TalkingCarlton
http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/

Collins vs Smorgon vs Pratt
http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=18494
Page 1 of 2

Author:  SCARA [ Fri Oct 12, 2007 1:20 pm ]
Post subject:  Collins vs Smorgon vs Pratt

Collins did what he had to do to get Elliot out and Carlton to the Dome on behalf of the AFL. Considering what Pratt has been able to achieve since he's been at the club just shows you how inept Smorgon and to a lessor extent Collins and some board members were. Smorgon may not be a billionaire but surely has money and some power. Total mismanagement.

Author:  LFTWNG11 [ Fri Oct 12, 2007 2:03 pm ]
Post subject: 

Collins was in the AFL pocket, thus why he got in... We would of never moved to the Telstra Dome if it weren't for him... As much as Elliot stuffed us up... He was better than both Collins and Smorgon IMO, if he had stayed president, Pagan wouldnt have lasted than a longer than a year!

Author:  The Don [ Fri Oct 12, 2007 2:14 pm ]
Post subject: 

All i can say is thankyou to the guys that challenged smorgan and co at the last election. Thankyou to Marcus Clarke , Ari Suss ,Paul Littman and even though he did not get on Ross Fiore.


Well done Boys and to the members that voted them in

Author:  BlueMark [ Fri Oct 12, 2007 2:26 pm ]
Post subject: 

It would seem that the club does best under a paternal authoritrian regime.

Collo- The financial blackhole and draft penalties proved to be a massive burden on his administration, but at least we stayed afloat, which we would not have if John had stayed in. Also it is not often acknowledged that the Collins board gave personal guarantees re the financial viablity of the club and that Collos health suffered greatly under the stress.

Smorgan was white-anted from the outset by a number of people. He never had a board stabled enough to make the headway needed at the time. And he did tip in his own money just never made a big deal of it. In the end I think he was glad to be voted out

Pratt has been fantastic (despite what I think of his business ethics) Anyone who had a personal agenda has been moved on and Swann has been allowed to make the big decisions with the full support of Pratt.

Author:  Synbad [ Fri Oct 12, 2007 2:51 pm ]
Post subject: 

BlueMark wrote:
It would seem that the club does best under a paternal authoritrian regime.

Collo- The financial blackhole and draft penalties proved to be a massive burden on his administration, but at least we stayed afloat, which we would not have if John had stayed in. Also it is not often acknowledged that the Collins board gave personal guarantees re the financial viablity of the club and that Collos health suffered greatly under the stress.

Smorgan was white-anted from the outset by a number of people. He never had a board stabled enough to make the headway needed at the time. And he did tip in his own money just never made a big deal of it. In the end I think he was glad to be voted out

Pratt has been fantastic (despite what I think of his business ethics) Anyone who had a personal agenda has been moved on and Swann has been allowed to make the big decisions with the full support of Pratt.

Rubbish!!!
Collo was an administrator.. he took the club away from Elliots stupidity and was good if he stayed for a year.. stabilising it ...
We had to leave Princes Park.... and we could have not gone to the MCG with Collo because we were weak!!!

Smorgon was a complete waste of time... offered nothing.. couldnt control the goings on and lacked the respect of just about everyone...

Malouf was as useless as tits on a bull....

Author:  ryan2000 [ Fri Oct 12, 2007 2:56 pm ]
Post subject: 

Last year, i sent a letter to Mr.Smorgan, Mr.Malouf & Mr.Pagan

In it, i outlined my concerns as a paid up member and supporter and my disgust at how poorly this club was being run.

Mr.Smorgan..............i never got a reply from.

Mr.Malouf sent me a letter that a 5year old could have written (spelling mistakes, crapy paper and just plain messy looking).

Mr.Pagan (who you all know i don't like) took the decency to phone me on my mobile for HALF AN HOUR! (gotta respect him for that).

All i can say is, i'm glad their all gone. And Collins too. It's amazing that Pratt, Swann & Sticky-Icky have done more in less than 12months than what Collo, Pagan, Malouf & Smorgan did in 5 bloody years!

A full clean-out was needed, thank god it finaly eventuated.

Sticks is a funny one thou. But i'm kinda glad he's staying around the club.

The recruitment department has come under some criticism.............but i'm kinda happy with em.
The past two years have been very good, well..........i think so anyway. ESPECIALLY with our later picks. It's one thing to grab Gibbs and Murphy (the givens) with your #1 pick. It's another to pick up talent later on in the draft such as Anderson & Edwards, and pick-ups like Betts & Jackson outside of the Draft.

But finally, the promise of exciting times ahead at Carlton have indeed come,.................

Author:  BlueMark [ Fri Oct 12, 2007 2:57 pm ]
Post subject: 

Synbad wrote:
BlueMark wrote:
It would seem that the club does best under a paternal authoritrian regime.

Collo- The financial blackhole and draft penalties proved to be a massive burden on his administration, but at least we stayed afloat, which we would not have if John had stayed in. Also it is not often acknowledged that the Collins board gave personal guarantees re the financial viablity of the club and that Collos health suffered greatly under the stress.

Smorgan was white-anted from the outset by a number of people. He never had a board stabled enough to make the headway needed at the time. And he did tip in his own money just never made a big deal of it. In the end I think he was glad to be voted out

Pratt has been fantastic (despite what I think of his business ethics) Anyone who had a personal agenda has been moved on and Swann has been allowed to make the big decisions with the full support of Pratt.

Rubbish!!!
Collo was an administrator.. he took the club away from Elliots stupidity and was good if he stayed for a year.. stabilising it ...
We had to leave Princes Park.... and we could have not gone to the MCG with Collo because we were weak!!!

Smorgon was a complete waste of time... offered nothing.. couldnt control the goings on and lacked the respect of just about everyone...

Malouf was as useless as tits on a bull....


True to form Synbad, wander in with your usual bucket of bile and insult, dump on whoever displeases you. Really Synbad you are pathetic and a complete waste of boardband. Why you bother is a complete mystery to me. In the real world you would get a smack in the mouth for some of the rubbish you write. In cyberspace we can just scroll past and read something form someone who adds to the debate, wheter one agrees with them or not. In short "Piss off idiot and bother someone who cares.'

Author:  AGRO [ Fri Oct 12, 2007 3:00 pm ]
Post subject: 

5 - 4 - 3 - 2 - 1 ......... :P

Author:  RoK [ Fri Oct 12, 2007 3:00 pm ]
Post subject: 

BlueMark wrote:
It would seem that the club does best under a paternal authoritrian regime.

Collo- The financial blackhole and draft penalties proved to be a massive burden on his administration, but at least we stayed afloat, which we would not have if John had stayed in. Also it is not often acknowledged that the Collins board gave personal guarantees re the financial viablity of the club and that Collos health suffered greatly under the stress.

Smorgan was white-anted from the outset by a number of people. He never had a board stabled enough to make the headway needed at the time. And he did tip in his own money just never made a big deal of it. In the end I think he was glad to be voted out

Pratt has been fantastic (despite what I think of his business ethics) Anyone who had a personal agenda has been moved on and Swann has been allowed to make the big decisions with the full support of Pratt.


shut up lefty :-D

Author:  ryan2000 [ Fri Oct 12, 2007 3:01 pm ]
Post subject: 

Synbad wrote:
BlueMark wrote:
It would seem that the club does best under a paternal authoritrian regime.

Collo- The financial blackhole and draft penalties proved to be a massive burden on his administration, but at least we stayed afloat, which we would not have if John had stayed in. Also it is not often acknowledged that the Collins board gave personal guarantees re the financial viablity of the club and that Collos health suffered greatly under the stress.

Smorgan was white-anted from the outset by a number of people. He never had a board stabled enough to make the headway needed at the time. And he did tip in his own money just never made a big deal of it. In the end I think he was glad to be voted out

Pratt has been fantastic (despite what I think of his business ethics) Anyone who had a personal agenda has been moved on and Swann has been allowed to make the big decisions with the full support of Pratt.

Rubbish!!!
Collo was an administrator.. he took the club away from Elliots stupidity and was good if he stayed for a year.. stabilising it ...
We had to leave Princes Park.... and we could have not gone to the MCG with Collo because we were weak!!!

Smorgon was a complete waste of time... offered nothing.. couldnt control the goings on and lacked the respect of just about everyone...

Malouf was as useless as tits on a bull....


Syners.....................couldn't aggree with your more!

Although Collo did overstay his welcome.

Author:  RoK [ Fri Oct 12, 2007 3:07 pm ]
Post subject: 

ryan2000 wrote:
Last year, i sent a letter to Mr.Smorgan, Mr.Malouf & Mr.Pagan

In it, i outlined my concerns as a paid up member and supporter and my disgust at how poorly this club was being run.

Mr.Smorgan..............i never got a reply from.

Mr.Malouf sent me a letter that a 5year old could have written (spelling mistakes, crapy paper and just plain messy looking).

Mr.Pagan (who you all know i don't like) took the decency to phone me on my mobile for HALF AN HOUR! (gotta respect him for that).

All i can say is, i'm glad their all gone. And Collins too. It's amazing that Pratt, Swann & Sticky-Icky have done more in less than 12months than what Collo, Pagan, Malouf & Smorgan did in 5 bloody years!

A full clean-out was needed, thank god it finaly eventuated.

Sticks is a funny one thou. But i'm kinda glad he's staying around the club.

The recruitment department has come under some criticism.............but i'm kinda happy with em.
The past two years have been very good, well..........i think so anyway. ESPECIALLY with our later picks. It's one thing to grab Gibbs and Murphy (the givens) with your #1 pick. It's another to pick up talent later on in the draft such as Anderson & Edwards, and pick-ups like Betts & Jackson outside of the Draft.

But finally, the promise of exciting times ahead at Carlton have indeed come,.................


great post mate.

Author:  BlueMark [ Fri Oct 12, 2007 3:15 pm ]
Post subject: 

RoK wrote:
BlueMark wrote:
It would seem that the club does best under a paternal authoritrian regime.

Collo- The financial blackhole and draft penalties proved to be a massive burden on his administration, but at least we stayed afloat, which we would not have if John had stayed in. Also it is not often acknowledged that the Collins board gave personal guarantees re the financial viablity of the club and that Collos health suffered greatly under the stress.

Smorgan was white-anted from the outset by a number of people. He never had a board stabled enough to make the headway needed at the time. And he did tip in his own money just never made a big deal of it. In the end I think he was glad to be voted out

Pratt has been fantastic (despite what I think of his business ethics) Anyone who had a personal agenda has been moved on and Swann has been allowed to make the big decisions with the full support of Pratt.


shut up lefty :-D


Its getting very lonely over here on the left, just me and BlueBird I think. Although AIRCAV wanders over for a visit on occassion :(

Author:  dannyboy [ Fri Oct 12, 2007 3:29 pm ]
Post subject: 

I am there Mark, just don;t need to argue it :wink:

Author:  Jarusa [ Fri Oct 12, 2007 3:36 pm ]
Post subject: 

Gee thanks comrade.

Author:  Sydney Blue [ Fri Oct 12, 2007 3:45 pm ]
Post subject: 

Collo was a AFL patsy or Stooge

Smorgan was out of his depth but tried hard

Pratt is the Messiah


Elliott is the hero - for bringing Pratt back

Should have stuck with Elliott in the first place - gone full circle now and wasted 5 years butt kissing the AFL for handouts

Author:  dannyboy [ Fri Oct 12, 2007 3:58 pm ]
Post subject: 

I've seen your red shirt Jar Jar

Author:  JK [ Fri Oct 12, 2007 4:07 pm ]
Post subject: 

KEVIN07!

Author:  79Vintage [ Fri Oct 12, 2007 4:12 pm ]
Post subject: 

JOHN58.

That should be Howard's new campaign slogan beacause that's where he is living, 1958 that is.


Howard was asked by a reporter when the election date was going to be?

His reply?

"I don't know, Janette hasn't told me yet."

Author:  Synbad [ Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:51 pm ]
Post subject: 

BlueMark wrote:
Synbad wrote:
BlueMark wrote:
It would seem that the club does best under a paternal authoritrian regime.

Collo- The financial blackhole and draft penalties proved to be a massive burden on his administration, but at least we stayed afloat, which we would not have if John had stayed in. Also it is not often acknowledged that the Collins board gave personal guarantees re the financial viablity of the club and that Collos health suffered greatly under the stress.

Smorgan was white-anted from the outset by a number of people. He never had a board stabled enough to make the headway needed at the time. And he did tip in his own money just never made a big deal of it. In the end I think he was glad to be voted out

Pratt has been fantastic (despite what I think of his business ethics) Anyone who had a personal agenda has been moved on and Swann has been allowed to make the big decisions with the full support of Pratt.

Rubbish!!!
Collo was an administrator.. he took the club away from Elliots stupidity and was good if he stayed for a year.. stabilising it ...
We had to leave Princes Park.... and we could have not gone to the MCG with Collo because we were weak!!!

Smorgon was a complete waste of time... offered nothing.. couldnt control the goings on and lacked the respect of just about everyone...

Malouf was as useless as tits on a bull....


True to form Synbad, wander in with your usual bucket of bile and insult, dump on whoever displeases you. Really Synbad you are pathetic and a complete waste of boardband. Why you bother is a complete mystery to me. In the real world you would get a smack in the mouth for some of the rubbish you write. In cyberspace we can just scroll past and read something form someone who adds to the debate, wheter one agrees with them or not. In short "Piss off idiot and bother someone who cares.'

BM i have only had one smack in the mouth ... (and it wasnt one way).. so youre wrong...AGAIN!!!... but anyway.. you know me in the real world... :wink:

You didnt address anything i said.... so whats the point of your post except to be silly???

I did address what you said.. and again you have NO IDEA....!!!.. same old same old BM rubbish.... :wink:

Author:  Barack Obama [ Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:56 pm ]
Post subject: 

BlueMark wrote:
It would seem that the club does best under a paternal authoritrian regime.

Collo- The financial blackhole and draft penalties proved to be a massive burden on his administration, but at least we stayed afloat, which we would not have if John had stayed in. Also it is not often acknowledged that the Collins board gave personal guarantees re the financial viablity of the club and that Collos health suffered greatly under the stress.

Smorgan was white-anted from the outset by a number of people. He never had a board stabled enough to make the headway needed at the time. And he did tip in his own money just never made a big deal of it. In the end I think he was glad to be voted out

Pratt has been fantastic (despite what I think of his business ethics) Anyone who had a personal agenda has been moved on and Swann has been allowed to make the big decisions with the full support of Pratt.


Pretty fair and good assessment. I was posting very heavily against Smorgon around the election time last year, and thought he had to go. But you're right, he did put some of his own money in and didn't really boast about it. And it's unfair to compare him to Pratt in terms of how much money he put in because Pratt has a far greater fortune than him.

Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC + 10 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/