View Full Version : Should Carlton sell home games interstate?
JeffDunne
8 Aug 2005, 09:55
The Carlton bandwagon has obviously fallen to pieces.
Their second 16K crowd of the season at the MCG illustrates yet again the myth of the "Big 3" and that their fans will always turn out.
With their parlous financial position and their onfield prospects looking bleak for the next few seasons, should Carlton be forced to sell a couple of games interstate before the AFL provides them with any more financial assistance?
The Saints, Bulldogs, Demons and Kangaroos were all forced to do this prior to the CBA becoming available, so I don't see why Carlton should be any different. They should be forced to sell a couple of games before getting any more handouts from the AFL.
It is a joke that the AFL paid them $3M to relocate from Princes Park when they can only attract crowds of 16K. Until the club are prepared to make further sacrifices like selling home games, I don't see why the rest of the comp should continue to prop up this rabble.
The Carlton bandwagon has ob.......
So bitter and angry JD. The Blues are well on the way to fast -tracking their financial turnaround. The financial stress Carlton has been under would have closed down any other club in the competition, but fortunately we have and always will have huge financial backing, so we just don’t have to resort the desperate measures you’re hoping the Blues to take. Not only are Carlton fast-tracking their financial recovery, but Denis is assembling an impressive young playing group, which will be further enhanced with this years top draft picks. Lots to look forward to for Blues fans. :)
flankerfromsrilanka
8 Aug 2005, 10:08
The Carlton bandwagon has obviously fallen to pieces.
Their second 16K crowd of the season at the MCG illustrates yet again the myth of the "Big 3" and that their fans will always turn out.
With their parlous financial position and their onfield prospects looking bleak for the next few seasons, should Carlton be forced to sell a couple of games interstate before the AFL provides them with any more financial assistance?
The Saints, Bulldogs, Demons and Kangaroos were all forced to do this prior to the CBA becoming available, so I don't see why Carlton should be any different. They should be forced to sell a couple of games before getting any more handouts from the AFL.
It is a joke that the AFL paid them $3M to relocate from Princes Park when they can only attract crowds of 16K. Until the club are prepared to make further sacrifices like selling home games, I don't see why the rest of the comp should continue to prop up this rabble.
Ok I'll bite. Obviously now that the AFL has sorted out its issues with the MCC our home games against clubs like Freo & Port will be played at Telstra Dome. We did draw 38k against Brisbane and 35K against Sydney there not too long ago. No reason to suggest why the crowds v Port and Freo couldn't have been closer to the 30k mark had the fixturing been done correctly.
They should do nothing of the sort. They should spend every penny they have and then some and then ask the AFL for some of the CBF they contributed to over the years because responsibility is not encouraged. Then when the AFL imposes conditions they should tell the AFL to get nicked and raise the money they need from their own supporters and use that as they please.
Either that or push for an end to underwriting incompetence. Propping up rabbles is AFL policy. While it remains so there will continue to be rabbles to prop up. Fix the real problem.
JeffDunne
8 Aug 2005, 10:16
The Blues are well on the way to fast -tracking their financial turnaround. The financial stress Carlton has been under would have closed down any other club in the competition . . .
Even for you parrot, that's a stupid comment.
The club is on track AGAIN for another 7-figure loss. Despite healthy attendances at the start of the season, record (or near enough) memberships, Wizard cup money, new sponsors - and still a loss?
The only reason the club can trade atm is because of the financial underwriting from the AFL - your board & president have said so.
JeffDunne
8 Aug 2005, 10:18
Ok I'll bite. Obviously now that the AFL has sorted out its issues with the MCC our home games against clubs like Freo & Port will be played at Telstra Dome. We did draw 38k against Brisbane and 35K against Sydney there not too long ago. No reason to suggest why the crowds v Port and Freo couldn't have been closer to the 30k mark had the fixturing been done correctly.
Brisbane and Sydney have a Melbourne following.
They draw 30K plus for most games at the Dome.
The Carlton bandwagon has obviously fallen to pieces.
Their second 16K crowd of the season at the MCG illustrates yet again the myth of the "Big 3" and that their fans will always turn out.
With their parlous financial position and their onfield prospects looking bleak for the next few seasons, should Carlton be forced to sell a couple of games interstate before the AFL provides them with any more financial assistance?
The Saints, Bulldogs, Demons and Kangaroos were all forced to do this prior to the CBA becoming available, so I don't see why Carlton should be any different. They should be forced to sell a couple of games before getting any more handouts from the AFL.
It is a joke that the AFL paid them $3M to relocate from Princes Park when they can only attract crowds of 16K. Until the club are prepared to make further sacrifices like selling home games, I don't see why the rest of the comp should continue to prop up this rabble.
OMG you stupid fool Carlton at there loest in history still has a higher avrage crowd than your mob.
Talk about being shot down in flames :D
Oh JD you sorry sorry little boy back to bed.
Lukesta63
8 Aug 2005, 10:21
If your post was in the slightest way impartial,balanced or a rational proposition,it would have some merit!
But you're bitterness is so obvious,that this post is nothing but a whinge.
Be brave enough to say what you mean:That "rabble" Carlton,who have owned St.Kilda for 100 years,are on the bottom ,and I don't want them to get any help that might get them off the bottom!
Who was beying for St.Kilda blood when they were a basket case????
Don't forget that the system that gave us the competitive balance fund,also gave the PP to the bottom sides!
And without PP's St.kilda would be lining up against Mordy-Braeside this week!!!
JD's obsession with Carlton is embarrassing.
JeffDunne
8 Aug 2005, 10:22
They should do nothing of the sort. They should spend every penny they have and then some and then ask the AFL for some of the CBF they contributed to over the years because responsibility is not encouraged. Then when the AFL imposes conditions they should tell the AFL to get nicked and raise the money they need from their own supporters and use that as they please.
Either that or push for an end to underwriting incompetence. Propping up rabbles is AFL policy. While it remains so there will continue to be rabbles to prop up. Fix the real problem.
So it's ok for Carlton to reap some of what they put into the competition for 100 years but not others?
I support the AFL for "propping" up teams provided their are conditions attached (which there are). Silly thing is, Carlton are being underwritten despite not having to meet any conditions. That is propping up a rabble.
JeffDunne
8 Aug 2005, 10:23
OMG you stupid fool Carlton at there loest in history still has a higher avrage crowd than your mob.
Talk about being shot down in flames :D
Oh JD you sorry sorry little boy back to bed.
Take the Tasmanian games out of the equation and do your figures again sunshine.
JeffDunne
8 Aug 2005, 10:25
If your post was in the slightest way impartial,balanced or a rational proposition,it would have some merit!
But you're bitterness is so obvious,that this post is nothing but a whinge.
Be brave enough to say what you mean:That "rabble" Carlton,who have owned St.Kilda for 100 years,are on the bottom ,and I don't want them to get any help that might get them off the bottom!
Who was beying for St.Kilda blood when they were a basket case????
Don't forget that the system that gave us the competitive balance fund,also gave the PP to the bottom sides!
And without PP's St.kilda would be lining up against Mordy-Braeside this week!!!
This thread has nothing to do with St Kilda.
Oh, and BTW, please explain to me how Carlton are going to get off the bottom without priority picks? :rolleyes:
Lukesta63
8 Aug 2005, 10:27
Even for you parrot, that's a stupid comment.
The club is on track AGAIN for another 7-figure loss. Despite healthy attendances at the start of the season, record (or near enough) memberships, Wizard cup money, new sponsors - and still a loss?
The only reason the club can trade atm is because of the financial underwriting from the AFL - your board & president have said so.
I think you'll find the losses are not operating losses i.e they are write downs of assets!!!
Keep going JD your team of superstars has certainly got the runs on the board!!!
itsintheblood
8 Aug 2005, 10:28
OMG you stupid fool Carlton at there loest in history still has a higher avrage crowd than your mob.
Talk about being shot down in flames :D
Oh JD you sorry sorry little boy back to bed.
OMG. "Carlton at there loest" WTF????? Failed kindegarten did we??
Take the Tasmanian games out of the equation and do your figures again sunshine.
Stop embarssing your self JD,if you take this out and that out oh and if you only count the big crowds we come close.Fact is pal you sorry club has sell games so count them all.
You tool shot down and owend.
The saints 26 spoons and bankrupt 3 times the joke of the AFL.
So it's ok for Carlton to reap some of what they put into the competition for 100 years but not others?As far as I'm concerned no but what does that have to do with what is smart practice and using the rules presumably designed for this situiation?I support the AFL for "propping" up teams provided their are conditions attached (which there are). Silly thing is, Carlton are being underwritten despite not having to meet any conditions. That is propping up a rabble.So far as I know they haven't taken anything from the CBA. They are getting money like St. Kilda and Hawthorn have been for Waverley. Watch Hawthorn's results without the Waverley money. Propping up rabbles is AFL policy. You say there are conditions but there aren't. You get propped up regardless of why you need it and THEN conditions are imposed. Carlton can raise the money need from their own supporter base and via their own means but they don't have to.
OMG. "Carlton at there loest" WTF????? Failed kindegarten did we??
typo time to grow up.
Lukesta63
8 Aug 2005, 10:34
This thread has nothing to do with St Kilda.
Oh, and BTW, please explain to me how Carlton are going to get off the bottom without priority picks? :rolleyes:
Now that the punishment for the salary cap infringements is over,there is light at the end of the tunnel,albeit still 2-3 years off! Although not St.Kilda's calibre we do have some young talent!
Tell me how are the conditions of the CBF not being met by Carlton??
JeffDunne
8 Aug 2005, 10:38
I think you'll find the losses are not operating losses i.e they are write downs of assets!!!
Keep going JD your team of superstars has certainly got the runs on the board!!!
LMFAO - not operating losses!! http://www.saintsreport.com/forums/images/smilies/smilielol.gif
The ONLY reason the club didn't announce a trading loss last year was they combined the results of the social and football clubs. And the social club always makes a profit . . . hang on . . . was that ATO I hear calling? :D
JeffDunne
8 Aug 2005, 10:44
Stop embarssing your self JD,if you take this out and that out oh and if you only count the big crowds we come close.Fact is pal you sorry club has sell games so count them all.
You tool shot down and owend.
The saints 26 spoons and bankrupt 3 times the joke of the AFL.
Actually, I think you'll find our average home crowds are slightly ahead of Carlton's WITH the Tasmanian games . . . but I didn't want to embarrass you.
The reason I said take out these games is because they are not representative of our home games in Melbourne. We drew crowds of 16K in Melbourne and were forced to sell them interstate – making our own way rather than going for a handout.
If I was going to whinge, I could have whinged about your draw that guarantees two games against Collingwood and Essendon.
SurreyBlue
8 Aug 2005, 10:46
The obsession continuous.
JD, Carlton are still doing better financially than StKilda. :confused:
How much is your debt again. Get over us fella.
Lukesta63
8 Aug 2005, 10:47
Was there not a loss of approx. 8 million FY 2004/05 due to writing down the value of the Legends stand Dcik head!!!
Look up the annual report and get someone to read it to you fc uk wit!!!
JeffDunne
8 Aug 2005, 10:48
So far as I know they haven't taken anything from the CBA. They are getting money like St. Kilda and Hawthorn have been for Waverley. Watch Hawthorn's results without the Waverley money. Propping up rabbles is AFL policy. You say there are conditions but there aren't. You get propped up regardless of why you need it and THEN conditions are imposed. Carlton can raise the money need from their own supporter base and via their own means but they don't have to.
Completely different situation.
We were happy to stay at Waverley, we had a contract, and it was the competition and the other 14 clubs that wanted us and Hawthorn to move.
Carlton needed to move or they'd go broke.
No comparison.
And Hawthorns recent financial results have more to do with their onfield plight and off-field investments than the loss of the Waverley income.
JeffDunne
8 Aug 2005, 10:51
The obsession continuous.
JD, Carlton are still doing better financially than StKilda. :confused:
How much is your debt again. Get over us fella.
LMFAO - the denial of the lemmings is incredible.
BTW sunshine, our debt will be gone by the end of next season. The club are forcasting that we'll have at least $1M in reserves this time next year. With sponsorships and increased expsoure both guaranteed next year, this figure will probably be exceeded.
it was bitterly cold at the 'G' yesterday. There would have been 15,000 Carlton supporters there. Not a bad effort considering.
JeffDunne
8 Aug 2005, 10:53
Was there not a loss of approx. 8 million FY 2004/05 due to writing down the value of the Legends stand Dcik head!!!
Look up the annual report and get someone to read it to you fc uk wit!!!
Such abuse.
I can tell the real hardcore lemmings - they get angry the minute you present them with facts.
I understand the write downs - but the club is still operating a loss. Go ask Collo if you don;t believe me. He'll tell you. :)
The interest bill alone must be killing the Blues. I think they have debts of $10m, so at a commercial rate of around 8% that is $800k a year just in servicing the debt let alone paying it.
Pies only got 33,000 v the Roos, maybe Eddie is being sent a message re Malthhouse?
Such abuse.
I can tell the real hardcore lemmings - they get angry the minute you present them with facts.
I understand the write downs - but the club is still operating a loss. Go ask Collo if you don;t believe me. He'll tell you. :)
Take it easy Dunncey Boy. Move on. Enjoy your own club at the moment.
flankerfromsrilanka
8 Aug 2005, 11:05
Brisbane and Sydney have a Melbourne following.
They draw 30K plus for most games at the Dome.
Why dont you go back and have a look at what bottom teams
of the past (eg St Kilda) drew against Sydney and Brisbane
back in 2000, 2001 and 2002. I'd be staggered if they hit
25K
JeffDunne
8 Aug 2005, 11:09
Pies only got 33,000 v the Roos, maybe Eddie is being sent a message re Malthhouse?
Or maybe the myth that supporters of the Big 3 will turn out regardless of results is being shown up for what it is?
Big 3
:p JD's Inferiority complex raising its ugly head once again.
JD
I think it is more a sign that the supporters are becoming more like theatre goers. Noticeable that at games now, the noise and emotion is a lot as prominent as it used to be.
I think also that the draft means there is no honour in fighting for wins and a lot of true supporters feel compromised going to games where they know they are better of losing.
Not just the big 3 or whatever, it applies to all clubs IMO and is a symptom of the draft.
Lukesta63
8 Aug 2005, 11:21
JD Collo is the original prophet of doom! When the punishment was dished out in '02 he was unsure if we'd field a team the following year!
Do you honestly believe if Carlton had a genuine trading loss of 8 million d
ollars,it would still be operating????
Why don't we meet for a beer one day before the game? My shout ;)
Funkalicous
8 Aug 2005, 11:30
I think also that the draft means there is no honour in fighting for wins and a lot of true supporters feel compromised going to games where they know they are better of losing.
Good point. I personally found it extremely difficult to watch the game yesterday. It was like I was barracking for both sides. My heart wanted the Blues to win, but my brain was supporting Port. It was absolutely unbearable. :(
itsintheblood
8 Aug 2005, 11:40
The obsession continuous.
JD, Carlton are still doing better financially than StKilda. :confused:
How much is your debt again. Get over us fella.
No you're not surrey. Dont kid yourself. Your balance sheet is a mess with this legends stand. An absolute mess. And by the time the taxman is finished with you, you'll be standing next to collo rattling the tins.
Good point. I personally found it extremely difficult to watch the game yesterday. It was like I was barracking for both sides. My heart wanted the Blues to win, but my brain was supporting Port. It was absolutely unbearable. :(
Felt the same Funky. Will be even worse this week against the 'pies.
As for JD's original point, both games have been shown live on Foxtel. Would have thought alot of people may have wanted to stay at home and watch the game in the warmth of their living room.
As for selling games interstate, I actually don't mind the idea. The next question is where. My preference would be Perth. Have a massive following over there, and if the $$ were right, why not?
Carlton have really suffered over the past few years becuase of mis-management and the likes, and need to start thinking outside the box.
JeffDunne
8 Aug 2005, 11:40
JD
I think it is more a sign that the supporters are becoming more like theatre goers. Noticeable that at games now, the noise and emotion is a lot as prominent as it used to be.
I think also that the draft means there is no honour in fighting for wins and a lot of true supporters feel compromised going to games where they know they are better of losing.
Not just the big 3 or whatever, it applies to all clubs IMO and is a symptom of the draft.
As opposed to turning up knowing your team has no chance of victory?
What a cop out.
I think also that the draft means there is no honour in fighting for wins and a lot of true supporters feel compromised going to games where they know they are better of losing.
Not just the big 3 or whatever, it applies to all clubs IMO and is a symptom of the draft.
Bingo.
Couple that with the bottom team playing an interstate team which is struggling to make the 8 on a cold, miserable day and those crowd figures aren't at all surprising.
SurreyBlue
8 Aug 2005, 11:43
No you're not surrey. Dont kid yourself. Your balance sheet is a mess with this legends stand. An absolute mess. And by the time the taxman is finished with you, you'll be standing next to collo rattling the tins.
Nah mate, that's Richmond and you know it.
JeffDunne
8 Aug 2005, 11:44
As for selling games interstate, I actually don't mind the idea. The next question is where. My preference would be Perth. Have a massive following over there, and if the $$ were right, why not?
Carlton have really suffered over the past few years becuase of mis-management and the likes, and need to start thinking outside the box.
I guess that's my point. If Carlton need cash, they are getting poor crowds for these games anyway, why not sell them, especially next year with the Commonwealth games stuffing up the schedule? For the next year or two at least they aren't going to be challengers, so why not sell a couple of games over the next two years and bring in another $1-2M?
SurreyBlue
8 Aug 2005, 11:45
Does any-one have the 2005 membership figures for StKilda (premiership favourite) and Carlton (spoon favourite)? Would be intersting to see?
SurreyBlue
8 Aug 2005, 11:46
I guess that's my point. If Carlton need cash, they are getting poor crowds for these games anyway, why not sell them, especially next year with the Commonwealth games stuffing up the schedule? For the next year or two at least they aren't going to be challengers, so why not sell a couple of games over the next two years and bring in another $1-2M?
Not going to happen JD. We are NOT StKilda and never will be.
Or maybe the myth that supporters of the Big 3 will turn out regardless of results is being shown up for what it is?
You may be right JD...good to see the Don fans still turning up though 42k against sydney was a decent crowd.
As for the blues they need to start winning some games soon as sponsors and Tv want nothing to do with them at the minute. I dont care how big you are as a club if you get yourself so entrenched in ******** its hard to dig yourself out. Ask eddie about that as he states the pies weren't far off going down the gurgler in 99.
JeffDunne
8 Aug 2005, 11:48
Does any-one have the 2005 membership figures for StKilda (premiership favourite) and Carlton (spoon favourite)? Would be intersting to see?
Carlton are 2-300 ahead (I think).
Your point? A club with similar membership figures already plays two home games interstate? :confused:
Blues_Man
8 Aug 2005, 11:52
Carlton are 2-300 ahead (I think).
Your point? A club with similar membership figures already plays two home games interstate? :confused:
you mean the bottom of the table team is still ahead in membership to the young and upcoming side (chock full of first round draft picks ) who are alsmost equal premiership favorites ???? :eek:
that says something right there
Carlton are 2-300 ahead (I think).
Your point? A club with similar membership figures already plays two home games interstate? :confused:
JD, just interested, but do you actually watch any footy games? You seem way too interested in the administration side of things, whereas your actual footy knowledge is a bit limited. You’re not an accountant by any chance? :)
whereas your actually footy knowledge is a bit limited.
A line soaked in irony.
JeffDunne
8 Aug 2005, 12:00
you mean the bottom of the table team is still ahead in membership to the young and upcoming side (chock full of first round draft picks ) who are alsmost equal premiership favorites ???? :eek:
that says something right there
Our shaky start to the season and lack of home games early on probably cost us reaching 35K. Given we have come off such a low base after the Tim Watson years our annual increases (in percentage terms) have been impressive. A similar increase next year and we’ll be in the high 30’s.
Carlton’s membership figures have gone sideways. You are losing members as fast as you gain them. Unless the start of next season has the same amount of hype as this, I’d be surprised if you can maintain your figures let alone increase them.
JeffDunne
8 Aug 2005, 12:01
A line soaked in irony.
:)
itsintheblood
8 Aug 2005, 12:03
Not going to happen JD. We are NOT StKilda and never will be.
Is that why you sold your jumpers to M&M's??? Never say never surrey.
79Vintage
8 Aug 2005, 12:06
I'm not going to abuse the original poster of this thread, I'm just going to address the merit of his arguments. Here I go -
Wait, there is no merit to his argument;)
Uhumagoo
8 Aug 2005, 12:07
We could sell our home game against Collingwood to... us, and play it at Optus, however we will give Collingwood fair opportunity to bid for it....
Syndey spank us wherever we play, So if we had to, I'd sell a home game to them..
JeffDunne
8 Aug 2005, 12:08
Is that why you sold your jumpers to M&M's??? Never say never surrey.
Slurpee longs for the Elliott years . . . cheating was always more palatable than having to compete on equal terms.
JeffDunne
8 Aug 2005, 12:10
I'm not going to abuse the original poster of this thread, I'm just going to address the merit of his arguments. Here I go -
Wait, there is no merit to his argument;)
So you're happy with 16K loss making games?
You've already had two this year. Sell them and the club could be in the black.
Is that why you sold your jumpers to M&M's??? Never say never surrey.
Ebay'd those finals tickets yet? :)
79Vintage
8 Aug 2005, 12:22
And as a bottom of the ladder team, as we will be for the next few years, the reality is in the last six weeks of the season we will still draw very low crowds, when many supporters feel the season is already over. That's the reality of the situation, so what you're really suggesting is sell home games off against home games earlier in the season that would make roughly the same amount of money. The only other option is to sell home games off in the last six weeks of the year, which really isn't a good way to repay the loyalty of many diehard patrons. There is also one other thing you haven't considered, Carlton supporters would backlash against losing home games and the cost in people not buying memberships would have to be equated against the big bickies that are on offer for these sold home games.
.
JD's obsession with Carlton is embarrassing.
I think it's funny!
Makes me proud that we've dominated stkilda so much over the decades that people like JD are cut so deep. Now we're in a manipulated system it matters not what happens, success and failure are contrived and the value of both lessened and cheapened in equal proportion.
JD
I think it is more a sign that the supporters are becoming more like theatre goers. Noticeable that at games now, the noise and emotion is a lot as prominent as it used to be.
I think also that the draft means there is no honour in fighting for wins and a lot of true supporters feel compromised going to games where they know they are better of losing.
Not just the big 3 or whatever, it applies to all clubs IMO and is a symptom of the draft.Collingwood's current issues aside I think it is a result of teams being better served with a loss than a win. I am seriously in two minds whether to go this week. We need to lose but it's against Carlton. I'm sure a lot of their mob feel the same although they can afford one more win so maybe not. I might give my seats to my Carlton supporting Niece and nephew and hope they have a great day.
Still, 33k wasn't bad all things considered.
JeffDunne
8 Aug 2005, 12:27
79Vintage, they are the same issues for every other club.
Why should other teams be forced to sell games before they get support - whereas Carlton are being underwritten while being allowed to accumulate debt?
IMO Carlton should be forced to sell games if they keep drawing such low attendances for particular fixtures.
Collingwood's current issues aside I think it is a result of teams being better served with a loss than a win. I am seriously in two minds whether to go this week. We need to lose but it's against Carlton. I'm sure a lot of their mob feel the same although they can afford one more win so maybe not. I might give my seats to my Carlton supporting Niece and nephew and hope they have a great day.
Still, 33k wasn't bad all things considered.
MarkT i have no problem losing to collingwood if it means we get your mob out of the priority pick area and keep the drivers seat for picks 1 and 3.
I'm not speaking for all carlton fans but i do know a lot that agree with me, i want to lose this week the same as i wanted to lose against port.
IMO Carlton should be forced to sell games if they keep drawing such low attendances for particular fixtures.
IMO you should be banned from incessantly posting about Carlton, but we don't always get what we want ;)
JeffDunne
8 Aug 2005, 12:35
F****d Deej isn't it!
Carlton and Collingwood wanting to be on the bottom?
No, it's f***ing beautiful.
The icing will be the realisation it's not by choice.
F****d Deej isn't it!
If the AFL said they'd drop the draft forever right now, i'd change my tune in a heartbeat and be there with bells on screaming for a win against your mob. And despite us losing picks 1 and 3 and suddenly having to compete with all the other clubs on an equal footing this year, which could be to the detriment of my club's drafting this year, I'd endorse the decision to drop the draft wholeheartedly.
I hate security blankets, i want to live or die on our own two feet.
Carlton and Collingwood wanting to be on the bottom?
No, it's f***ing beautiful.
The icing will be the realisation it's not by choice.
No sh#t sherlock we know it's not by choice. Just like it wasn't Goddard's or Deliddio's CHOICE to go to saints or tigers.
So bitter and angry JD. The Blues are well on the way to fast -tracking their financial turnaround. The financial stress Carlton has been under would have closed down any other club in the competition, but fortunately we have and always will have huge financial backing, so we just don’t have to resort the desperate measures you’re hoping the Blues to take. Not only are Carlton fast-tracking their financial recovery, but Denis is assembling an impressive young playing group, which will be further enhanced with this years top draft picks. Lots to look forward to for Blues fans. :)
I take it the ATO's recent billing of Carlton FC is evidence of how Carlton tried to "fast track" its financial recovery?
Even with Elliot gone you're still a dodgy organisation.
I take it the ATO's recent billing of Carlton FC is evidence of how Carlton tried to "fast track" its financial recovery?
Even with Elliot gone you're still a dodgy organisation.
do you even have an inkling what you're talking about? how old are you?
JeffDunne
8 Aug 2005, 12:42
No sh#t sherlock we know it's not by choice. Just like it wasn't Goddard's or Deliddio's CHOICE to go to saints or tigers.
Oh that's right I forgot . . . Carlton are on the bottom because of some great AFL conspiracy.
Your club supports the system Deej, in fact your president helped engineer it. Complain to him if he (or the club) can't work in it.
You are bottom because of ineptitude. Nothing more, nothing less.
MarkT i have no problem losing to collingwood if it means we get your mob out of the priority pick area and keep the drivers seat for picks 1 and 3.
I'm not speaking for all carlton fans but i do know a lot that agree with me, i want to lose this week the same as i wanted to lose against port.
Thats what the system encourages at this point of the season.Its a big loss to lose pick 1 and 3 but the pride involved is also a big motivator. I would like to see the Pies win the last few games but I can understand if anyone wants to get some quality picks. Stinks really.
skipper kelly
8 Aug 2005, 12:53
Get rid of 4 Victorian sides and all problems are solved.
Carlton and Collingwood wanting to be on the bottom?
No, it's f***ing beautiful.
The icing will be the realisation it's not by choice.
Who said anything about wanting to be bottom? I want to stay on 5 wins so we get a PP. That’s the rules we have to deal with. Last year we finished 13th and ended up with pick 7. The previous year we finished 2nd and ended up with pick oblivion. Hardly rocket science or surprising. I don't want to tank, I don’t want a spoon but what the heck good would 1 more win achieve against a Carlton on its knees. I should want to grind then but right now that would be cutting off our nose to spite our face. Pretty simple stuff. Why can't you see it? For the record I would much rather my club signed who ever the hell it wanted to sign and went to court to keep them all. If you don’t have a contract you are available. I’m not the one who can’t sleep at night with out my blankie.
I don’t want the draft and PP freebies but when that is the only way to get players you have to take what you get gifted for ineptness because when you are good you will be penalised.
I never said choice was part of the equation. I have no illusions that we are tanking and I'm glad we aren't. We gave it everything on Sunday and North had too much class in the end. I am worried Carlton won't have too much class this weekend.
Next year is another year and hopefully we will have a forward line.
Oh that's right I forgot . . . Carlton are on the bottom because of some great AFL conspiracy.
Your club supports the system Deej, in fact your president helped engineer it. Complain to him if he (or the club) can't work in it.
You are bottom because of ineptitude. Nothing more, nothing less.
We're on the bottom because it is our turn to be on the bottom in the context of the system. The fact we've been on the bottom and will be for longer than usual is because we've not played the system as well as others have.
Two very different things, don't get confused between the two.
itsintheblood
8 Aug 2005, 13:21
Ebay'd those finals tickets yet? :)
STILL in the hunt parrothead. Even after our poor second half, we're STILL in the hunt. How's your finals prospects this year going??
Idiot.
KnaveyBlue
8 Aug 2005, 13:39
Is anyone going to remind our little obsessor that our two 16k games were played against:
Fremantle, on a Sunday, in bitter cold.
Port Adelaide, on a Sunday, 10 degrees and pi$$ing down rain.
If you think St Kilda would have got more than 16k to either game then you're simply kidding yourself.
But hey, don't let the facts get in the way of a good troll JD, you big Carltonophile you ;)
flankerfromsrilanka
8 Aug 2005, 13:39
Oh that's right I forgot . . . Carlton are on the bottom because of some great AFL conspiracy.
Your club supports the system Deej, in fact your president helped engineer it. Complain to him if he (or the club) can't work in it.
You are bottom because of ineptitude. Nothing more, nothing less.
Yes, but St Kilda are currently flag favourites because of ineptitude.
Nothing more, nothing less. No other way the Kosis and Riewoldts of this
world would have played for your former rabble. And please don't tell me
you had some grand f****** recruiting scheme down there because we know it's not true.
Yes, but St Kilda are currently flag favourites because of ineptitude.
Nothing more, nothing less. No other way the Kosis and Riewoldts of this
world would have played for your former rabble. And please don't tell me
you had some grand f****** recruiting scheme down there because we know it's not true.
StKilda's recruiting gurus chose Ball over Judd.
Think that pretty much answers it.
JeffDunne
8 Aug 2005, 13:45
StKilda's recruiting gurus chose Ball over Judd.
Think that pretty much answers it.
And a very astute decision it was too.
FWIW, StKilda have never had a problem getting talent. We had a pretty good zone to draw on. Remember, the good old days where kids had NO choice who they played for?
We had a pretty good zone to draw on. Remember, the good old days where kids had NO choice who they played for?
Some kids.
And a very astute decision it was too.
FWIW, StKilda have never had a problem getting talent. We had a pretty good zone to draw on. Remember, the good old days where kids had NO choice who they played for?
There has always been a high suicide in Ballarat. I wonder why!
SurreyBlue
8 Aug 2005, 13:57
79Vintage, they are the same issues for every other club.
Why should other teams be forced to sell games before they get support - whereas Carlton are being underwritten while being allowed to accumulate debt?
IMO Carlton should be forced to sell games if they keep drawing such low attendances for particular fixtures.
Show me where the AFL have underwritten Carlton's loses or even helped us get back into a positive? :confused:
As for "forced"....sorry, unlike "home ground", no-one forced anyone to sell their games interstate.
Again talking s**t.
skipper kelly
8 Aug 2005, 14:00
get rid of the 6 non victorian teams and all the problems will be solved
And a very astute decision it was too.
FWIW, StKilda have never had a problem getting talent. We had a pretty good zone to draw on. Remember, the good old days where kids had NO choice who they played for?
Ball Judd Hodge who cares, Essendon Collingwood Adelaide Sydney or Carlton weren't given a chance to have a crack at them, they were handed to you on a silver platter and now you're building a side around these gifts.
Odds are if we all had an equal chance at drafting either one of these young guns that none of them would be playing where they are now.
Riewoldt would be at Brisbane.
You support the draft because it's the making of your club and you'd be racking up spoon number 27 28 and 29 without it, i am against it because fundamentally i disagree with what/how it strives to achieve what it does. If Bryce Gibbs wants to play for Adelaide he should bloody well be allowed to play for Adelaide.
SurreyBlue
8 Aug 2005, 14:03
It never ceases to amaze me how "certain" supporters support a system that breed's mediocrity and more importantly demands it. I think they call it "progress".
skipper kelly
8 Aug 2005, 14:05
get rid of the draft and all the problems will be solved
JeffDunne
8 Aug 2005, 14:05
Show me where the AFL have underwritten Carlton's loses or even helped us get back into a positive? :confused:
As for "forced"....sorry, unlike "home ground", no-one forced anyone to sell their games interstate.
Again talking s**t.
Ian Collins basically said as much when releasing last years result. Actually, he said something along the lines of " . . . we wouldn't be able to trade if it wasn't for the goodwill of our bank . . . ". Given the AFL have underwritten the debt with the bank by guaranteeing Carltons future dividends, the AFL is underwriting the club. If the AFL had done likewise with Fitzroy they'd still be in the comp.
The reason clubs like StKilda were forced to sell games was because the same undertakings weren't forthcoming when we needed them.
SurreyBlue
8 Aug 2005, 14:05
Ball Judd Hodge who cares, Essendon Collingwood Adelaide Sydney or Carlton weren't given a chance to have a crack at them, they were handed to you on a silver platter and now you're building a side around these gifts.
Odds are if we all had an equal chance at drafting either one of these young guns that none of them would be playing where they are now.
Riewoldt would be at Brisbane.
You support the draft because it's the making of your club, i am against it because fundamentally i disagree with what/how it strives to achieve what it does. If Bryce Gibbs wants to play for Adelaide he should bloody well be allowed to play for Adelaide.
Hear Hear. But we are wasting out time Deej, they don't like the hard work down at Moorabbin and 100 years of history shows that.
get rid of the 6 non victorian teams and all the problems will be solvedAll the problems? Are you serious? List them all. Does one of them have anything to do with viability? Good grief you read some ill thought out trash on here at times. Which 6 and how are the cull decisions made? Does 1 go North to replace a failed South Melbourne experiment?
JeffDunne
8 Aug 2005, 14:08
It never ceases to amaze me how "certain" supporters support a system that breed's mediocrity and more importantly demands it. I think they call it "progress".
Explain to me again how it breeds mediocrity?
Was Andrew Walker (a priority pick) better than a flag?
skipper kelly
8 Aug 2005, 14:09
All the problems? Are you serious? List them all. Does one of them have anything to do with viability? Good grief you read some ill thought out trash on here at times. Which 6 and how are the cull decisions made? Does 1 go North to replace a failed South Melbourne experiment?
all 6.
SurreyBlue
8 Aug 2005, 14:09
Ian Collins basically said as much when releasing last years result. Actually, he said something along the lines of " . . . we wouldn't be able to trade if it wasn't for the goodwill of our bank . . . ". Given the AFL have underwritten the debt with the bank by guaranteeing Carltons future dividends, the AFL is underwriting the club. If the AFL had done likewise with Fitzroy they'd still be in the comp.
Wrong. The Club worked it out with Banks direct, the AFL bought forward funds that we "would" get this year to fix our cash flow....nothing was underwritten by the AFL, nothing was handed to us that we weren't going to get and nothing has been given to us for moving. The last point is quite prudent here as others have received compensation for moving.
If the AFL were serious about the national comp they'd scrap all the vic sides and start afresh. Wipe the slate clean, set up 4 melbourne sides and go from there.
JD, you weren’t forced it was how you chose to manage your self inflicted position. Back in the olden days before TV contracts underwrote your existence when faced with a similar (recurring?) problem you just gave hair cuts after your benefactors ran dry.
SurreyBlue
8 Aug 2005, 14:11
Explain to me again how it breeds mediocrity?
Was Andrew Walker (a priority pick) better than a flag?
You must be the thickest bloke on earth.
If clubs haven't been throwing games to get picks (way back in the late 90's even), then you are living with your head in the ground. That is what is wrong with the system, people WANT TO LOSE. :o
If the AFL were serious about the national comp they'd scrap all the vic sides and start afresh. Wipe the slate clean, set up 4 melbourne sides and go from there.
Are you serious? What sort of comp would they be serious about then? One that 1/4 of the State followed with any semblance of passion? It would die a quick death. Blunt the Melbourne market and you don't have a viable national comp. Which networks will pay $100m?
JeffDunne
8 Aug 2005, 14:15
Wrong. The Club worked it out with Banks direct, the AFL bought forward funds that we "would" get this year to fix our cash flow....nothing was underwritten by the AFL, nothing was handed to us that we weren't going to get and nothing has been given to us for moving. The last point is quite prudent here as others have received compensation for moving.
I get sick of making you look like a fool.
"We have liabilities of $15.1 million and assets which don't match that, so it is not a pretty picture when you look at the balance sheet itself," Collins said.
"It is fair to say that we are in a position where we are relying on the AFL and its redirection order, we are in a position where we are relying on our bankers.
Blues lose $11m but keen to keep Pagan (http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2005/02/28/1109546797309.html)
Pity how little some of you fools know about your own club. :rolleyes:
SurreyBlue
8 Aug 2005, 14:15
If the AFL were serious about the national comp they'd scrap all the vic sides and start afresh. Wipe the slate clean, set up 4 melbourne sides and go from there.
Partly agree here. The Victorian teams need to address this situation and NOT the AFL. Carlton, Essendon, Collingwood and even Richmond should start talking to the likes of Melbourne, Kangaroos, Western and Hawthorn.
I would let StKilda die a natural cause, because a hundred years of nothing equals just that. :D
skipper kelly
8 Aug 2005, 14:17
get rid of the salary cap and all the problems will be solved
SurreyBlue
8 Aug 2005, 14:17
I get sick of making you look like a fool.
"We have liabilities of $15.1 million and assets which don't match that, so it is not a pretty picture when you look at the balance sheet itself," Collins said.
"It is fair to say that we are in a position where we are relying on the AFL and its redirection order, we are in a position where we are relying on our bankers.
Blues lose $11m but keen to keep Pagan (http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2005/02/28/1109546797309.html)
Pity how little some of you fools know about your own club. :rolleyes:
I'm the fool. TWO STATEMENT THERE JD. :rolleyes:
Redirection = ONE from AFL. Maybe you should look up the word "redirection" and
TWO = relying on our bankers. OUR BANKERS.....
And you call other what again? :o
Partly agree here. The Victorian teams need to address this situation and NOT the AFL. Carlton, Essendon, Collingwood and even Richmond should start talking to the likes of Melbourne, Kangaroos, Western and Hawthorn.
I would let StKilda die a natural cause, because a hundred years of nothing equals just that. :D
Your kidding right.
Hawthorn has higher memberships, better facilities and more supporters then Richmond.
It would be a Hawthorn takeover not the opposite way around.
Richmond are insignifigant
They are expendable, Hawthorn is the new member of the big 4.
More members,better supporters,better facilities more success.
Premierships in cricketers off season doesnt count
JeffDunne
8 Aug 2005, 14:18
You must be the thickest bloke on earth.
If clubs haven't been throwing games to get picks (way back in the late 90's even), then you are living with your head in the ground. That is what is wrong with the system, people WANT TO LOSE. :o
I'm thick?
You're the idiot that wants your team to lose.
Sides have won games late in the season to put them above the PP thresh-hold. Only a goose would think that teams that are crap all year would need to throw games in order to lose. There in the position in the first place because they're crap.
If there was no PP or draft, teams without a finals chance would still give kids a game. It's not tanking - it's being smart and developing your players.
You really are a fool.