mcchins also had a lot on his plate too when he became president when the carringbush were in a parlous state - would Fitzy be any busier than him - he might be doing other things than Mcchins but doubt he would be busier

Frank Fitzy could by and sell Mc chins.Different leauge all together as far as time Eddie would be able to rap T.V un in only 2 maybe 3 day's a week.

Dunno what youre trying to say but i do know that out of Fitzy and McChins .......one of them works hard for the club he supports and helped turn it around....and the other isnt involved in his club even though he played for them and was a premiership captain.. and that club opened alot of doors for him... and he prefers to work for the AFL... where its all nice and cushy.

Mate your like a dog with a bone,do you always have to have the last word.

Fitzy was a childhood hero of mine so anything ever said about him i never take well.

frank dardew · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 12:38 pm **Posts:** 7640

THATS THE EXACT POINT FITZY WOULD BUY AND SELL MCCHINS- THATS WHY IM SO DISAPPOINTED HE ISNT PRESIDENT
He has got all the skills and expertise and would or could be the pre-eminent President in the AFL.
Query whether the job was sexy enough for him!

camel · **Posted:** Wed Aug 17, 2005 10:01 am

I agree, I think the Blue Birds should come back too.

Synbad · **Posted:** Wed Aug 17, 2005 9:15 pm

RoK wrote:

Synbad wrote:

RoK wrote:

frank dardew wrote:

but Eddie Mcchins also had a lot on his plate too when he became president when the carringbush were in a parlous state - would Fitzy be any busier than him - he might be doing other things than Mcchins but doubt he would be busier

Frank Fitzy could by and sell Mc chins.Different leauge all together as far as time Eddie would be able to rap T.V un in only 2 maybe 3 day's a week.

Dunno what youre trying to say but i do know that out of Fitzy and McChins .......one of them works hard for the club he supports and helped turn it around....and the other isnt involved in his club even though he played for them and was a premiership captain.. and that club opened alot of doors for him... and he prefers to work for the AFL... where its all nice and cushy.

Mate your like a dog with a bone,do you always have to have the last word.

Fitzy was a childhood hero of mine so anything ever said about him i never take well.

Thats the point he was your childhood hero when he could have been your hero today....

The problem with the club is for years it gave us alot.
Now that it needs individuals to give back.. they dont want to.. they have been to used to taking.

The club gave Fitzy alot...

Fitzy could have given something back...

Thats how it is..

Rod Waddell · **Joined:** Thu Apr 28, 2005 10:49 am **Posts:** 1651

Synbad, Fitzy was on the board many moons ago. He came, sat didn't like what he saw and took off. He probably thought the Elliot way of doing business was not ethical or above board :roll:

RoK · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 6:31 pm **Posts:** 295

Rod Waddell wrote:

Synbad, Fitzy was on the board many moons ago. He came, sat didn't like what he saw and took off. He probably thought the Elliot way of doing business was not ethical or above board :roll:

Why would he think that.

ALP approach Mike Fitzpatrick

Who is online