Diggins on the attack....again

[The Old Dark Navy's]

What has Rose done to deserve to be re-elected?

Can anyone answer this question?

That was my only point, that we didn't know what he had done, not that he hadn't done anything. There is a lot we don't know about both sides, so if we are going to question, we have to question EVERYBODY.

 

[mediumsizered]

She wont be re-elected so she's going out with a bang. Having a bitch, thats all this is. The only thing thats come of this other than her getting it off her chest (pretty unprofessional) is that its Carlton in the media yet again for shyte, bad news shyte..............

i dont know what i'm talking about - does anyone?????

And this to me is part of what counts against Diggins. This is now twice in a short period of time that she has put the media focus back on to the politics of our club. Her use of the media for her election campaign tends to suggest to me that people associated with her are most likely to be the people responsible for some of the information that was leaked to the media in previous months. If she gets re-elected, my advice to her fellow board members will be to mind their backs. It would seem there is no limit to what some people will do to get their message across.

 

[AndyWalkersGirl]

It would seem there is no limit to what some people will do to get their message across

But this is just it mediumsizered - how do we actually know who is right and who is wrong in coming out and saying what they are saying? how do we know she is not doing it for the good of the club?

It's very hard because we need to try to take into consideration both sides of the argument. It's never an easy thing to do. At least we're all passionate about this club!

 

[mediumsizered]

But this is just it mediumsizered - how do we actually know who is right and who is wrong in coming out and saying what they are saying? how do we know she is not doing it for the good of the club?

It's very hard because we need to try to take into consideration both sides of the argument. It's never an easy thing to do. At least we're all passionate about this club!

What I don't want to see is this board election fought in the media. The Unity group have done a mailout, Diggins says she has done a mailout, I assume Littman/Fiore/Clarke will be doing a mailout, as well. This is where the campaign should be fought. Not in front of the whole football community so our club can continue to be a laughing stock. This latest press release by Diggins was unnecessary because I assume what is contained in this release is the same as what is in her mailout. Who is she trying to win over by running to the media?

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

But ODN, how do you know that she isn't doing it to inform people?

How do you know that Smorgon hasn't been telling the truth and trying to keep the leaks inhouse? What we know and don't know is a two way street, that is my point.

So what, just because i have an opinion, you call it " out to cause derision"?

I pointed out the use of the term 'head in the sand' to describe those that aren't on the change bandwagon. That straight out suggests they don't know what is going on and is belittling in my view. One of the loudest changed advocates uses it regularly. I was wondering why you had resorted to using it. It was used in post 2 and to finish post 15 after claiming at the start of that post, it was being used by someone else. I checked, it wasn't.

I was trying to suggest it was not your usual form to use what I consider a derisive phrasing like that. That was complimentary to how I usually view you.

Just because my opinion may differ to yours, does not make it wrong. Just because i have voiced my opinions does not mean i am ridiculing anyone.

Again, head in the sand pretty much does that.

Just because you are a moderator does not make you a higher person of thought than i am. We are both entitled to our own opinions, right or wrong, and there should be room for healthy debate.

Now this is something both mediumsizered and I need to address once and for all I think. This perception that because a moderator disagrees with something, that we are pulling rank as a moderator, rather than expressing ourselves as posters. It seems we can't have opinions as posters because we are also moderators.

"But of late, it seems to be very little but that..." that is unneccessary and unhealthy. I am entitled to my opinions without someone telling me i am ridiculing or setting out to upset this board.

Well if I was just a poster I would object in stronger words than that. It is diplomacy that makes me appeal to the better nature in people rather than just straight out return fire. I personally object to the head in the sand analogy as I consider myself to be anything but ignorant.

For god's sake, there is an AGM coming up, and I am not the only one who is fed up with our club's off-field dramas.

I am sick of the off field dramas. I do recognise that they are not all caused by the Unity ticket however, and I do recognise that those outside of that ticket are firing their own shots. They want anger, they want frustration, they want the media circus because it is all another nail in Smorgon's coffin, as the general public perceive all bad news to be Smorgon's doing somehow.

I have explained time and time again, that I am not a Smorgon supporter but I consider myself to have a strongly developed sense of justice and I hate seeing hatchet jobs based on internet rumours and speculation, while one side of the debate gets off more lightly. I would prefer to be more objective than I am being, but the anti-Smorgon propaganda wagon is in a higher gear and I feel like some balance needs to be provided.

Just because i have been stating my views on Change does not make me a poster of lesser worth, or someone out to cause derision.

And I never said it did. Purely the head in the sand analogy.

Of late, i have voiced my opinions more frequently on the board issue. That is true. However, to cause derision is not something i do on these carlton boards.

Thus my question ...

It is quite unneccesary for you to accuse me of that. an AGM is a serious thing, and we are all entitled to discuss it, whether we have similar views or not.

Then we should all talk about the issues at hand and not suggest those that disagree have their head in the sand ... agree?

As for your head in the sand comment - i have never claimed to know the facts. That is the point of what i have written - the fact that we just do not know!! I said 'head in teh sand' because it has been thrown around here a lot leading up to this AGM

But you did say this ...

Time for change. Or we can keep living with our heads in teh sand.

So if we don't change, we are living with our heads in the sand. Is someone decided that we need to stabilise and not change until a better ticket comes along, they are living with their heads in the sand according to this. That is all I responded to. Your opinions you are perfectly entitled to. If I disagree, I will say so and if you disagree with me, you will say so. Such is the nature of forum debate.

, and i find it odd that people have been asking for some insight into the club's board, adn when someone tries to give it, they accuse her of doing it for the wrong reason.

I don't think anybody was asking Diggins for insight into the board but anyway. I find it odd that Diggins must be telling the truth but when Smorgon replies, he is the one lying. Again, a two way street.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

But this is just it mediumsizered - how do we actually know who is right and who is wrong in coming out and saying what they are saying? how do we know she is not doing it for the good of the club?

It's very hard because we need to try to take into consideration both sides of the argument. It's never an easy thing to do. At least we're all passionate about this club!

Now this is perfectly worded.

We don't really know and we are all bases our decisions on our own instinct. That is fine, we all have to decide somehow. But because we are just exercising our own judgement, we ALL have to be careful not to sell those with opposing views short and assume we are the ones in the right.

If it were all clear cut that would be different. Right now, there is a split in our supporter base and the board potentials and incumbents are using us to wage their war in many respects.

I would much rather civility and cautious decision making rather than anger and frustration amongst us.

 

[AndyWalkersGirl]

i get what you're saying now i think ODN. I didn't realise it was all in response to my 'head in the sand.'

Perhaps i should have used inverted commas around those words in my original posts. My point was, too many people have accused other people of living with their 'heads in the sand' for not wanting to know what is going on.

I was annoyed because it seemed there were too many people accusing Diggins of lying when we just dont know the whole story. We never will. I found it ironic that those who were accusing people of living with their 'heads in the sand' were the same people accusing diggins' statements.

The more i write - the easier it is to lose track of my original point - that is, we just dont know what is going on, we are not experts, we just have to listen to both sides and trust that whoever gets in will be doing it for the best interests of the club.

This is ridiculous - I can't ever remember a time when Carlton supporters were so split over our club. I just want it all to stop, and let's get back to the footy! As i said, i guess it just shows that we really are passionate about our club, as some of us get fired up very easily....

 

[HBF]

Now this is perfectly worded.

We don't really know and we are all bases our decisions on our own instinct. That is fine, we all have to decide somehow. But because we are just exercising our own judgement, we ALL have to be careful not to sell those with opposing views short and assume we are the ones in the right.

If it were all clear cut that would be different. Right now, there is a split in our supporter base and the board potentials and incumbents are using us to wage their war in many respects.

I would much rather civility and cautious decision making rather than anger and frustration amongst us.

That is very very well summed up ODN.
We all have to follow our own intuition and try and come up with who is more believable.

I do think that if Diggins gets re-elected, she will be very isolated on the board, and therefore, not sure how beneficial she will be.

 

[maroon and blue]

Is Dennis Pagan expendible? Does he have consuming passions outside of football? When setting the rudder right at the Blues should you factor him in or look towards a management (maybe not about who has the most bucks) that is focussed towards the betterment Carlton?

 

[OZBomb]

i get what you're saying now i think ODN. I didn't realise it was all in response to my 'head in the sand.'

Perhaps i should have used inverted commas around those words in my original posts. My point was, too many people have accused other people of living with their 'heads in the sand' for not wanting to know what is going on.

I was annoyed because it seemed there were too many people accusing Diggins of lying when we just dont know the whole story. We never will. I found it ironic that those who were accusing people of living with their 'heads in the sand' were the same people accusing diggins' statements.

The more i write - the easier it is to lose track of my original point - that is, we just dont know what is going on, we are not experts, we just have to listen to both sides and trust that whoever gets in will be doing it for the best interests of the club.

This is ridiculous - I can't ever remember a time when Carlton supporters were so split over our club. I just want it all to stop, and let's get back to the footy! As i said, i guess it just shows that we really are passionate about our club, as some of us get fired up very easily....

As I recall, "Head in the Sand" was used by those posters who where championing the white knights that where coming to replace the current board, suggesting some people refused to believe we where in trouble and where constantly positive. As I recall AWG, you where one of those accused of looking through rose coloured glasses by these posters, to which I thought you successfully argued that you didn't know the full facts and that any such talk only painted Carlton in a poor public light,

I find it ironic that you are now suggesting that others are leaving their head in the sand by not supporting Diggins decision to criticise Smorgon's management through the media.

To me, Diggins running to the media serves no purpose, but to damage the CFC brand. As has been mentioned, there are ways to inform the members of your policies and personal attacks through the media isn't one of them, atleast that I support. I understand Smorgon has also attempted to use the media for his agenda and I also find that abhorent. I don't support either of them.

I don't understand how you differentiate between the two because you agree with some of the things one is saying. There are ways to inform the members without making us look like a joke to the rest of the AFL and corporate community. Anyway... let's hope this thing is over soon enough.

 

[audas]

Here are some FACTS.

Lorraine Diggins has been out in the media and public (mailing memebrs) with a smear campaing. Nothing less. It is a disgrace to see anyone behaving this way politically and immediately strikes them off any decent, informed voters choice. It reeks of republicansim smear campaings of the lowest order and should not be tolerated.

She has publicy griped about petty player numberings of which she has no right over any one else.

She has launched a personal attack on the integrity of several members of the board and anyone knows that we dont air our dirty laundry.

And through all her recent behaviour can quite obviously be seen as the source of our leaks.

She has also been very deceptive about the ALF report.

She was given ample opportunity on talking carlton to air her acheivements and objectives. She paid NO MENTION to women of carlton despite claims to the contrary here. Her ONLY attempt at doing ANYTHING was a total failure, both the youth marketing and good governance document which was a debarcle. (Her own admittance).

Her plan for the future was a magic pot of gold ($7million) which was to come from thin air, and a business group (which Smorgan would have infinitely more ability at producing that Lorraine).

Her only other statements are that we need to change, which means ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. I've said that, is that grounds for me being elected, is that a platfrom ? NO. Is a public smear campaign something you want. NO.

compared to:

ON the other hand we have someone who has put out a press statement clarifying the situation regarding the report. DONE.

Someone who has not resorted to PETTY name calling.

Someone who is trying to remain restrained and not draw attention to the club with pathetic media stunts like lorraines and he is labelled a lack of passion for showing restrained professionalism

We now have a great list.

Expanded Coaching staff.

Retained all required players.

Redevloping labour park into something rivalling collingwoods

major sponsorrs returning with excellent prospects

DENIS PAGAN

financially on target with independant plan

3 year corporate strategy in palce and on target

More honest and open than Lorraine Diggins acutally is (the minutes are there AWG go check em out) WITHOUT the name calling, public smear campaing and inuendo and muck raking the a Lorraine is engaging in.

Once more. She has done nothing except fail, and offers NOTHING except completely empty vague ideas like we need to change.

Its not head in the sand, im worried about, its pie in the sky.

 

[Effes]

You accuse others of hysteria yet you're guilty of it yourself.

Once again putting your own spin on things in order to convince yourself that everything is alright

 

[audas]

According to the above post, no hysteria, no spin, no twist, no delusion. Egyptian fish needs the room of mirrors.

 

[Bee Vee]

Here are some FACTS.....

You should have stopped there.
Everything else is just uninformed opinion.

 

[Corpuscles]

Here are some FACTS.

Lorraine Diggins has been out in the media and public (mailing memebrs) with a smear campaing. Nothing less. It is a disgrace to see anyone behaving this way politically and immediately strikes them off any decent, informed voters choice. It reeks of republicansim smear campaings of the lowest order and should not be tolerated.

If you don't mind me saying so a good post. At least you have clearly decided where your vote is going and want to convince others!

You obviously know much more ... having read the Directors meeting minutes???? Must be on the board????

However from the outside ( yes it is interesting and not because its opportunity to kick)

These statements smack of truth to me:
http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/footy/common/story_page/0,8033,21059620%5E20322,00.html

CARLTON director Lauraine Diggins has described the Blues board as "dysfunctional" as the infighting continues at the struggling AFL club.


"withholding details of an AFL-commissioned report into the club operations"

"I am writing to seek your support at the most important board election in the history of Carlton," she wrote.

"It is five minutes to midnight at Carlton, but it is not too late.

"Change must begin at the top -- the present board has become dysfunctional.

"In recent months, it has not been accountable, democratic or transparent -- but the biggest problem is that too many board members think things are OK at Carlton."

She has got off her bum and written to members. Has Smorgon sent you his letter explaining how he intends to reverse the disaster whilst he was Pres?.....If he has and you are sure then stick with him. If not realise or discover how critical the next 3 years are to your club.

Diggins IMO has it right.... the board MUST VIGOROUSLY seek Corporate or benefactor debt reduction donation in order to well .....be Carlton... otherwise 3 more years on the park bench covered in dirty newspapers!

The pity is Diggins, would be an outrider and divisive unless an alternative President is identified!

Sorry my $0.02

 

[Jimthegreat]

The club's position doesn't mean that Diggins isn't looking to protect her interests. She wants to remain on the board, that much is clear. She is not on a ticket and has little chance of bringing about change by herself. She just wants to protect what she has. She isn't bombarding the media again to inform people, she is on the campaign trail and giving it all she has. They are all being self serving at the moment.

On another note, the phrase 'head in the sand' is coming up a lot again. I noticed you said others were accusing the anti-Smorgon brigade of using it. I have noted that it is almost always the other side using it to belittle those that won't be swayed. In fact you have used it a fair bit of late? I'm curious as to why it is creeping in everywhere. THS/Synbad loves to use it but always meets with derision when he does it. It's not your usual form to set out to cause derision, but of late it seems to be very little but that. Let's not have classes of supporters, those that claim they know the facts and those that supposedly have their head in the sand. There are some very intelligent people on both sides of this argument, and we don't want to create a divide that lasts long after the election. My thoughts ....

If the caps fits........

No-ones going to tell me some people don't have their head stuck in the sand with the current situation of our club from the Board to the playing field. They put rose-coloured glasses on thinking everything's ok. There's a couple in particular.

But we all support Carlton so they'll be no divide if one sticks to discussing the issues as some will agree and some will disagree. I may disagee on one issue with someone but agree on another. That's life. The beer with them afterwards still tastes the same.

 

[Jimthegreat]

See, this is the double standard. Nobody is overlooking Smorgon's self interest, I guarantee you that there is more derogatory stuff about Smorgon on the Carlton forums than there is about Diggins or any other board member. I guarantee that!!!!! 100%. Smorgon has copped it every which way, but when someone against Smorgon cops it, then she is just telling it how it is.

People are so set on change, regardless of what that change is, that if offends them to see one shred of support or any defence of the current board whatsoever. They see every defence as being magnified and undoing their campaign for change, so much so that there is an extreme exaggeration where they believe there is more pro-Smorgon stuff than anti-Smorgon stuff.

I have never ever seen an issue debated on so much opinion, circumstantial evidence and bandwagoning, in my whole life. I have never seen so many supporters denigrate their fellow supporters and offer us so much rhetoric. I think both sides need to take a chill pill, sit back, take a deep breath and read their posts before pressing submit.

Remember I guarantee there is more anti-Smorgon posts than pro-Smorgon. Anybody want to take the time to call me on that? So on the internet at least, Smorgon is a shot duck. Little pockets of support or defending inaccuracies mean diddly on here.

As stated above, who knows what the truth of most of these matters are? So on one hand, we are told that nobody knows, and on the other we are told that because there are issues, Smorgon must go. Geez, wouldn't it be good to create a ruckus at work and get the boss sacked because he should have stopped it?

And how is uncle Grahram going. Despite what saying saying you're as subtle as I am on the coach. As is MS.

That politics of any form, the leader is responsible and cop it in the neck in times of trouble, whether it be howard, Rudd or Smorgon. For me, a vote for these guys is a vote for the incompetence, rabble and embarrassment that continues to plague our club. The other mob can no way be worse.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

These statements smack of truth to me:
http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/foo...E20322,00.html

"dysfunctional"

Well we have board members slagging off at each other .... big surprise there.

"most important board election in the history of Carlton," she wrote. "

Again, considering our finances and position, this is a no brainer that anybody could say.

"It is five minutes to midnight at Carlton, but it is not too late.

Again, rhetoric. No surprise there.

"Change must begin at the top -- the present board has become dysfunctional.

"the biggest problem is that too many board members think things are OK at Carlton."

This is opinion. The board have a financial plan that is prone to problems if memberships drop off sharply as they did last year. Granted it revolves around cost cutting predominantly but there is nothing to suggest they think things are fine or they would still be spending. The went to the AFL for a loan, does that indicate the board think things are okay? If her version of thinking things are okay, means that the board members think we will come out the other side, then I would rather they had some faith in our future, than running around with their hands in their air, screaming 'what do we do?'

 

[AndyWalkersGirl]

Guys, calm down!


I have never said i knew the facts. That was my point of my posts - the fact that none of us know the facts on either side of the story.

"Head in the sand" was referred to those who accused everyone of looking through 'rose coloured glasses' yet were teh same people accusing Diggins of being a liar.

My point was quite simple, although the purpose got lost in words - dont accuse people of living with their heads in the sand, if you're not going to be open to both arguments, because it is hypocritical.

I am sorry for the confusion, I dont think i quite clearly knew how to write it.

I have not once convinced myself that everything is alright. My reference to 'head in the sand' was a response to those that continually use that phrase to other supports, those people who are now accusing Diggins of whatever. My point is and was, listen to both sides, because none of us are experts and none of us know the facts. Dont just dismiss what someone says because of how they've gone about it. We just dont know what has gone on and what the truths are.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

And how is uncle Grahram going. Despite what saying saying you're as subtle as I am on the coach. As is MS.

Despite what I am saying? So despite what I am saying, you consider you know my real motivation huh? My words don't spell it out but you know better?

Would you like me to find links where I have been critical of Smorgon? Please don't challenge me in an objectivity contest, you will lose.

That politics of any form, the leader is responsible and cop it in the neck in times of trouble, whether it be howard, Rudd or Smorgon. For me, a vote for these guys is a vote for the incompetence, rabble and embarrassment that continues to plague our club. The other mob can no way be worse.

It's your opinion and you are fully entitled to it.

 

[Bluebear]

Have you ever stopped and thought that maybe there is some truth to what she says? Have you ever stopped to think that perhaps change is needed?

Everytime I read something posted about the board I consider this exact thing AWG.
Is it true? Does it make sense?

My question to you is have you considered that she is not being upfront?

What interested me about her rant last week was that it went back to over 12 months ago when OUR Josh was sponsored by us.....and not her. This clearly peed her off, but how is it relevant to THIS board and THIS president.......and THIS year.......its not....but its a personal sting that she hasn't let go of.
To back this up with not seeking out the report she keeps harping on about because she was so amazed by the events of that meeting in December.......give me a break. Its no-one fault but her own that she FORGOT to ask to see the report due to whatever spun her head.

She is angry and bitter over 2005 jumper presentation, has been leaking like a sieve since the end of the season and should be read in such a light.

Not saying to disregard everything she says, just put it in context of somone with a personal axe to grind.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Just thought I would add that their are two sponsorships for Josh, a player partner and a player sponsor. We have the less expensive of the two.

 

[BlueBelle]

Just thought I would add that their are two sponsorships for Josh, a player partner and a player sponsor. We have the less expensive of the two.

What is the price difference?

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

about $1000 for memory.

 

[Monkeyboy]

Everytime I read something posted about the board I consider this exact thing AWG.
Is it true? Does it make sense?

My question to you is have you considered that she is not being upfront?

What interested me about her rant last week was that it went back to over 12 months ago when OUR Josh was sponsored by us.....and not her. This clearly peed her off, but how is it relevant to THIS board and THIS president.......and THIS year.......its not....but its a personal sting that she hasn't let go of.
To back this up with not seeking out the report she keeps harping on about because she was so amazed by the events of that meeting in December.......give me a break. Its no-one fault but her own that she FORGOT to ask to see the report due to whatever spun her head.

She is angry and bitter over 2005 jumper presentation, has been leaking like a sieve since the end of the season and should be read in such a light.

Not saying to disregard everything she says, just put it in context of somone with a personal axe to grind.

FWIW - It aint her that talks to the Journos!