AGRO wrote:
tap in 79 wrote:
It looked like "the members' forum" was a bit like an after-thought and patched onto the end so that only a few questions could be asked.
It is clear from this statement and others in the media which clubs and CEOs are under the thumb of the AFL and which clubs aren't.
Trigg said that "the tea leaves suggested that this could be as early next year with new stadium deals in time for 2017".
Yeah, but even if Carlton does a deal with the AFL on Docklands going by how Trigg deals with the AFL (based on his benign and congenial media statements) one would assume that he doesn't have much to deal with and Carlton will once again be used as the funding palace for the AFL's ambitions. I would prefer Carlton at the MCG seeing how much money Docklands has screwed from the Blues.
Let's start with
a) Carlton gets compensation for all the years they have played at Docklands. Trigg openly pushes for this in the media.
b) Hawthorn moves some of their home games to Docklands. Trigg openly pushes for this.
c) Carlton pays no equalisation tax and gets refunded all the money they have paid for what I feel should be more rightly called
the AFL's insanity tax.. Trigg talks tough on eradicating this AFL insanity tax. If Collingwood and Hawthorn want to pay for it fine, but not Carlton.
Then if that occurs we can work from there with the AFL. Trigg needs to start dealing tough with the AFL like Geelong, Hawthorn and Collingwood do.
No one respects the USA anymore as they are too weak in their foreign affairs, eg Obama and his red line on Syria. Surprise, surprise he does nothing when Syria goes over the red line. No one respects weakness. Either get tough or go home. Same, no one respects Carlton as they are weak internally and externally.
A Boy Named Sue - apologies if it wasn't a fair statement about the members time for questions. You were there at the meeting, so you have more right to get the correct message out there on that side of things.