T
The Crap
Guest
Happy?
The Blues - The Best in the Business (at cheating)
The Blues - The Best in the Business (at cheating)
-
AFLW 2025 - AFLW Trade and Draft - All the player moves
-
Mobile App Discontinued
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
Should Salary Cheats Have Bigger Fines?
- Thread starter Stengas
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
The Old Dark Navy's
Moderator
- Moderator
- #52
Originally posted by McKenna for PM:
And the pot decides that it is the kettle who is black! This entire argument is based on speculation ODN - you SPECULATED that the payment was made out of the goodness of Carlton's heart. It is equally likely that it was part of their negotiations. Any other club would have been severely reprimanded if they had done this. And later you further speculated by suggesting that if it were my team I would be a hypocrite by taking their side. You have judged me guilty until proven innocent on that one. Methinks it is not I who is the hypocrite....
I have been a Blue basher ever since I first realised the love affair the AFL has with Carlton. The day I realised this was on one of the many one point losses West Coast has suffered to Carlton. We were five points up and in the dying seconds of the game Greg "Diesel" Williams followed Tony Evans into Carlton's goalsquare and ran alongside him as Evans kicked the ball over the line to concede a rushed behind. Thinking quickly, Williams raised his hands to convince the goal umpire that it had been his foot. Carlton won again by one point. Even Carlton fans behind the goalsquare conceded that he cheated. And yet the AFL allowed it.
UP THE BLUEBASHERS!!
You can complain about the unfair treatment as much as you like, I shall feel no pity.
Wrong, the pot thinks the kettle is a twit!!!
It is just as likely that the deal was part of the negotiations???? Now, my speculation comes under the innocent before proven guilty premise whereas yours comes under the shoot first ask questions later premise. Which one should people adopt. Hope you are under question one day and not given the benefit of the doubt. Fact still remains that the only person that gained from this is Fraser Brown.
I also suggested that people would be hypocrites if they did not respond the same way when it came to their team finding themselves in a similar position. See, that scenario is set in the future so unless you have already decided your leanings in advance and are declaring yourself a hypocrite, then let's see how it pans out okay?
Oh, and can you tell me the last time the AFL overturned a result because of an obvious umpiring error? What about shots for goal that go the wrong side of the posts and are awarded goals? What about ludicrous staging for free kicks that lead to match winning goals? You could probably point to dozens of decisions in a match that adversely affect the outcome. How long have you been following football for? What a stupid statement!!! The truth is that even if the AFL had it in their power to overturn a result based on one error in a match, they would be opening up such a dangerous precedent that it would clog up their system forever and a day. I think every football fan can point to a glaringly obvious mistake that has cost their team a game here and there. Do they blame the AFL or the umpires?
The Truth (the whole truth or anything but the truth) Touchy? Now, let's see. If we were here bragging and being arrogant in general we may need to be put in our place a little. All we are doing is defending our team. If we don't then your accusations are seen to be indefensible. Our silence would let people think it was true.
As for inciting Shinners to go along with you. There is a lot of history behind Shinners comments to that effect. In fact Shinners from what I know of him is a knowlegeable footy fan who seems to respect all as long as he is respected. Definitely not a shit stirrer of your ilk!!!
------------------
mens sana in corpore sano - a sound mind in a sound body
- Nov 17, 2000
- 12,447
- 23
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Post Count: 125,527
My comment was about the fairness to players of the current situation and not a suggestion that it could be scrapped without adressing the level playground issues.
The hope was that if recognition was made that the players did deserve more pay that suggestions would come forth as to how this could arrive whilst maintaining reasonable balance.
If the consensus is that players are not underpaid then there is no issue.
The hope was that if recognition was made that the players did deserve more pay that suggestions would come forth as to how this could arrive whilst maintaining reasonable balance.
If the consensus is that players are not underpaid then there is no issue.
sainter
ENGLISH PREMIER LEAGUE
Frodo,
You guessed earlier on that the salary cap was about $3.5 million. It has actually increased from $4.75 million this year to $5.25 million for next year. And you have to take into consideration that the AFL lists are being reduced from 42 to 38. Also, each club are only required to include half the salary of two veterans that are over 30 years of age and played 200 games for the club.
That provides plenty of scope. Doesn't matter, I too needed a good laugh and reading that AFL players are underpaid gave it to me.
One more thing, players are welcome to place a price on their heads going into the draft. For a team to draft them, they are required to pay the selected player the amount nominated before the draft has taken place.
You seem to be such a fan of the old VFL competition.
Have a look at some of the poorer Victorian teams and compare the amount of premierships they have won to some of the larger clubs. All clubs must be allowed to compete on an equal footing. Richer clubs are welcome to pour millions of dollars into upgrading player facilities. For the sake of equality, and to retain the integrity of this competition, the salary cap and national draft can not be compromised.
Look at my club. We have won 26 wooden spoons. Before this year, our last one was in 1988. In reality, this year is one of the first times that we have been given an opportunity to rebuild the club. It is very hard for some clubs to just keep up with the rapidly increasing salary cap each year. Getting rid of it would be a sure fire way to turn this into a 8 - 10 team competition.
Deep down, I think getting rid of some Victorian clubs was high on your agenda.
------------------
Fortius Quo Fidelius
You guessed earlier on that the salary cap was about $3.5 million. It has actually increased from $4.75 million this year to $5.25 million for next year. And you have to take into consideration that the AFL lists are being reduced from 42 to 38. Also, each club are only required to include half the salary of two veterans that are over 30 years of age and played 200 games for the club.
That provides plenty of scope. Doesn't matter, I too needed a good laugh and reading that AFL players are underpaid gave it to me.
One more thing, players are welcome to place a price on their heads going into the draft. For a team to draft them, they are required to pay the selected player the amount nominated before the draft has taken place.
You seem to be such a fan of the old VFL competition.
Look at my club. We have won 26 wooden spoons. Before this year, our last one was in 1988. In reality, this year is one of the first times that we have been given an opportunity to rebuild the club. It is very hard for some clubs to just keep up with the rapidly increasing salary cap each year. Getting rid of it would be a sure fire way to turn this into a 8 - 10 team competition.
Deep down, I think getting rid of some Victorian clubs was high on your agenda.
------------------
Fortius Quo Fidelius
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
- Nov 17, 2000
- 12,447
- 23
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Post Count: 125,527
Sainter,
You are quite right. Victoria can't sustain 9 clubs. I feel strongly that three need to go, Hobart added and a 26 game season implemented with each team playing each other twice.
This gives a more sensible final 6. After all a 10/10 record shouldnt be enough to make a final.
I would like to see a NZ team and NT team in time too with matches going out to 30 a season. We had an early start to 2000 without problems so why not start at the same time as 2000, finish the same time as 1999 and fit a few more games in. The off season is far too long. I have withdrawal symptoms already.
Oh, and one thing about the VFL. I respect it as a great competition but I know hardly anything about it. So when Hafey, Hudson, Mackenna etc are mentioned I aint got a clue. So please forgive me if I talk AFL and not VFL.
You are quite right. Victoria can't sustain 9 clubs. I feel strongly that three need to go, Hobart added and a 26 game season implemented with each team playing each other twice.
This gives a more sensible final 6. After all a 10/10 record shouldnt be enough to make a final.
I would like to see a NZ team and NT team in time too with matches going out to 30 a season. We had an early start to 2000 without problems so why not start at the same time as 2000, finish the same time as 1999 and fit a few more games in. The off season is far too long. I have withdrawal symptoms already.
Oh, and one thing about the VFL. I respect it as a great competition but I know hardly anything about it. So when Hafey, Hudson, Mackenna etc are mentioned I aint got a clue. So please forgive me if I talk AFL and not VFL.
sainter
ENGLISH PREMIER LEAGUE
Frodo,
Please don't put words in my mouth.
I did not say anywhere that Victoria could not sustain 9 clubs!
I mentioned that the substantial increases in the salary cap are making it increasingly difficult for poorer clubs to survive.
There is no reason that any Victorian or interstate club need to disappear providing they can remain financially stable and I sincerely hope this will be the case.
Getting rid of the salary cap would obviously be disasterous for the league. It has already been covered by others what happens to professional sporting leagues across the world when there is no equality - one-sided results, etc.
Hobart are in no position at all to field a team next year and probably not for another 10 or 20 years. As for New Zealand and the Northern Territory, get in the real world. Heard of factors such as sponsorship, suitable venues, etc.
It is people like you that really annoy me. As a saints fan, you know perfectly well that I would never advocate a reduction of teams, particularly as my team is one of a number that could in a vulnerable position.
------------------
Fortius Quo Fidelius
Please don't put words in my mouth.
I did not say anywhere that Victoria could not sustain 9 clubs!
I mentioned that the substantial increases in the salary cap are making it increasingly difficult for poorer clubs to survive.
There is no reason that any Victorian or interstate club need to disappear providing they can remain financially stable and I sincerely hope this will be the case.
Getting rid of the salary cap would obviously be disasterous for the league. It has already been covered by others what happens to professional sporting leagues across the world when there is no equality - one-sided results, etc.
Hobart are in no position at all to field a team next year and probably not for another 10 or 20 years. As for New Zealand and the Northern Territory, get in the real world. Heard of factors such as sponsorship, suitable venues, etc.
It is people like you that really annoy me. As a saints fan, you know perfectly well that I would never advocate a reduction of teams, particularly as my team is one of a number that could in a vulnerable position.
------------------
Fortius Quo Fidelius
How the hell did you get that impression from Sainter's post?? Can’t u read or just don't have any level of comprehension at all???? You have as much right to an opinion as the next bloke, but I haven't seen anything but anti-Victorian illogical and shit strirring dribble come from your posts.
ODN, Bee, McKenna, The Truth/ Crap,
This next opinion is based entirely on speculation (and add a bit of ignorance to that
The most recent salary cap breach was based on the fact that the club had tried to find a way of paying Bradley, (whilst playing) through deferring some of his income to after retirement (possibly as a specialist coach). Tell me if I'm wrong. Now, I presume, like a lot of the others on this thread, that the AFL might be thinking that this lump sum payment to Brown could possibly be held in the same regard as Bradley's situation (despite Brown's contract), having accumulated a deferred sum every year. Now, I understand merits to rewarding of long term players of the club etc., but no matter how “fair” it may seem, it is against the rules. In saying that, I wouldn't be suprised if a lot of clubs are secretly doing it as well, (if they can afford it
If this is the case, I have to disagree with you ODN, and say that the club is benefiting in real terms of success. Not now, (as it's fairly obvious that this payment will have NO effect on the upcoming season), but if true, at the time of Brown's last contract negotiations, if they had of said "look Fraser, we can only pay ya $200,000 a season now because any more will put us over the cap, but we'll pay ya more after ya retire,", it is simply wrong. If it was all above board, and $200,000 was the most they could pay him, Fraser could have went for a better offer at another club who could have paid him well within their cap. If Fraser was a prick and left, this would have disadvantaged the club. So IMO, it does have a bearing on performance, only of course, if true. The prior "record" with Bradley gives rise to this speculation, and i must admit, as soon as I saw “suspicion” and “lump sump”, this is where my mind wandered to.
BTW- Darren Bewick is fighting for a $50,000 lump sum after retirement as a “pro-rata long service leave payment”, could be the same shit, different smell.... who knows???
Oh definitely, you have made me a happy woman!
The Old Dark Navy's
Moderator
- Moderator
- #59
If that IS the case Westy, then it still comes back to clubs losing players that they developed themselves because asking prices go up faster than the salary cap does. Does anyone really want to see players move so frequently that they can barely recognise their team from one season to another? They still did not use the money to recruit a big name player or anyone that is going to improve their performance on the field. This topic is heartfelt and I say this on behalf of all footy fans. Do we not want to retain loyalty? How hard is it to watch one of your favourite players run around in someone else's colours? It can be that sort of thing that will disillusion a young kid and possibly steer them away from the game. I don't know if this works in Melbourne still but when I lived there everybody had players names sewn into their coats. Must have people working around the clock to remove and add names!!!! I don't think you have heard the end of this, in fact if they had another moratorium for just this example, I think most clubs would be putting their hand up. And in all likelihood, you would find other teams picking up players like Browny after having freed up their cap by making a deal similar to this. Do they have a super fund for players? I would suggest that the club pays a more than generous contribution to the fund (given that it is a short career) and none of this should be covered by the cap.
------------------
mens sana in corpore sano - a sound mind in a sound body
------------------
mens sana in corpore sano - a sound mind in a sound body
McKenna for PM
Senior List
Westy Boy has summed up by stance on the Carlton issue well - I mustn't have explained myself very well. We are making the point that whilst Carlton had little to gain now or in the future, they had a great deal in the past season, when the deal was done.
ODN, your views on not trading established players are justified, and your point is valid. But that is beside the point.
I am pointing out to the Carlton supporters that what Carlton did was against the rules of fair play. Other teams face exactly the same problem. Don't blame the rules for what happened. We don't know the true intentions of management in making the decision to do this, but I would opine that there were more sinister motives than simply giving something back to a guy who has given a lot to the club. That is SPECULATION, of course I have no evidence. You have the right to speculate too. And you have exercised that right.
Your point about maintaining a player they have built is valid, but still leaves this act as cheating. Why can't they lobby the AFL about it, rather than doing things unfairly?
My story about the Diesel/Evans episode was not an effort to change anyone else's opinions, I was merely describing a major contributor to my hatred of Carlton. I should have made it clear that it wasn't part of my argument. Of course it is overly emotional. It is AFL - a very emotional game. Who hasn't screamed into the telly when something really bad happens? I am battling hard to formulate an unemotional argument. Every now and again the emotions come out. But it certainly appears to a lot of people that the "tradition" at Carlton buys them a lot of favours from the AFL.
That is beside the point. Please don't even respond. I have no desire to argue it. How do you put that face with the big cheesy grin on it on here? [insert here]
ODN, your views on not trading established players are justified, and your point is valid. But that is beside the point.
I am pointing out to the Carlton supporters that what Carlton did was against the rules of fair play. Other teams face exactly the same problem. Don't blame the rules for what happened. We don't know the true intentions of management in making the decision to do this, but I would opine that there were more sinister motives than simply giving something back to a guy who has given a lot to the club. That is SPECULATION, of course I have no evidence. You have the right to speculate too. And you have exercised that right.
Your point about maintaining a player they have built is valid, but still leaves this act as cheating. Why can't they lobby the AFL about it, rather than doing things unfairly?
My story about the Diesel/Evans episode was not an effort to change anyone else's opinions, I was merely describing a major contributor to my hatred of Carlton. I should have made it clear that it wasn't part of my argument. Of course it is overly emotional. It is AFL - a very emotional game. Who hasn't screamed into the telly when something really bad happens? I am battling hard to formulate an unemotional argument. Every now and again the emotions come out. But it certainly appears to a lot of people that the "tradition" at Carlton buys them a lot of favours from the AFL.
That is beside the point. Please don't even respond. I have no desire to argue it. How do you put that face with the big cheesy grin on it on here? [insert here]
Favours from the AFL. Do you want to back that up with hard facts?
Tiger_Of_Old
THE_GUN:"Why don't you use your reg acc"7/9/24
hello to fellow footy fans this is my 1st post[hopefully not my last]salary cap cheats.hmmmmm good subject when it comes to the tigers.we have cheated ourselves with the fact that we pay our players the top dollar for little return [apart from this year]however the way the afl has changed the rule that every club has to spend 95% of its salary cap the situation of how the tigers have placed themselves in over the years by paying players top dollar for underperforming will be spread thru out the comp[ie stkilda this year}as for carlton,s punishment all i can say somebody was in bed with jackson and without naming him all i can say he is often referred to saying pigs arse lol.without being to cinical wasnt this same person who took the afl to court over the tv issue?hmmmmmmmmm hate to think a deal was done to keep quiet
but anyway cheers all
but anyway cheers all
Shit, another Blue Basher with unsubstantiated facts.
------------------
The Blues. The Best in the business.
------------------
The Blues. The Best in the business.
Bloodstained Angel
Premiership Player
Ok Bee no worries - just off the top of my head :
- Why is Carlton the only club to still have its own home ground ?
- Why did the AFL endorse ridiculous contracts to do with compensation payments to Carlton when other clubs use OO and don't attract a large enough crowd ?
- How come David Parkin gets off Scott-free for assaulting a spectator ? - Because he is a 'good bloke?' yeah sure.
- How come John Elliott can treat no-smoking rules at the MCG with utter contempt whilst everyone else has to go outside to light up ?
- Why was it that the AFL decided to wait untill AFTER the National Draft to announce penalties for your latest salary cap indiscretion - then the penalties were just another slap on the wrist.
- Why, in the same episode did the AFL press release go to such extraordinay lengths to explain how Carlton were NOT going to be dealt with fairly, justly or appropriately ?
- Why does Carlton get a favourable draw year in year out ? Virtually no interstate travel (they play the SCG every 4 years for Chrissake) virtually no games outside OO or the MCG ?
- and another thing - STEPHEN SIVAGNI does not deserve to be fullback of the century ?
Of course these are anecdotes, just dreamt up by me and taken out of context, sure - but it was just so easy to recall these, if I sat down and actually researched this in depth I could come up with many more examples.
Face it Bluebaggers - you are a protected species and its pissing the rest of us off !
One rule for those who are born to rule, another rule for the rest of us.
The Blues - the best in the business (at playing the AFL like a violin)
- Why is Carlton the only club to still have its own home ground ?
- Why did the AFL endorse ridiculous contracts to do with compensation payments to Carlton when other clubs use OO and don't attract a large enough crowd ?
- How come David Parkin gets off Scott-free for assaulting a spectator ? - Because he is a 'good bloke?' yeah sure.
- How come John Elliott can treat no-smoking rules at the MCG with utter contempt whilst everyone else has to go outside to light up ?
- Why was it that the AFL decided to wait untill AFTER the National Draft to announce penalties for your latest salary cap indiscretion - then the penalties were just another slap on the wrist.
- Why, in the same episode did the AFL press release go to such extraordinay lengths to explain how Carlton were NOT going to be dealt with fairly, justly or appropriately ?
- Why does Carlton get a favourable draw year in year out ? Virtually no interstate travel (they play the SCG every 4 years for Chrissake) virtually no games outside OO or the MCG ?
- and another thing - STEPHEN SIVAGNI does not deserve to be fullback of the century ?
Of course these are anecdotes, just dreamt up by me and taken out of context, sure - but it was just so easy to recall these, if I sat down and actually researched this in depth I could come up with many more examples.
Face it Bluebaggers - you are a protected species and its pissing the rest of us off !
One rule for those who are born to rule, another rule for the rest of us.
The Blues - the best in the business (at playing the AFL like a violin)
BSA
As a Sydney supporter you should not make accusations of favouritism toward Carlton. Everyone knows the AFL have favoured Sydney for years. That was to make up for the fact of moving South Melbourne up there.
BTW. Who does deserve to be fullback of the century?
As a Sydney supporter you should not make accusations of favouritism toward Carlton. Everyone knows the AFL have favoured Sydney for years. That was to make up for the fact of moving South Melbourne up there.
BTW. Who does deserve to be fullback of the century?
Tiger_Of_Old
THE_GUN:"Why don't you use your reg acc"7/9/24
nope sorry im not a blue basher it just so happens carlton were caught and if it was sydney in the same circumstances id say the same thing
Oh yeah, and how about your comment on TV rights. Not Blue Bashing?
------------------
The Blues. The Best in the business.
Bloodstained Angel
Premiership Player
Cripes Bee - you're rather touchy on this aren't you ?
I'm not making accusations - you asked for examples of favouritism, I gave them to to you.
If you want to talk about the AFLs favouritism towards Sydney fine, lets talk about that, I'm not denying anything here.
Don't invite comments from the floor if you can't handle it.
The Blues - Born to rule
I'm not making accusations - you asked for examples of favouritism, I gave them to to you.
If you want to talk about the AFLs favouritism towards Sydney fine, lets talk about that, I'm not denying anything here.
Don't invite comments from the floor if you can't handle it.
The Blues - Born to rule
Bloodstained Angel
Premiership Player
Oh and Bee
My apologies for the SOS jibe - it was a cheap shot and I have realised my embarrassment when I did think of a FB of the Century
GEOFF SOUTHBY
cheers
My apologies for the SOS jibe - it was a cheap shot and I have realised my embarrassment when I did think of a FB of the Century
GEOFF SOUTHBY
cheers
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
There is no favouritism towards Carlton. It's rubbish. Why would someone as powerful as the AFL show favouritism toward one club?
The fact is Carlton take the AFL on. They don't sit around saying yes sir, no sir three bags full sir! Perhaps the AFL actually respect Carlton for that fact. Or maybe they are scared of Big Bad Jack
.
I have heard this favouritism rot all my life, right back when it wasn't the AFL but the VFL. It's really just envy on the part of other supporters. Carlton envy.
The fact is Carlton take the AFL on. They don't sit around saying yes sir, no sir three bags full sir! Perhaps the AFL actually respect Carlton for that fact. Or maybe they are scared of Big Bad Jack
I have heard this favouritism rot all my life, right back when it wasn't the AFL but the VFL. It's really just envy on the part of other supporters. Carlton envy.
Bloodstained Angel
Premiership Player
You shouldn't believe your own clubs publicity Bee.
Carlton (and Elliott himself) like to promote themselves as 'the club that takes on the AFL'
nothing could be further from the truth, in fact Carlton are closer and cosier to the AFL Commission than any other club. With the possible exception of Collingwoods MacGuire, Elliott enjoys unprecedented access and influence at the AFL Commission.
So while Carlton like to portray themselves as the 'outsiders' sticking up for the ordinary suburban supporter, in fact they are in bed with the AFL so much they are lying on top of each other.
But enough of vague, softly abusive rantings at each other - would you mind actually addressing the points I raised in my post above ?
The Blues - Born to rule.
Carlton (and Elliott himself) like to promote themselves as 'the club that takes on the AFL'
nothing could be further from the truth, in fact Carlton are closer and cosier to the AFL Commission than any other club. With the possible exception of Collingwoods MacGuire, Elliott enjoys unprecedented access and influence at the AFL Commission.
So while Carlton like to portray themselves as the 'outsiders' sticking up for the ordinary suburban supporter, in fact they are in bed with the AFL so much they are lying on top of each other.
But enough of vague, softly abusive rantings at each other - would you mind actually addressing the points I raised in my post above ?
The Blues - Born to rule.
BSA,
Have you read through the 'They can stick that levy up their...' thread?
The reason why Carlton can and do get away with so much is because they have the AFL by the short and curlies!
Welcome aboard tiger_of_old, the more Tigers we have aboard here the better!
------------------
This is a hallucination and these faces are in a dream. A computer generated environment; a fantasy island you can do anything and not have to face the consequences.
Have you read through the 'They can stick that levy up their...' thread?
The reason why Carlton can and do get away with so much is because they have the AFL by the short and curlies!
Welcome aboard tiger_of_old, the more Tigers we have aboard here the better!
------------------
This is a hallucination and these faces are in a dream. A computer generated environment; a fantasy island you can do anything and not have to face the consequences.
BSA
I presume you mean the post about the ridiculous accusations.
Carlton are the only club to have it's own home ground because they stood firm and wouldn't move. Why should we? It's ours we own it. If you owned your own home would you move out into rented accomodation? Especially if you had to share with others?
David Parkin did not assault a spectator.
The AFL were still investigating the salary cap breach. They did not wait until after the draft deliberately. How do you define being dealt with fairly? The breach was a payment to Craig Bradley. It was not a payment to entice a player to the club. There are different levels of so called breaches.
BTW I actually like your signature. I might suggest to the club that they adopt it.
I presume you mean the post about the ridiculous accusations.
Carlton are the only club to have it's own home ground because they stood firm and wouldn't move. Why should we? It's ours we own it. If you owned your own home would you move out into rented accomodation? Especially if you had to share with others?
David Parkin did not assault a spectator.
The AFL were still investigating the salary cap breach. They did not wait until after the draft deliberately. How do you define being dealt with fairly? The breach was a payment to Craig Bradley. It was not a payment to entice a player to the club. There are different levels of so called breaches.
BTW I actually like your signature. I might suggest to the club that they adopt it.
Hang on...
Throwing a punch is assault!
If it connects is it assault and battery?
------------------
This is a hallucination and these faces are in a dream. A computer generated environment; a fantasy island you can do anything and not have to face the consequences.
Bloodstained Angel
Premiership Player
yeah - i've just read the thread.
Details of the settlement remain 'commercial in confidence' so we can only speculate on a number of issues ?
- Why did the AFL and Carlton choose to settle out of court ?
- who blinked first ?
- who 'won' ?
- what is the nature of the settlement ?
- what precedents (if any) have been set ?
As ordinary punters in the outer, we don't know any of the details , so we can only speculate.
I will speculate and say right away that this confiidential sttlement is just another example of how closely the AFL and Carlton work together.
I guarantee you if it had been any other club besides Carlton, it would have been a long and bitter legal stoush that would still be dragging on.
Instead its a nod and a wink and a say no more whenever Carlton and the AFL sit down to sort out differences.
cheers
The Blues - Born to rule.
Details of the settlement remain 'commercial in confidence' so we can only speculate on a number of issues ?
- Why did the AFL and Carlton choose to settle out of court ?
- who blinked first ?
- who 'won' ?
- what is the nature of the settlement ?
- what precedents (if any) have been set ?
As ordinary punters in the outer, we don't know any of the details , so we can only speculate.
I will speculate and say right away that this confiidential sttlement is just another example of how closely the AFL and Carlton work together.
I guarantee you if it had been any other club besides Carlton, it would have been a long and bitter legal stoush that would still be dragging on.
Instead its a nod and a wink and a say no more whenever Carlton and the AFL sit down to sort out differences.
cheers
The Blues - Born to rule.
Similar threads
