Today's Sun has a two paragraph "story" ......(no link,yet)

It's a report by Scotty Palmer who says Demetriou "has thrown a spanner into the plans of Fraser Brown who wants to unseat Blues President Graham Smorgon"

It goes on to say.....

"Demetriou said on MMM that if Brown was part of any Election Ticket; the AFL would chase the answers they sought from him during 2003 regarding alleged salary cap breaches"

so...is it possible that this is also the word from the afl that made the board do a 'backflip' and decide to keep pagan 10-0

It's in theory irrelevant that the AFL chase Brown for answers.

If he has nothing too say he has nothing too say.

This is the problem with the handout, the AFL have to much too say on us.

But we obviously needed it.

_________________
Supporting the Blues No Matter What

Cant see Fraser Brown being too worried about that now. Said nothing then, will say nothing forever.

_________________
dane's trolling again

The deep seated hatred for Carlton just keeps rearing it's ugly head; doesn't it?

It's as if he's saying......

"Look.....we'll help out Carlton....but we don't want to help them to be successful".....................

_________________
No ones listening till you make a mistake.

This was mentioned in a Patrick Smith article yesterday.

"We do not know what Fraser Brown's intentions are but if he was to join the Carlton board the AFL would have very serious concerns. And we have sought and received legal advice that we could act on these concerns" - Demetriou.

Please, trying to keep us at ransom! Bring Fraser Brown in now, it will be the start of our rise to the top!

Demetriou your weak! Look what the AFL is trying to do to our club, make us look like they own us! we need to show the AFL they need us more then we need them! Lets get back to the top!

and we think this guy is gonna give us our draft picks back.

The AFL never stepped in when it knew that big John Elliot was rorting companies and involved in dodgy deals....Browny is no where near the Elliot level of corruption.

_________________
Back like a raging case of pubic lice

There are many skeletons in the cupboard of this person. This is just a subtle warning that if he wants a fight he must be prepared for them all to come out. It may not change a thing, but be prepared for a dirty fight.

It might be the only thing that saves the Board. If we get the picks, the Carlton faithful (well, the dumb ones anyway) will think that Smorgon is the Messiah...and not vote for Brown.

If I were Brown, I'd wait for the decision re: the picks before challenging.

_________________
"A good composer does not initiate. He steals."

- Igor Stravinsky

Great point there...hopefully the AFL can compensate the current board with a Top 10 PP...and then Browny steps in and gets rid of Pagan replaced with Ratten and this would be the making for a new successfull era for the Carlton Football club.

D'spew was on MMM yesterday and said if Fraser wants a position on a new Carlton board then the AFL want a few questions answered. They've even had legal advice on the matter.

Caro said Brown might not actually want to be on the board

_________________
"You are being watched. The government has a secret system. A machine that spies on you every hour of every day. I know because I built it." - Finch

The legal advice is interesting. Although a part of the AFL the Carlton Football club, as an Incorporated body, they would surely be a seperate enitity and could surely put anyone on tne board they wanted, unless they have a conviction to precludes that, like in Jack Elliot's case.

Whether Fraser Brown wants a seat on the board or not, I cannot see how the AFL can in anyway "officially" prevent him from gaining a place on the Blues board.

It is a completely separate issue to the salary cap investigation.

Behind the scenes, some AFL pressure may be applied, just like in the alleged case of the Pagan backflip, but all the crap about legal advice is DimWitRiou talking through his very large arse.

Can anyone tell me what possible legal grounds the AFL could have for preventing Fraser Brown from being on the Carlton board?

As for the AFL money, they only gave us a loan with the remaining $500,000 being for ground rental - so big deal!

We don't have to be subservient to their New World Order...

_________________

************************************************************
NOW YOU'RE JUST SOME CLUB THAT I USED TO KNOW.

That is the basis for this thread!

_________________
No ones listening till you make a mistake.

One minute the Spew is espousing freedom from inferference and then in the next breath he is quite clearly trying to shape a clubs board.

This would not happen if the club came out and said that they WILL be challenging the legality of the changes to the priority picks under the Trade Practises Act 1975. In particluar the arbitary stripping of a commercial acquitsion (the priority pick) without a hearing before an appealable tribunal or procedural commitee.

Where is the backbone to take it on. Other codes and clubs would not let there 30K plus membership be treated like this

_________________
Ich bein ein Carltonian

I guess it could be something like the following:

The club via its franchise agreement is obliged to follow the rules and regulations of the AFL. This also applies to employees and players of the club, I assume it also applies to the directors.

By not cooperating with the AFL's salray breach investigations Brown has breached this. At the time he was not a player anymore so the AFL had no way of going after him.

If he becomes a director - they can say to him that he a) can not be a director because he breached the obligations in 2002 or b) ask him to make statuary declarations regarding his role where he either - if he does not tell the truth would be able to get in trouble with the law, or if he reveals under the table payments get in big trouble with the ATO.

This is how I read Spew's comments.

A Franchise Agreement is one thing, the Court of Law is another. I'd imagine the draft and salary cap is on the Franchise Agreement as well but would get blown out of the water in court under the Trades Practices Act.