Blues launch drive to revamp training centre
It's a good initiative but it also seems to indicate that we're not going to get the funding from the AFL/State Govt./Federal Govt. that the other clubs receive.
| TalkingCarlton http://talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/ |
|
| Ground Re-development: Carlton Football Club Foundation http://talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2898 |
Page 1 of 7 |
| Author: | 1AW_rules [ Sun Jun 12, 2005 1:40 am ] |
| Post subject: | Ground Re-development: Carlton Football Club Foundation |
Blues launch drive to revamp training centre It's a good initiative but it also seems to indicate that we're not going to get the funding from the AFL/State Govt./Federal Govt. that the other clubs receive.
|
|
| Author: | Synbad [ Sun Jun 12, 2005 1:47 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Quote: With the Blues last on the ladder, he was pleased by the recent decision of the AFL Commission to leave priority picks in place this year, which was again noted at the AFL's "lovefest" with club chief executives during the week.
"I'm glad they haven't started tampering with that seeing from where we're looking from. It would be very, very unfair," Collins said. "We haven't had a pick for so long that we probably wouldn't know what to do with it anyway if we do get it. But it was interesting that there was a push to get that changed and I'm happy it remains the same." |
|
| Author: | Wangers [ Sun Jun 12, 2005 11:01 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Synbad wrote: Quote: With the Blues last on the ladder, he was pleased by the recent decision of the AFL Commission to leave priority picks in place this year, which was again noted at the AFL's "lovefest" with club chief executives during the week. "I'm glad they haven't started tampering with that seeing from where we're looking from. It would be very, very unfair," Collins said. "We haven't had a pick for so long that we probably wouldn't know what to do with it anyway if we do get it. But it was interesting that there was a push to get that changed and I'm happy it remains the same." Brought a smile to my face, too, Synbad. 
|
|
| Author: | TruBlueBrad [ Sun Jun 12, 2005 11:29 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
How ironic if we end up with the last one in its current form |
|
| Author: | KERMIT [ Sun Jun 12, 2005 5:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Having re-read the propaganda pamphlet the board issuesd to members last year it is clear to me that the AFL had committed to supporting the redevelopment of OO into an elite traing facility. It is mentioned throughout and AFL CEO Andrew flower even says as much in his message from the AFL. I quote: "...we are prepared to support the redevelopment of the facility into a first class traing and administration complex to provide the players and staff with the environment now required to achieve excellence in our national competition." No conditions on securing an co-training tenant or otherwise. Why are we now having to fund this all ourselves? This was a [b]major[/b] justification for the move to Collo stadium and for us being stitched up by the AFL! Why was the redevelopment issue mentioned throughout the publication if nothing was in place? I would urge you all to go back and re-read the booklet issued last year and draw your own conclusions on the matter. Would also like to hear Synbad's views on the matter. As I recall he was an ardent supporter of the Board's proposal at the time. |
|
| Author: | bosman [ Sun Jun 12, 2005 8:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Quote: We haven't had a pick for so long that we probably wouldn't know what to do with it anyway if we do get it.
If there are any duds in the draft, I'm sure we will get them with pick number 1 and 2... 
|
|
| Author: | Effes [ Sun Jun 12, 2005 8:17 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Read this over on CSC "What is this "given our record with the draft" crap; thats like a begger with a self-induced limp who won't chase the meels-on-wheels van because he might have to drop his salmonella infested sandwich. " 
|
|
| Author: | Rod Waddell [ Tue Jun 14, 2005 3:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
*Bumped* Synbad awaiting your reply. The move away from OO was packaged with the AFL assisting in the ground redevelopment. Has not happened and does not look like happening. |
|
| Author: | AGRO [ Tue Jun 14, 2005 4:21 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Talk to me when we get a crowd below 20000 at either the MCG or Telstradome. |
|
| Author: | KERMIT [ Tue Jun 14, 2005 4:27 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Let's not get away from the topic here. We don't want to reignite the TD/MCG move. We all had our say last year and expressed our views. The issue here is having accepted the AFL's one and only condition that we do not play any more home games at OO, why have we not been able to get them to assist financially with our proposed redevelopment? The AFL seem to have plenty of money to splurge on grounds on the Gold Coast (Carrara) and on facilities in the Western suburbs of Sydney but not seemingly for the CFC. All we want is an answer to this simple question. |
|
| Author: | ScottSaunders [ Tue Jun 14, 2005 4:28 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
AGRO wrote: Talk to me when we get a crowd below 20000 at either the MCG or Telstradome.
nope - sorry AGRO - that doesnt fly we only need around 14,000 to break even at OO whilst at the MCG its rumoured to be around the 25,000 mark and the TD the 30,000 mark. The club and board didnt do enough, and there where only a few on TBV that dared suggest otherwise and as usual if you dont agree with a norm you had all sorts of barbs thrown your way. The club and the AFL has something to answer for all this. And like a few others im also waiting for an explanation from the many "collo and his board are great" bandwagon to come here and explain to me and everyone else what has happened to our great deal. This fact, combined with the fact that it appears the AFL is going to renegotiate a deal that will see collingwood get the deal that alot of carlton people where told was not possible, makes the board look very very poor. I for one - wont be putting in a cent to the stadium and im questioning why im a member to be honest and im not questioning being a member of the club becuase of the performance on the field but questioning becuase of the performance of the club off it. |
|
| Author: | AGRO [ Tue Jun 14, 2005 4:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
ThePrez wrote: AGRO wrote: Talk to me when we get a crowd below 20000 at either the MCG or Telstradome. nope - sorry AGRO - that doesnt fly. Sorry Prez it flies pretty high IMHO. How many FTA games do we get with a Saturday or Sunday afternoon OO fixture again???? |
|
| Author: | ScottSaunders [ Tue Jun 14, 2005 4:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
AGRO wrote: ThePrez wrote: AGRO wrote: Talk to me when we get a crowd below 20000 at either the MCG or Telstradome. nope - sorry AGRO - that doesnt fly. Sorry Prez it flies pretty high IMHO. How many FTA games do we get with a Saturday or Sunday afternoon OO fixture again???? the other great bargaining chip. Friday Night games last year = 3 Friday Night games this year = 3 that didnt work either, yet another shaft. all these things we where promised last year, not one has come through our way, and what has the club done? zip, nada, zilch, not a sceric and any other phrase that means nothing. from memory in total we have a grand total of 1 extra FTA game as compared to last year. |
|
| Author: | TheGame [ Tue Jun 14, 2005 4:38 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Since Jack left we have been the AFL's b!tch. |
|
| Author: | Blue Vain [ Tue Jun 14, 2005 4:40 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
The move has taken place. Its pointless arguing over what would have happened had we stayed at OO. As for rumours and guestimates on break even numbers, we dont know the facts so why speculate? The only facts released are the abysmal financial state the club was in and how it would have deteriorated had we stayed at OO. Kermit is correct. The issue at hand is the AFL's apparent reluctance to commit to Carltons training facility upgrade. I dont think its time to panic yet but I'd prefer to see some form of commitment. The onus is on Carlton to establish a training base partner eg. umpires, VFL or similar. Hopefully a committee has been established and work is being undertaken. Once we establish an interim agreement on a facility partner, the pressure can be applied. |
|
| Author: | ScottSaunders [ Tue Jun 14, 2005 4:41 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
and what is worse than being a "bitch" a "bitch" that lets it happen time and time again. not @#$%&! happy |
|
| Author: | AGRO [ Tue Jun 14, 2005 4:41 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
ThePrez wrote: AGRO wrote: ThePrez wrote: AGRO wrote: Talk to me when we get a crowd below 20000 at either the MCG or Telstradome. nope - sorry AGRO - that doesnt fly. Sorry Prez it flies pretty high IMHO. How many FTA games do we get with a Saturday or Sunday afternoon OO fixture again???? the other great bargaining chip. Friday Night games last year = 3 Friday Night games this year = 3 that didnt work either, yet another shaft. all these things we where promised last year, not one has come through our way, and what has the club done? zip, nada, zilch, not a sceric and any other phrase that means nothing. from memory in total we have a grand total of 1 extra FTA game as compared to last year. Who do we think we are at the moment, The F - U - C - K - I - N - G Beatles!!!!
|
|
| Author: | ScottSaunders [ Tue Jun 14, 2005 4:42 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
what have the beatles got to do with anything? or is it you dont have any worth while response that you have to resort to
|
|
| Author: | AGRO [ Tue Jun 14, 2005 4:46 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Its obviously not dark enough and you are not wearing sunglasses???
|
|
| Author: | ScottSaunders [ Tue Jun 14, 2005 4:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
AGRO wrote: Its obviously not dark enough and you are not wearing sunglasses???
yet another witty response keep the coming as they really add to your presuasive argument that we havent been shafted and the club hasnt done a sceric about it.
|
|
| Page 1 of 7 | All times are UTC + 10 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|