Talking Carlton Index Lochie O'Brien Kerryn Harrington Lochie O'Brien Kerryn Harrington CFC Home CFC Membership CFC Shop CFC Fixture Blueseum
It is currently Mon Jul 07, 2025 9:06 pm

All times are UTC + 10 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1094 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 ... 55  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 8:00 am 
Offline
John Nicholls
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2014 1:06 pm
Posts: 9354
Sidefx wrote:
I think you’ll find if the AFL do hand an early PP it’ll go: CFC #1, GC #2 followed by the normal picks.

Let’s just hope they really think we’re stuffed and give both clubs a second PP pre round 2 or pre round one 2019.


So in essence, we get 1 and 3?

Where do I @#$%&! sign?

_________________
O say does that star spangled banner yet wave.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 8:10 am 
Offline
Mike Fitzpatrick

Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2015 5:55 pm
Posts: 4435
robertbb wrote:
Sidefx wrote:
I think you’ll find if the AFL do hand an early PP it’ll go: CFC #1, GC #2 followed by the normal picks.

Let’s just hope they really think we’re stuffed and give both clubs a second PP pre round 2 or pre round one 2019.


So in essence, we get 1 and 3?

Where do I @#$%&! sign?


Given we are rebuilding it makes sense to hasten things so maybe trade our future first for an early first this year so in the above scenario we would have three early picks. If so I would go Walsh, Smith and Ben King. Love the versatility of Ben King. And Ben Silvagni also offers KPP versatility. So that would be as good an off season as you could dream to have.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 8:22 am 
Offline
Craig Bradley
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 1:55 pm
Posts: 6767
robertbb wrote:
Sidefx wrote:
I think you’ll find if the AFL do hand an early PP it’ll go: CFC #1, GC #2 followed by the normal picks.

Let’s just hope they really think we’re stuffed and give both clubs a second PP pre round 2 or pre round one 2019.


So in essence, we get 1 and 3?

Where do I @#$%&! sign?


:thumbsup:

The only thing that I could see stuffing it all up is if they give GC a compo pick after their first pick (#5) for Lynch. They would then have to explain to the rest of the comp that the first 5 picks will only go to Carlton and GC.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 8:30 am 
Offline
Mike Fitzpatrick

Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2015 5:55 pm
Posts: 4435
Sidefx wrote:
robertbb wrote:
Sidefx wrote:
I think you’ll find if the AFL do hand an early PP it’ll go: CFC #1, GC #2 followed by the normal picks.

Let’s just hope they really think we’re stuffed and give both clubs a second PP pre round 2 or pre round one 2019.


So in essence, we get 1 and 3?

Where do I @#$%&! sign?


:thumbsup:

The only thing that I could see stuffing it all up is if they give GC a compo pick after their first pick (#5) for Lynch. They would then have to explain to the rest of the comp that the first 5 picks will only go to Carlton and GC.


They don't deserve a PP.
Look at the ladder and recent history. If they get a PP we should get several.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 8:56 am 
Offline
Craig Bradley
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 1:55 pm
Posts: 6767
Paddycripps wrote:
Sidefx wrote:
robertbb wrote:
Sidefx wrote:
I think you’ll find if the AFL do hand an early PP it’ll go: CFC #1, GC #2 followed by the normal picks.

Let’s just hope they really think we’re stuffed and give both clubs a second PP pre round 2 or pre round one 2019.


So in essence, we get 1 and 3?

Where do I @#$%&! sign?


:thumbsup:

The only thing that I could see stuffing it all up is if they give GC a compo pick after their first pick (#5) for Lynch. They would then have to explain to the rest of the comp that the first 5 picks will only go to Carlton and GC.


They don't deserve a PP.
Look at the ladder and recent history. If they get a PP we should get several.


I agree, but we both know that will never happen. There would be riots in Melbourne if the AFL did that. :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 9:25 am 
Offline
John Nicholls
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2014 1:06 pm
Posts: 9354
The more I think about it, the more I think it's likely that we'll get 1 and 4. GCS will get 2, 3 (for Lynch) and an end of first round PP as their situation/recent history isn't as dire as ours has been.

I'd far prefer 1 and 3, but 4 will do.

_________________
O say does that star spangled banner yet wave.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 10:05 am 
Offline
Craig Bradley
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 1:55 pm
Posts: 6767
Still, that would be a great result and we can pick up two gun midfielders for the next 10 years.

But if they did give GC a pre second round pick only then I think we would get 1 (pre first round) and 2, then GC 3 and 4 (Lynch)?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 10:26 am 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 8:30 pm
Posts: 23931
Paddycripps wrote:
Sidefx wrote:
robertbb wrote:
Sidefx wrote:
I think you’ll find if the AFL do hand an early PP it’ll go: CFC #1, GC #2 followed by the normal picks.

Let’s just hope they really think we’re stuffed and give both clubs a second PP pre round 2 or pre round one 2019.


So in essence, we get 1 and 3?

Where do I @#$%&! sign?


:thumbsup:

The only thing that I could see stuffing it all up is if they give GC a compo pick after their first pick (#5) for Lynch. They would then have to explain to the rest of the comp that the first 5 picks will only go to Carlton and GC.


They don't deserve a PP.
Look at the ladder and recent history. If they get a PP we should get several.

I think we are a chance to get several picks. One early and one at end of 1st round.

_________________
That’s not a political statement — it’s a harsh reality, and we must act,” she said. “He is a clear and present danger to the things that keep us strong and free. I support impeachment.”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 10:27 am 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 8:30 pm
Posts: 23931
Everyone wants a strong Carlton.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

_________________
That’s not a political statement — it’s a harsh reality, and we must act,” she said. “He is a clear and present danger to the things that keep us strong and free. I support impeachment.”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 12:04 pm 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:35 am
Posts: 18063
robertbb wrote:
The more I think about it, the more I think it's likely that we'll get 1 and 4. GCS will get 2, 3 (for Lynch) and an end of first round PP as their situation/recent history isn't as dire as ours has been.

I'd far prefer 1 and 3, but 4 will do.


Gold Coast will get at least the equivalent we do. Forget their recent history, they have AFL agenda in their camp.

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 12:08 pm 
Offline
John James

Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 4:13 pm
Posts: 697
bluegirl72 wrote:
Everyone wants a strong Carlton.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


:lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 12:17 pm 
Offline
Stephen Silvagni

Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 11:03 am
Posts: 25550
Location: Bondi Beach
Blue Sombrero wrote:
Nobody in the media has said the PP is working the way it was supposed to. In fact they are all saying it is stuffed and helping create the two tier comp.
Of course teams at the top think it's wonderful but that's because they are skimming the cream and playing off n finals every year as a result.
I mentioned this elsewhere but I want to bring it up again (regurgitate it, come might say).
FA is in place so the players can move to the club of their choice. I get that but the compo system is what mucks it up. The AFL hands out the compo. What if there were no compo from the AFL at all but the cub of choice had to pay it? The player is still choosing the club but what if the club doesn't think he is worth it? What if the AFL dfecides Lynch is worth two picks, one top five and one top twenty and (Richmond) has to give them to the AFL who will then pass them on to the GCS? (Richmond), if they want Lynch badly enough, will pay. If not, Lynch has to nominate a second club, stay where he is or go to the draft. All of a sudden we have no free kick to a top club. Yes, they don't have to trade with the club because Lynch has nominated them as is his right under FA but they have to trade with the AFL to make sure Lynch gets is wish and the losing club gets a fair go.

We have already seen the F/S rule stuffed up because Geelong's past players were good producers of boys and they got too many free hits and ended up winning a flag on the back of them, so why can't the same point system be applied to the FA system?

I seriously want this to be discussed somewhere where it gets an airing in the press or whatever so if you think it's a good idea and you can twitter, tweet or otherwise message someone who might bring it up for discussion, please do it. I think all avenues have to be explored.

End of rant.


Fantastic idea and logical if FA is to show some semblance of fairness.

I'd prefer that Top 8 sides, in particular top 4 sides can't be involved with FA.

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 1:22 pm 
Offline
Mike Fitzpatrick

Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2015 5:55 pm
Posts: 4435
Just give the flowering pick


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 1:33 pm 
Offline
Craig Bradley

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 12:38 pm
Posts: 7640
club still recovering from stupid public statement in May about PP - which is looking more stupid every week

No need to discuss it in May Chad could have and should have sidestepped issue

Now obviously softening stance - stupid -do this stuff behind closed doors with AFL -get the deal done and then apply for the pick at the end of the year knowing what the result will be before making it a public debate and talking point

Only thing that original statement and position and then apparent backflip does is to raise concern with supporters who think it is another example of the Club not knowing what to do and misreading the play, misreading the messaging to the members and failing to understand the system and how it works


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 1:39 pm 
Offline
Craig Bradley
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 1:55 pm
Posts: 6767
I strongly disagree to the point where I think the clubs stance with the PP is almost genius.

At the start of the year we would've been accused of tanking and the media was already out to get us when it was suggested. They waited and now all of a sudden the media are becoming pro us getting a PP. What makes it even better is that GC need help from the AFL and they can't be seen giving help to one and not the other. It's a win win for the club and the supporters who see this know and the ones who don't will know at the end of the year.

Genius.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 1:52 pm 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 11:17 am
Posts: 18742
Location: threeohfivethree
Sidefx wrote:
I strongly disagree to the point where I think the clubs stance with the PP is almost genius.

At the start of the year we would've been accused of tanking and the media was already out to get us when it was suggested. They waited and now all of a sudden the media are becoming pro us getting a PP. What makes it even better is that GC need help from the AFL and they can't be seen giving help to one and not the other. It's a win win for the club and the supporters who see this know and the ones who don't will know at the end of the year.

Genius.


Correct except I think for the bit about it being the club’s genius.

I reckon they were tapped on the shoulder by head office earlier in the year.

The AFL hated the tanking issue and suddenly it’s no longer an issue.

_________________
“When a clown moves into a palace, he doesn't become a king. The palace turns into a circus.”
Turkish Proverb


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 2:01 pm 
Offline
Rod Ashman
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 10:58 am
Posts: 2143
Watching Gill from the AFL talk about free agency trading one can read behind the lines that he thinks it is working wonderfully.

Gill on Talking Footy last night:

Wayne “let’s talk about free agency. Tom Lynch. Is it fair that the best player at the worst club gets to the best club?”
Gill “I don’t know if it is free agency per se that you should look to there. If Tom wasn’t a free agent and wanted a change he would get there via a trade anyway..”

Gill's words deciphered for accuracy: - so in more accurate words, we at the AFL are happy for the best players to be traded to the best clubs, and the sub-par players - the O'Sheas, the Sumners etc - get traded to the rubbish clubs. We don't have the will to take on the players association, with our mate Dangerfield doing the exact same thing in his career. We all laugh that Adelaide got paid peanuts for such a good player. Trading is working beautifully. There is no conflict of interest.






Wayne Carey has another go of drawing the truth out of our Carlton friend Gill.

“not many top players are going to want to go to a poorer club or one at the same level are they?"

Gill “I have great confidence in Mark Evans. He’s been there 18 months and he's made dramatic change. They are working on a great environment for success at the Gold Coast. They have a new coach, a new football manager etc. When you look at Brisbane 2-3 years ago before david noble came in. people get a bit distracted by individual trades or movements.”





His words deciphered for accuracy:

Wayne, I am not going to answer your question. Instead I am going to waffle on about something completely different. I know you were asking if free agency is working, but instead I am going to talk about how we need to funnel more money into the Gold Coast.


The system is broken. Tom Lynch will not go into the draft. As Tom Mitchell got to Hawthorn, Tom Lynch will get to one of only 3 clubs. If he went into the draft at the very least if he didn't want to go to Carlton he would have to upp his asking price and force Collingwood to do a fair trade for him.


By limiting the trade to 3 teams it really isn't competitive for his bid. It is a closed market, and whenever that happens you have distortions of the market.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 2:14 pm 
Offline
Harry Vallence
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 10:49 am
Posts: 1623
Blue Vain wrote:
robertbb wrote:
The more I think about it, the more I think it's likely that we'll get 1 and 4. GCS will get 2, 3 (for Lynch) and an end of first round PP as their situation/recent history isn't as dire as ours has been.

I'd far prefer 1 and 3, but 4 will do.


Gold Coast will get at least the equivalent we do. Forget their recent history, they have AFL agenda in their camp.



Agree and that only be equitable to all parties both Blues & Suns have been in a horrible state for quite a few years and need help.
AFL can no longer bury thir head in the sand.

_________________
Go Blue Boys


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 2:33 pm 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan

Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 6:11 pm
Posts: 15061
bluegirl72 wrote:
Everyone wants a strong Carlton.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

I know we all do.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 2:38 pm 
Offline
Horrie Clover

Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2006 1:43 pm
Posts: 322
Sidefx wrote:
I strongly disagree to the point where I think the clubs stance with the PP is almost genius.

At the start of the year we would've been accused of tanking and the media was already out to get us when it was suggested. They waited and now all of a sudden the media are becoming pro us getting a PP. What makes it even better is that GC need help from the AFL and they can't be seen giving help to one and not the other. It's a win win for the club and the supporters who see this know and the ones who don't will know at the end of the year.

Genius.

we effectively have half the media campaigning that we should get a PP on our behalf and we've reached round 20 and have yet to be accused of tanking
Let's not kid ourselves the decision to give us a PP or not will have zero to do with the formalities of an application


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1094 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 ... 55  Next

All times are UTC + 10 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Pecker and 24 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group