Carlton Supporters and The AFL

[Waynesworld]

Haha, good one but you're wrong.
I do follow the game passionately, watch every single game most weekeneds, and know the rules exactly.
Obviously no one is one eyed enough to call for free kicks when they clearly arent there, although when you go to games there are some morons in the mob mentality who call for everything (cough* eagles supporters cough*) but on carlton games id say there is obviously a weighting to carltons side due to my support of the mighty blues but it's not 100% and i don't believe anyone is such a way.
But if you're watching the game with complete neutrality then you're not a supporter

Well I will apologise. However from what I have read recently on the Carlton board and from Carlton supporters in general it is not hard to see why we wouldn't tar you all with the same Chicken wing marinade.

 

[JRoo]

He sold them back at a far less price than he had been offered and NTH new Jack was just taking the piss. He did the deal after it was found that the shares would go back to club. He did the right thing and i suggest you should be thankful for it. He did not have to sell them back we had just made 1.4million from selling CSC and could have made 600k from the sale of the NTh shares but we sold them back for around the 200k mark.

He did nothing of the sort, what was the price he could have sold them for and what was the price he did sell them for?

The CFC did not do the NMFC any sort of favour by selling John Magowan the shares, Carlton needed the cash themselves after investing in their useless grandstand. John Magowan was sick of the arrogant fool at Carlton and used his own cash to get rid of the CFC from our share registry after their previous attempt to buy out the club, strip the assets out and to then shut us down.

 

[GarnerSmash]

Well when the marks are 45-50 metres out on a tight angle and they are then awarded 50 metre penalties they count as freebies to me. Certainly got looked after by the umps did Drew.

I hate Carlton more than any team, and I was sympathising with them on Friday night, so work that one out.

Dude, Jamison rode him into the turf with his knees. 50 every day. That's Jamisons fault, not the umps. The douce wants to show Petrie he's there do so by spoiling, not by pretending to be a freaking jockey.

 

[Kaiser Powser]

Lost your marbles maybe?

Well it was a tough week at work

 

[Waynesworld]

I have not read anyone say that, but i guess you can not bitch like and old women if you don't add bullshit.

Please go back to the Carlton board. One of the earlier threads started with a post about how Carlton were raped by the umpires, and Drew's and Adam's 50m were the first 2 incorrect decisions listed.
Now I will admit to the fact that I did think the first was soft, but the second.....please.
But as I said - check the Carlton board. Makes for very amusing reading. Admittedly most of the real muppets don't seem to venture out much.

 

[Smokeyr67]

Do you really think the club would go under?? Forget that we have 3 billionaires and another 20 odd that are worth well over 100 mill.

OK, so there's Judd, Pratt - who are the rest?

 

[Kaiser Powser]

Jamsion was reported!! Every commentator said how bad jamsion's action was. Don't comment if you don't understand the game..

Dude, Jamison rode him into the turf with his knees. 50 every day. That's Jamisons fault, not the umps. The douce wants to show Petrie he's there do so by spoiling, not by pretending to be a freaking jockey.

Obviously the Jamison 50 was there. But it seemed to quickly follow a soft free to Petrie in front, so just seemed to compound the first free which was wrong IMO.
By the time Petrie got another softie later in the game I was pretty much shaking my head.

 

[GarnerSmash]

Obviously the Jamison 50 was there. But it seemed to quickly follow a soft free to Petrie in front, so just seemed to compound the first free which was wrong IMO.
By the time Petrie got another softie later in the game I was pretty much shaking my head.

I do agree that the first did seem a bit soft. The ump claimed double movement from Jamison, first a nudge on Petrie, then an attempt to mark. I would have been pissed if that was called at the other end. Regardless ,you play back jockey to a full forward it is completely irrelevant what has occurred before. That's 50. Tough shit Jamo, dumb move.

 

[jonoman89]

Here one of their own has been dealt appropriately and fairly within the rules

How can anyone honestly suggest that this is the case considering the sanctions other players have received this season for similar or worse acts.

Judd deserved weeks but he has been treated anything but appropriately considering other circumstances. It's also not very appropriate for an MRP member to declare him all but guilty of misconduct when it's not their call to do so, whilst at the same time the Club can't defend their player for risk of being fined.

I would agree Judd has been treated appropriately and fairly if Hunt got 3 weeks or Wellingham received more weeks. They haven't.

The system is rotten to the core. It's not just a matter of Chris Judd.

 

[Oneiros]

How can anyone honestly suggest that this is the case considering the sanctions other players have received this season for similar or worse acts.

Judd deserved weeks but he has been treated anything but appropriately considering other circumstances. It's also not very appropriate for an MRP member to declare him all but guilty of misconduct when it's not their call to do so, whilst at the same time the Club can't defend their player for risk of being fined.

I would agree Judd has been treated appropriately and fairly if Hunt got 3 weeks or Wellingham received more weeks. They haven't.

Wellingham did get more weeks - we just have an insane system that allows guilty-plea reductions on all but a tiny subset of catchall offences and gives good record reductions for even heinous acts.

For what its worth the fact that the tribunal disregarded Judd's priors and loading does make up for the lack of guilty plea.

 

[jonoman89]

And as for the victim mentality people allude to Carlton supporters have. Well, you'd feel the same way if the AFL nearly destroyed your club for committing acts nearly every club in the competition was doing.

People forget that Melbourne and Essendon were convicted of severe salary cap cheating in the late 1990s and received a sanction not even in the same ball park.

 

[djrossie16]

Nah, not even.

Does Bartel have a Bee allergy?

 

[GreatBradScott]

And as for the victim mentality people allude to Carlton supporters have. Well, you'd feel the same way if the AFL nearly destroyed your club for committing acts nearly every club in the competition was doing.

People forget that Melbourne and Essendon were convicted of severe salary cap cheating in the late 1990s and received a sanction not even in the same ball park.

Evidence? Please, I'll shut up if you prove EVERY OTHER AFL CLUB was doing this.

 

[jonoman89]

Wellingham did get more weeks - we just have an insane system that allows guilty-plea reductions on all but a tiny subset of catchall offences and gives good record reductions for even heinous acts.

For what its worth the fact that the tribunal disregarded Judd's priors and loading does make up for the lack of guilty plea.

People bring this up all the time, that Wellingham actually received 5 weeks. As you have mentioned, this is bullshit. He has received 3 weeks. The system just managed to dress it up to make the sanction sound worse than it actually is.

Doing nothing on the Hunt foot stomp is one of the worst decisions the MRP has ever made. If Judd brought the game into disrepute how the hell can Hunt be cleared?

It actually boggles the mind how ridiculous the MRP and Tribunal has become. It's a raffle. There is no consistency whatsoever due to an arbitrary points system and no precedent being followed. It's a sham process which continually delivers sham results for every club in the league.

 

[jonoman89]

Evidence? Please, I'll shut up if you prove EVERY OTHER AFL CLUB was doing this.

With pleasure.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salary_cap#Breaches_2

And I never said every club was doing it. I said nearly every club was doing it. A few clubs being repeat and serious offenders in Carlton, Melbourne, Essendon and Sydney.

 

[PieBeast]

OK, so there's Judd, Pratt - who are the rest?

The Moran family.

PS. Collingwood might be the most hated club in the league but carlton supporters' behavior over the last couple of days shows why they're the most despised.

 

[GreatBradScott]

With pleasure.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salary_cap#Breaches_2

Let's have some fun.


In 2002, Carlton were fined a record $987,500 and forfeited their priority picks in the National Draft, their first and second round picks in the National Draft for two years and were excluded from the 2003 pre-season draft after an AFL investigation found that they had committed serious and systematic breaches of the salary cap regulations totaling $1.37 million between 1998 and 2001; ruckman Matthew Allan was suspended for five matches and fined $10,000 for accepting undisclosed payments from club officials.


Every other club received fines of under $60,000 for minor breaches which totaled to no more than the highest being WCE being upwards of $150,000.


1 POINT 3 ****ING MILLION DOLLARS.

Are you flogs for real.

Size of the crime = Size of the punishment.

You're all sick in the head.

 

[Oneiros]

The Moran family.

PS. Collingwood might be the most hated club in the league but carlton supporters' behavior over the last couple of days shows why they're the most despised.

Aren't they all in jail??

 

[KnaveyBlue]

Odd, as an Eagles fan, I hadn't noticed that.

Well, the free kick count does gain some relevance when your club is consistently streets ahead of the rest of the competition in terms of frees received. This is of course due to the Subiaco Effect.

SUBIACO EFFECT: [soo-be-ako ef-ekt]

Definition: A temporary state of confusion that manifests in umpires when crowd reaction does not match the correct decision which should be paid.

Usage: "Kerr was totally holding the ball then, but the umpire was never going to pay it because he didn't have 40,000 people screaming "BALL!" at him. F***ing Subiaco Effect."

 

[FlowersByIrene]

The Moran family.

PS. Collingwood might be the most hated club in the league but carlton supporters' behavior over the last couple of days shows why they're the most despised.

We're just sticking up for our own

 

[JeffDunne]

It is rather amusing that despite systematic cheating of the salary cap, the AFL then allowed Carlton to again blatantly flout the rules to acquire Judd & now Carlton fans are claiming the AFL are participating in a conspiracy against them & Judd.

Only a Carlton supporter could draw a line through those dots.

 

[BM123]

Oh yes lets judge thousands of people by the team they support because that's not incredibly stupid/naive at all......bigfooty sometimes....

 

[FlowersByIrene]

Well, the free kick count does gain some relevance when your club is consistently streets ahead of the rest of the competition in terms of frees received. This is of course due to the Subiaco Effect.

SUBIACO EFFECT: [soo-be-ako ef-ekt]

Definition: A temporary state of confusion that manifests in umpires when crowd reaction does not match the correct decision which should be paid.

Usage: "Kerr was totally holding the ball then, but the umpire was never going to pay it because he didn't have 40,000 people screaming "BALL!" at him. F***ing Subiaco Effect."

My family have members seats at Subiaco, and when i go there it is truly shocking
This old women shouts "he's holding him" every time Cox initiates a grapple in the ruck, despite the fact cox inititates it and they are both grappling.

The Subiaco effect is the worst game altering result in football.

 

[jonoman89]

Let's have some fun.


In 2002, Carlton were fined a record $987,500 and forfeited their priority picks in the National Draft, their first and second round picks in the National Draft for two years and were excluded from the 2003 pre-season draft after an AFL investigation found that they had committed serious and systematic breaches of the salary cap regulations totaling $1.37 million between 1998 and 2001; ruckman Matthew Allan was suspended for five matches and fined $10,000 for accepting undisclosed payments from club officials.


Every other club received fines of under $60,000 for minor breaches which totaled to no more than the highest being WCE being upwards of $150,000.


1 POINT 3 ****ING MILLION DOLLARS.

Are you flogs for real.

Size of the crime = Size of the punishment.

You're all sick in the head.

Read the page again. Look at the 1987 Sydney breaches, 1996 Essendon Breaches and 1999 Melbourne breaches. Same, if not worse, category of severity considering the cap was a lot smaller in those days.

Then look at the sanctions they received.

Then take off your anti-Carlton glasses.

 

[JeffDunne]

Oh yes lets judge thousands of people by the team they support because that's not incredibly stupid/naive at all......bigfooty sometimes....

Given the delusion extends to most Carlton presidents (current, dead & past) this century . . . can you blame people for this generalisation?