Talking Carlton Index Lochie O'Brien Kerryn Harrington Lochie O'Brien Kerryn Harrington CFC Home CFC Membership CFC Shop CFC Fixture Blueseum
It is currently Wed May 07, 2025 9:09 am

All times are UTC + 10 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 280 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 7:23 pm 
Offline
John James

Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 2:18 pm
Posts: 675
Location: Adelaide
bluehotel wrote:
If it was WH then there should be no qualms. If it was the board then Sticks must have been an influence as he has dual roles.


Pretty much agree with this. If it was the board, then this is a poor way of running things. If it was WH, then this is exactly what should have happened, and we are getting pent up over nothing.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 7:27 pm 
Offline
Wayne Johnston
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:34 am
Posts: 8888
Location: 8888
BlueWorld wrote:
mjonc wrote:
Time to raise the issue again. Pagan openly blaming the board for Zantuck not being drafted on SEN. What the flower is going on in this place? The gap between board and board and board and football department/leadership group is growing larger and larger. SEN obvioulsy trying to get a response from Smorgan as to Pagans comments.


Just on 3AW. Denies board had any involvement in decision. :?:


Didn't see that coming.

_________________
Mjonc signing off at 8888


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 7:57 pm 
Offline
John James

Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 8:04 pm
Posts: 615
Grandstand Guru wrote:
well even if the Board did make the decision - which it is unclear at the moment - Pagan speaking out about it shouldn't be occurring. Admittedly it can be hard to dodge the issue once a peanut like Zantuck comes out whingeing in the press...Wayne Hughes was on SEN and basically said he chose Cloke to replace Bryan so Zantuck a non-issue in that regard


However we could have picked Zantuck in psd and Cloke at no 1 in the rookie draft if we chose.

Whether we ended up choosing the right player or not is almost irrelevant, the process (or lack thereof) is the issue.

_________________
Get comfortable being uncomfortable


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 9:03 pm 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 3:08 pm
Posts: 16771
Location: Melbourne
billc3 wrote:
Pagan said "he was told No Zantuck"....KB assumed the board...I'm betting it was a combination of Hughes, MC and Board edict.

As such it's not a board decision....but it does show a poorly functioning football dept.


If this was the case, and I have no idea if it was or wasn't.....why does it show a poorly functioning football department. If it was as you suggest, couldn't that then mean it was democracy at work.

Regards Cazzesman

_________________
Ricky Gervais - “Everyone has the right to hold whatever beliefs they want. And everyone else has the right to find those beliefs f***ing ridiculous.”


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 9:08 pm 
Offline
Horrie Clover

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 3:26 pm
Posts: 332
Cazzesman wrote:
billc3 wrote:
Pagan said "he was told No Zantuck"....KB assumed the board...I'm betting it was a combination of Hughes, MC and Board edict.

As such it's not a board decision....but it does show a poorly functioning football dept.


If this was the case, and I have no idea if it was or wasn't.....why does it show a poorly functioning football department. If it was as you suggest, couldn't that then mean it was democracy at work.

Regards Cazzesman


Cazz - your abilty to sugar coat in order to keep the peace is admirable, but in this case the football department were overruled by Smorgon. Not the board - just Smorgon acting with Sticks as back up. This is what you get in the absence of policy. Smorgon must go - he is the root of most problems at this club.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 9:22 pm 
Offline
John James

Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 2:18 pm
Posts: 675
Location: Adelaide
Speedy wrote:
Cazzesman wrote:
billc3 wrote:
Pagan said "he was told No Zantuck"....KB assumed the board...I'm betting it was a combination of Hughes, MC and Board edict.

As such it's not a board decision....but it does show a poorly functioning football dept.


If this was the case, and I have no idea if it was or wasn't.....why does it show a poorly functioning football department. If it was as you suggest, couldn't that then mean it was democracy at work.

Regards Cazzesman


Cazz - your abilty to sugar coat in order to keep the peace is admirable, but in this case the football department were overruled by Smorgon. Not the board - just Smorgon acting with Sticks as back up. This is what you get in the absence of policy. Smorgon must go - he is the root of most problems at this club.


Is there any actual evidence to back this up, or are you just specualting??


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 9:59 pm 
Offline
Mike Fitzpatrick
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 2:41 pm
Posts: 4623
Cazzesman wrote:
billc3 wrote:
Pagan said "he was told No Zantuck"....KB assumed the board...I'm betting it was a combination of Hughes, MC and Board edict.

As such it's not a board decision....but it does show a poorly functioning football dept.


If this was the case, and I have no idea if it was or wasn't.....why does it show a poorly functioning football department. If it was as you suggest, couldn't that then mean it was democracy at work.

Regards Cazzesman


Sorry CM ...not taking a potshot ...and I mean poorly functioning (maybe wrong expression) in terms of not airing the "democratic decisions" in public :wink:

So when are you coming out and saying that you don't know why we took player X....you wanted player Y but "they" overulled you....I've got Ch 10 on the phone now...

_________________
“Every single element of the Club has to be the best in the league, meticulously and methodically, and only by doing this will we be elite and challenge for number 17.”
Greg Lee


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 10:33 pm 
Offline
Harry Vallence
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 8:08 pm
Posts: 1277
Location: Perth
Cazzesman wrote:
billc3 wrote:
Pagan said "he was told No Zantuck"....KB assumed the board...I'm betting it was a combination of Hughes, MC and Board edict.

As such it's not a board decision....but it does show a poorly functioning football dept.


If this was the case, and I have no idea if it was or wasn't.....why does it show a poorly functioning football department. If it was as you suggest, couldn't that then mean it was democracy at work.

Regards Cazzesman


I would have thought that Denis whinging about it in public demonstrated the original assertion.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 12:40 am 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 7:13 pm
Posts: 21069
Location: Missing Kouta
[url=http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/footy/common/story_page/0,8033,20924937%255E20322,00.html]Blues still worry AFL.
[/url]
Quote:
Smorgon denied the board had told coach Denis Pagan he could not recruit Ty Zantuck at Tuesday's pre-season draft.

"That was a match committee issue, it had nothing to do with the board," Smorgon said.

"It didn't come to the board for resolution and let's make that clear -- there was no board decision regarding the draft decision. Full stop."

And Carlton's board have never tried to influence the decisions of the football department. :?
Link.
Quote:
On the day that Carlton president Graham Smorgon announced a board edict forbidding the recruitment of players who are either over 24 or cannot be expected to play at least 100 games for the club,


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 6:42 am 
Offline
Wayne Johnston
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:34 am
Posts: 8888
Location: 8888
About to become public hey? tomorrow is Friday is it not? :lol:

_________________
Mjonc signing off at 8888


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 10:02 am 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:31 am
Posts: 17892
Can I ask what is actually wrong with the board telling the football department to bypass Zantuck. Its not a football decision. I dont think Smorgon sat up at night watching videos of Zantuck playing to assess whether he'd benefit,
It was a decision based on not gambling on a guy who has burned his bridges at 2 clubs in the last 2 years. The last thing the club needs is a player who can give the wrong sort of headalines.
I'm sure the edict wasnt "We want Cloke" it was "Pass on Zantuck" and fair enough I reckon.

_________________
T E A M


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 10:17 am 
Offline
Wayne Johnston
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:34 am
Posts: 8888
Location: 8888
buzzaaaah wrote:
Can I ask what is actually wrong with the board telling the football department to bypass Zantuck. Its not a football decision. I dont think Smorgon sat up at night watching videos of Zantuck playing to assess whether he'd benefit,
It was a decision based on not gambling on a guy who has burned his bridges at 2 clubs in the last 2 years. The last thing the club needs is a player who can give the wrong sort of headalines.
I'm sure the edict wasnt "We want Cloke" it was "Pass on Zantuck" and fair enough I reckon.


Wrong headlines, Cloke speeding nearly costing a TAC Sponsorship!

Smorgon talking gives the wrong headlines, in fact anyone at Carlton gives the wrong headlines. Carlton is the headline until this board pisses off.

_________________
Mjonc signing off at 8888


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 10:42 am 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:35 am
Posts: 17943
mjonc wrote:
Smorgon talking gives the wrong headlines, in fact anyone at Carlton gives the wrong headlines. Carlton is the headline until this board pisses off.


I dont understand.
Did'nt Pagan make this public?
Did'nt Denis tell KB that he was overruled?
Everything I saw in the media yesterday related to Pagans comment. :?

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 10:44 am 
Offline
Wayne Johnston
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:34 am
Posts: 8888
Location: 8888
Blue Vain wrote:
mjonc wrote:
Smorgon talking gives the wrong headlines, in fact anyone at Carlton gives the wrong headlines. Carlton is the headline until this board pisses off.


I dont understand.
Did'nt Pagan make this public?
Did'nt Denis tell KB that he was overruled?
Everything I saw in the media yesterday related to Pagans comment. :?


My point exactly. Anyone who spoke made headlines. Negative headlines.

_________________
Mjonc signing off at 8888


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 11:19 am 
Offline
Adrian Gallagher

Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 10:53 am
Posts: 53
Location: HEADQUARTERS-CANBERRA
This board has got to go. This club is absolute disgrace at the top. Obvioulsy there is nothing between the ears with these blokes. To precious about themselves and totally short sighted. Does anybody out there have any credible information as to whether there is going to be a genuine challenge to this absolute incompetence. Basically this club is in the hands of a regime of dictators. Something needs to be done asap. Enough is enough. :(


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 11:21 am 
Offline
Mike Fitzpatrick
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 4:22 pm
Posts: 4678
Location: Melbourne
My anger is not becuase of Pagan saying he was over-ruled, or Smorgon over-ruleing Pagan................

I'm more upset that this board just can't seem to avoid bad-publicity.

Pagan and smorgan are ADAMANT that there is no bad blood between them and that they have regular discussion etc, etc, etc. If that is the case, why does there continue to be such a lack of comunication.

Pagan was on SEN this morning and his 1st priority was to get the message accross to supporters that everything is ok and that things are very positive down at Carlton. Great,................buy why are things so poorly organised down there? It's really not doing much to our image which we are so desperatly trying to improve on.

That's all i'm upset about.

_________________
"We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit"
- Aristotle


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 5:15 pm 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 7:13 pm
Posts: 21069
Location: Missing Kouta
The treatment of Diggins has been disgraceful and the comments that have been said straight to her face by "men" are reprehensible. :x

The fact they're trying to silence Valmorbida and Diggins who appear to be asking the questions we want to hear and not replace them isn't the way to run a board. :evil:

Does Smorgon run his daddy's company as his own personal fiefdom? :idea:

Sticks has burnt all his bridges with me. :(

When do we get the chance to vote them out :?:

Will I even receive a voting form this time :?: :idea:

I'm still waiting for my copies of Inside Carlton to arrive.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 6:06 pm 
Offline
formerly blue-insider
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 11:36 am
Posts: 292
Location: Caaaaaarlton
All these post about getting rid of board members players and coaches...
Who's left after the TCers get their way?

Unless there are real and viable replacements for each level why sook?

There is no group officially requesting to take over the board. None.
Fraser Brown took a pot shot - stood back - and now looks the fool.

There is no better proven available coach.
Why try unproven coaches? That would be a disaster waiting to happen.

Forget bitching about getting new 'people' because right now there is no-one, and anyone speaking off the top of their heads about sack this and get rid of that sounds like nothing more than drunks wondering the city streets on a Friday night.

This forum has become very negative.

Yeah the clubs has made a few mistakes - but take a look at our list - there is plenty to look forward to.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 6:08 pm 
Offline
Rod Ashman
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:35 pm
Posts: 2432
Senior lawyer Stephen Moulton (Mills Oakley Lawyers) will go public before the weekend about his intentions to get on the board.

_________________
I just want my old club back ... (edit) maybe I have!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 6:29 pm 
Offline
Craig Bradley

Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 9:00 am
Posts: 6154
Moulton Does Fridays


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 280 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14  Next

All times are UTC + 10 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Toranasaurus and 129 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group