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 Tue Jul 08, 2025 4:31 am

All times are UTC + 10 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1094 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 ... 55  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Aug 15, 2018 10:10 am 
Offline
John Nicholls
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 8:22 pm
Posts: 9603
Location: Beijing
DocSherrin III wrote:
robertbb wrote:
Correct.

"We are focused on winning games"


or...

"Unfortunately, although the answer is indeed clear, simple and straightforward, there is some difficulty in justifiably assigning to it the fourth of the epithets applied to the statement inasmuch as the precise correlation between the information communicated and the facts insofar as they can be determined and demonstrated is such as to cause epistemological problems of sufficient magnitude as to lay upon the logical and semantic resources of the English language a heavier burden than they can reasonably be expected to bear."


Yes Minister?

_________________
"our electorate seeks less to be informed and more to be validated." Sad times.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 15, 2018 11:32 am 
Offline
Craig Bradley

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 12:38 pm
Posts: 7640
yep Doc was much better approach and would of killed issue off

Sidex you give them way too much credit and really do you believe they were being strategic - no one else does - once again it showed our club off field is light years behind the better clubs

Just because we look like we are getting a priority pick almost inspite of ourselves doesn't mean that they handled it well nor that it was by design it was a mistake pure and simple


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 15, 2018 12:42 pm 
Offline
Harry Vallence
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 10:49 am
Posts: 1623
frank dardew wrote:
yep Doc was much better approach and would of killed issue off

Sidex you give them way too much credit and really do you believe they were being strategic - no one else does - once again it showed our club off field is light years behind the better clubs

Just because we look like we are getting a priority pick almost inspite of ourselves doesn't mean that they handled it well nor that it was by design it was a mistake pure and simple


Agree with you, very unprofessional and amateurish by the club. A simple not a priority mid season will be reassessed.
Let's hope Brad Llyod can make a difference our footy operations needs a huge smarting up.
Hopefully Liddle, Llyod, Bolton and Sivagni the statesman get it right asap.
I don't mind Judd as director of footy nullifies errors at the top, age brackets are right for core administration, let see how they evolve.
President next.

_________________
Go Blue Boys


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 15, 2018 1:06 pm 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 2:09 pm
Posts: 17235
bmaurizio wrote:
Hopefully Liddle, Llyod, Bolton and Sivagni the statesman get it right asap.
I don't mind Judd as director of footy nullifies errors at the top, age brackets are right for core administration, let see how they evolve.
President next.


Well...Lids, BL, BB and SOS are far more important than Chris Judd. Judd is only on the board because MLG knows it would appease most members to have a popular past player on there. There'd be grown men at the AGM ready to give the suits of the room an absolute serve, save for Juddy being there.

"Don't wanna look like a flower in front of Juddy...he might come and have a beer with us after..."

Even I have to give MLG credit where it's due. The President isn't going anywhere until 2022. This is Carlton. If you want to be on the board for your full term of 12 years - you'll be on there for 12 years.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 15, 2018 2:34 pm 
Offline
Harry Vallence

Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2009 2:58 pm
Posts: 1636
grrofunger wrote:
Effes wrote:
https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/afl-plans-for-priority-pick-applications-from-lowly-blues-and-suns-20180814-p4zxia.html

AFL plans for priority pick applications from lowly Blues and Suns
By Jake Niall
14 August 2018 — 7:55pm

Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Send via Email

The AFL is preparing for Carlton and Gold Coast to make applications for priority draft picks at the end of the season.

The expectation from the league is that both clubs will apply, as they must to have a chance of receiving an extra draft pick under the rules. Carlton and Gold Coast have won two and four games respectively in 2018, occupying the bottom two positions on the table.



WRONG !

Even Gil said its not a rule...just his made up convention as if its always been the way to apply forever and a day because he likes people grovelling to him.

Gil is a slimy weasel, the game would be much better off without him in charge.


:thumbsup: Too right, I hope on one of his junkets Romanian mobsters kidnap him and sell his organs on the black market.

_________________
"Then joked and said he (Jack himself) probably wouldn't even need to play until round 2 against Collingwood."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 15, 2018 3:49 pm 
Offline
Harry Vallence

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 1:39 pm
Posts: 1002
DocSherrin III wrote:
Sidefx wrote:
Liddle said the right thing at the right time...


The right thing would have been 'not appropriate for the club to discuss that at this juncture' ...


This kind of response is given by every player manager for uncontracted players and all it does is turn it into a circus. Just look at Lynch, Ablett, Buddy etc.

The only way to kill the conversation is what the club did and then revisit the decision when the time is right and framed in a way to best reflect the clubs interests.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 15, 2018 4:41 pm 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 2:09 pm
Posts: 17235
Steve_C7 wrote:
This kind of response is given by every player manager for uncontracted players and all it does is turn it into a circus. Just look at Lynch, Ablett, Buddy etc.

The only way to kill the conversation is what the club did and then revisit the decision when the time is right and framed in a way to best reflect the clubs interests.


I must have missed the bit where the clubs statement killed the conversation.

I don't think it'll matter in the long run, so long as the CEO puts his hand up and owns the original comments by acknowledging that while they believe they're on the right path, the realities are that recruiting mistakes of the past have made it increasingly difficult to compete with other teams in the competition.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 15, 2018 5:29 pm 
Offline
Craig Bradley
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 1:55 pm
Posts: 6767
DocSherrin III wrote:
Sidefx wrote:
Liddle said the right thing at the right time...


The right thing would have been 'not appropriate for the club to discuss that at this juncture' ...


And that doesn’t scream “yes, we will be asking for one at the end of the year” :thumbsup:

If you were a lawyer, I’d be glad you’re not mine.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 16, 2018 9:12 am 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:00 pm
Posts: 24655
Location: Kaloyasena
Word from “maky uppy HQ” is that whilst they want Gold Coast and Carlton to apply for the Priority Pick, they are more concerned about the parlous state of St Kilda.

Also “maky uppy HQ” also more worried about the fallout from other clubs should they award priority picks, so they’re trying to come up with a package of measures to assist bottom clubs, as they want to help St Kilda too - and awarding priority picks to three clubs won’t fly in the face of pressure and criticism from the other clubs.

So I wouldn’t be holding my breath at this stage for picks before or after the first round at this stage.

_________________
"Hence you will not say that Greeks fight like heroes but that heroes fight like Greeks"?

Winston Churchill


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 16, 2018 9:47 am 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 2:09 pm
Posts: 17235
AGRO wrote:
Word from “maky uppy HQ” is that whilst they want Gold Coast and Carlton to apply for the Priority Pick, they are more concerned about the parlous state of St Kilda.

Also “maky uppy HQ” also more worried about the fallout from other clubs should they award priority picks, so they’re trying to come up with a package of measures to assist bottom clubs, as they want to help St Kilda too - and awarding priority picks to three clubs won’t fly in the face of pressure and criticism from the other clubs..


Saints have only one pick inside the first three rounds of this draft. I'm not against them being given a second rounder. Thing is - and I think the AFL knows this - a 2nd rounder doesn't help them much. They need an A-grader. They could afford to pay Gaff a lot of money and he'd make sense for them...but I don't think it happens.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 16, 2018 9:58 am 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:00 pm
Posts: 24655
Location: Kaloyasena
Like I said I wouldn’t be holding my breath for actual priory picks at this stage - but we are talking about “Maky Uppy HQ” - so there will be a lot of goal post moving between now and when the official draft order is established.

:wink:

_________________
"Hence you will not say that Greeks fight like heroes but that heroes fight like Greeks"?

Winston Churchill


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 16, 2018 11:03 am 
Offline
Rod Ashman
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 10:58 am
Posts: 2143
AGRO wrote:
Word from “maky uppy HQ” is that whilst they want Gold Coast and Carlton to apply for the Priority Pick, they are more concerned about the parlous state of St Kilda.

Also “maky uppy HQ” also more worried about the fallout from other clubs should they award priority picks, so they’re trying to come up with a package of measures to assist bottom clubs, as they want to help St Kilda too - and awarding priority picks to three clubs won’t fly in the face of pressure and criticism from the other clubs.

So I wouldn’t be holding my breath at this stage for picks before or after the first round at this stage.


Why are they more concerned about St Kilda? Who is on the bottom of the ladder with a percentage of God knows what?

Carlton has two marketable players in Curnow & Cripps, but that doesn’t change fact St Kilda has a better overall list than Carlton’s. If the opposite was the case Carlton would have beaten Saints sometime in last 2 years.

How about Carlton trades Kerridge to Hawthorn for his amazing up and und r kicking skills and in return gets Mitchell. Noice.

GWS, why don’t we put together a list of the most laughable (&equitable) trades involving Hawthorn over the last 10 years?

I’ll start- Best of all. This one netted the 2013 flag. Brian Lake for a couple of useless draft picks.
What trades will Hawthorn do this year? Oh, can’t wait.

Trading system entrenches inequality. Fix up trading rules AFL eg clubs that have made finals in 18 of last 20 years approx (eg Hawthorn) have to give up a player on their list if they are raiding the list of a bottom club.
Do something. Make them give up something of value. Don’t just accept the status quo.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 16, 2018 12:06 pm 
Offline
Harry Vallence

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 1:39 pm
Posts: 1002
tap in 79 wrote:
AGRO wrote:
Word from “maky uppy HQ” is that whilst they want Gold Coast and Carlton to apply for the Priority Pick, they are more concerned about the parlous state of St Kilda.

Also “maky uppy HQ” also more worried about the fallout from other clubs should they award priority picks, so they’re trying to come up with a package of measures to assist bottom clubs, as they want to help St Kilda too - and awarding priority picks to three clubs won’t fly in the face of pressure and criticism from the other clubs.

So I wouldn’t be holding my breath at this stage for picks before or after the first round at this stage.


Why are they more concerned about St Kilda? Who is on the bottom of the ladder with a percentage of God knows what?

Carlton has two marketable players in Curnow & Cripps, but that doesn’t change fact St Kilda has a better overall list than Carlton’s. If the opposite was the case Carlton would have beaten Saints sometime in last 2 years.

How about Carlton trades Kerridge to Hawthorn for his amazing up and und r kicking skills and in return gets Mitchell. Noice.

GWS, why don’t we put together a list of the most laughable (&equitable) trades involving Hawthorn over the last 10 years?



I’ll start- Best of all. This one netted the 2013 flag. Brian Lake for a couple of useless draft picks.
What trades will Hawthorn do this year? Oh, can’t wait.

Trading system entrenches inequality. Fix up trading rules AFL eg clubs that have made finals in 18 of last 20 years approx (eg Hawthorn) have to give up a player on their list if they are raiding the list of a bottom club.
Do something. Make them give up something of value. Don’t just accept the status quo.


Agreed, the easiest way to fix the restricted free agent where a top team gets a top rated player and gives nothing in return is to force them to hand over the same band compo pick.

So for example where if Hawthorn wanted Tom Lynch, then Gold Coast would get a band 1 compo pick which is first round and therefor hawthorn will need to provide the same in return so in this case their 1st round pick to Gold Coast.

This is absolutely necessary as the current system entrenches poor teams at the bottom of the ladder if they keep investing in young talent and loose them just as they start to get a return on their investment. The reverse is also true in that the top teams are effectively getting 2 first round pick, one in the form of the restricted free agent and then one in the draft; so they get one ready made player that they know is quality and one that is a pick more speculative.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 16, 2018 1:35 pm 
Offline
John Nicholls
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2014 1:06 pm
Posts: 9354
Steve_C7 wrote:

This is absolutely necessary as the current system entrenches poor teams at the bottom of the ladder if they keep investing in young talent and loose them just as they start to get a return on their investment. The reverse is also true in that the top teams are effectively getting 2 first round pick, one in the form of the restricted free agent and then one in the draft; so they get one ready made player that they know is quality and one that is a pick more speculative.


I hope you realise what you're suggesting may actually make this competition fair. So fair in fact, it's ludicrous. :hitcomputer:

_________________
O say does that star spangled banner yet wave.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 16, 2018 3:02 pm 
Offline
Rod Ashman
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 10:58 am
Posts: 2143
Steve_C7 wrote:
tap in 79 wrote:
AGRO wrote:
Word from “maky uppy HQ” is that whilst they want Gold Coast and Carlton to apply for the Priority Pick, they are more concerned about the parlous state of St Kilda.



So I wouldn’t be holding my breath at this stage for picks before or after the first round at this stage.


Why are they more concerned about St Kilda? Who is on the bottom of the ladder with a percentage of God knows what

How about Carlton trades Kerridge to Hawthorn for his amazing up and und r kicking skills and in return gets Mitchell. Noice.

GWS, why don’t we put together a list of the most laughable (&equitable) trades involving Hawthorn over the last 10 years?



I’ll start- Best of all. This one netted the 2013 flag. Brian Lake for a couple of useless draft picks.
What trades will Hawthorn do this year? Oh, can’t wait.

Trading system entrenches inequality. Fix up trading rules AFL eg clubs that have made finals in 18 of last 20 years approx (eg Hawthorn) have to give up a player on their list if they are raiding the list of a bottom club.
Do something. Make them give up something of value. Don’t just accept the status quo.


Agreed, the easiest way to fix the restricted free agent where a top team gets a top rated player and gives nothing in return is to force them to hand over the same band compo pick.

So for example where if Hawthorn wanted Tom Lynch, then Gold Coast would get a band 1 compo pick which is first round and therefor hawthorn will need to provide the same in return so in this case their 1st round pick to Gold Coast.

This is absolutely necessary as the current system entrenches poor teams at the bottom of the ladder if they keep investing in young talent and loose them just as they start to get a return on their investment. The reverse is also true in that the top teams are effectively getting 2 first round pick, one in the form of the restricted free agent and then one in the draft; so they get one ready made player that they know is quality and one that is a pick more speculative.



Well put!

There has to be some real loss for Hawthorn when they raid players from other clubs.

If they get Lynch as it stands they don’t really lose anything of value.

They should have to either have to trade a player to Gold Coast that they want (not a fringe player of no value)or hand over their 1st round pick.

When Carlton got Judd they had to experience pain to get some gain. Why is trading so much in favour of stronger clubs now? No pain for plenty of gain.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 16, 2018 3:26 pm 
Offline
Rod Ashman

Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 1:54 pm
Posts: 2251
how nice would it have been to get judd as a free agent and to have kept kennedy + pick 3 as well....

our timing with all of this shit seems constantly out of whack...i..e. i seem to recall they changed the priority pick system so that you got one at the end of the first round and first year in itmeant we ended up with gibbs and hampson instead of gibbs and boak. there were some other alterations to the rules which went against us as well from memory...now you need to "apply" for a pick...what a load of shit that is..

i can just see us having to pay in a similar way described in posts above when we finally do attract a decent "free agent".


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Aug 17, 2018 12:12 am 
Offline
Harry Vallence

Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 10:49 am
Posts: 1651
doofdoof wrote:
how nice would it have been to get judd as a free agent and to have kept kennedy + pick 3 as well....

our timing with all of this shit seems constantly out of whack...i..e. i seem to recall they changed the priority pick system so that you got one at the end of the first round and first year in itmeant we ended up with gibbs and hampson instead of gibbs and boak. there were some other alterations to the rules which went against us as well from memory...now you need to "apply" for a pick...what a load of shit that is..

i can just see us having to pay in a similar way described in posts above when we finally do attract a decent "free agent".


How about the AFL caps the number of free agents clubs can receive. That way every team can have a go at a free agent ie every club has a shot.

Unfortunately we’ve had ours with Daisy! But then again Betts went out as well so net net is zero so we need another turn....yippee. Let’s no t forget Waite either.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Aug 17, 2018 10:22 am 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 10:56 am
Posts: 19501
Location: Progreso, Yucatan, MEXICO
Rod Waddell wrote:
doofdoof wrote:
how nice would it have been to get judd as a free agent and to have kept kennedy + pick 3 as well....

our timing with all of this shit seems constantly out of whack...i..e. i seem to recall they changed the priority pick system so that you got one at the end of the first round and first year in itmeant we ended up with gibbs and hampson instead of gibbs and boak. there were some other alterations to the rules which went against us as well from memory...now you need to "apply" for a pick...what a load of shit that is..

i can just see us having to pay in a similar way described in posts above when we finally do attract a decent "free agent".


How about the AFL caps the number of free agents clubs can receive. That way every team can have a go at a free agent ie every club has a shot.

Unfortunately we’ve had ours with Daisy! But then again Betts went out as well so net net is zero so we need another turn....yippee. Let’s no t forget Waite either.

Can't do that because the entire concept of free agency is that the player gets to go to the club of his choice.
Making the club pay the compo either with their draft pick or by a series of draft picks a la father son/academy picks is the way to go.

_________________
Let slip the Blues of war (with apologies to William Shakespeare) (and Sir Francis Bacon, just in case)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Aug 17, 2018 10:45 am 
Offline
Craig Bradley
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 1:55 pm
Posts: 6767
Blue Sombrero wrote:
Rod Waddell wrote:
doofdoof wrote:
how nice would it have been to get judd as a free agent and to have kept kennedy + pick 3 as well....

our timing with all of this shit seems constantly out of whack...i..e. i seem to recall they changed the priority pick system so that you got one at the end of the first round and first year in itmeant we ended up with gibbs and hampson instead of gibbs and boak. there were some other alterations to the rules which went against us as well from memory...now you need to "apply" for a pick...what a load of shit that is..

i can just see us having to pay in a similar way described in posts above when we finally do attract a decent "free agent".


How about the AFL caps the number of free agents clubs can receive. That way every team can have a go at a free agent ie every club has a shot.

Unfortunately we’ve had ours with Daisy! But then again Betts went out as well so net net is zero so we need another turn....yippee. Let’s no t forget Waite either.

Can't do that because the entire concept of free agency is that the player gets to go to the club of his choice.
Making the club pay the compo either with their draft pick or by a series of draft picks a la father son/academy picks is the way to go.


I think the best way to go forward would be similar to the restricted free agency model. E.g. If a free agent from Gold Coast wanted to go to Hawthorn for $750k per year but Carlton offered the player $1 million a year, the Hawks would have to match it. Then the Hawks would be required to make a trade to salary dump and equal the offer or just let it go. Then Gold Coast would still get a compo pick, the player would be traded for their "fair" value and somebody else might pick up a decent player as a salary dump.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Aug 17, 2018 10:50 am 
Offline
Harry Vallence

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 1:39 pm
Posts: 1002
Sidefx wrote:
Blue Sombrero wrote:
Rod Waddell wrote:
doofdoof wrote:
how nice would it have been to get judd as a free agent and to have kept kennedy + pick 3 as well....

our timing with all of this shit seems constantly out of whack...i..e. i seem to recall they changed the priority pick system so that you got one at the end of the first round and first year in itmeant we ended up with gibbs and hampson instead of gibbs and boak. there were some other alterations to the rules which went against us as well from memory...now you need to "apply" for a pick...what a load of shit that is..

i can just see us having to pay in a similar way described in posts above when we finally do attract a decent "free agent".


How about the AFL caps the number of free agents clubs can receive. That way every team can have a go at a free agent ie every club has a shot.

Unfortunately we’ve had ours with Daisy! But then again Betts went out as well so net net is zero so we need another turn....yippee. Let’s no t forget Waite either.

Can't do that because the entire concept of free agency is that the player gets to go to the club of his choice.
Making the club pay the compo either with their draft pick or by a series of draft picks a la father son/academy picks is the way to go.


I think the best way to go forward would be similar to the restricted free agency model. E.g. If a free agent from Gold Coast wanted to go to Hawthorn for $750k per year but Carlton offered the player $1 million a year, the Hawks would have to match it. Then the Hawks would be required to make a trade to salary dump and equal the offer or just let it go. Then Gold Coast would still get a compo pick, the player would be traded for their "fair" value and somebody else might pick up a decent player as a salary dump.


That defeats the purpose of the free trade and how would that help Gold Coast in that scenario?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1094 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 ... 55  Next

All times are UTC + 10 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 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