| TalkingCarlton http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/ |
|
| Lets get JK back and see Eagles lose pick 3 & 18! http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=18634 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | Koutamagic [ Thu Oct 18, 2007 2:41 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Lets get JK back and see Eagles lose pick 3 & 18! |
http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,865 ... 11,00.html I know you all hate him, but gotta love what he is suggesting here! |
|
| Author: | Donstuie [ Thu Oct 18, 2007 2:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
The shock of Fatprick Smith sticking up for us notwithstanding (even though I see no mention in the article of getting the picks back), this won't happen. If WC lose their picks they'll simply disappear altogether, meaning pick 4 (Melbourne) would become pick 3. Can't have the AFL doing us a favour can we? 
|
|
| Author: | Kaptain Kouta [ Thu Oct 18, 2007 2:56 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
While the concept of getting the picks taken off the Weagles is nice, there's no way we could get anything back without losing Judd in the process. But, yes, some of the points he makes are valid: The Spew in Paris with his thumb up his date watching Rugby rather than watching over this mess. The threatened sanctions, and what would appear as The Spew laying the groundwork for a complete cop-out. The culture at the Weagles, and the complicity of management while they were winning. The complicity of The AFL in bringing him back and exposing him to harm. |
|
| Author: | ryan2000 [ Thu Oct 18, 2007 2:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
wouldn't happen..........well, i doubt it would. Even when we lost our picks, the Barnaby French trade (pick 18?) still went through because it had already been done prior to us getting fined. WC need to be hit hard. Draft picks? I dunno...........we got hit right in the nuts with draft pick penalties, and even though i aggree we needed to be punished AND SERVERLY PUNISHED AT THAT.........the draft picks were just too hard. The AFL knows this but are too stuborn (not to mention chicken shit) to ever admit it! Problem is, a fine is gonna do nothing cause west coast are rolling in the cash. That's what happens when you have on 2 teams in a town of 2million compared to 7 in a town of 3million........thanks AFL! The one i'd probably go for is a loss of a first round draft pick ONLY and maybe premiership points (12?). |
|
| Author: | Koutamagic [ Thu Oct 18, 2007 2:59 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
they should give JK the option to nominate for pre-season draft. then we can get him back (hoping Tigers commit to Brennan). don't really care about pick 3 & 18, they can disappear, like what happened to us! |
|
| Author: | Kaptain Kouta [ Thu Oct 18, 2007 3:02 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
ryan2000 wrote: The one i'd probably go for is a loss of a first round draft pick ONLY and maybe premiership points (12?).
I'd go with Loss of pick 3, and loss of ALL 2008 points, with the rider that their draft picks for 2008 would be determined on how many points, and what ladder position they would have if they were allowed their points. So, they could win 12 matches, be about 7th on the ladder in a normal season, but miss the finals and still have pick 9 as their first pick in the draft. |
|
| Author: | Donstuie [ Thu Oct 18, 2007 3:03 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Koutamagic wrote: they should give JK the option to nominate for pre-season draft. then we can get him back (hoping Tigers commit to Brennan). don't really care about pick 3 & 18, they can disappear, like what happened to us!
Even though Josh wouldn't want to rock the boat, he could possibly seek legal options under the grounds of the conditions of his contract now being changed, and then nominate for the PSD. It would be a long and messy process, and cause more problems. |
|
| Author: | AGRO [ Thu Oct 18, 2007 3:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Josh Kennedy (and his management) and to a lesser extent Carlton - would have been relying on the information provided to them by West Coast Eagles - that it was a fit place for Josh to continue his career/employment as a professional footballer. If WCE withheld or even inadvertantly misinformed any party in the transation - then I think their is reasonable grounds for Josh to declare his contract null and void. It would be up to Josh and his management to get a ruling on it - but at this stage I reckon in the manner we forced Josh out the door it may be unlikely that he would want to come back. Although most (and I would be one) Carlton Supporters would welcome him back with both arms. By the way I agree with Fatprick Smith  .
And to all those who think I am a misogynist - I still think that Fatprick is an ugly corpulent tosser. 
|
|
| Author: | Dominator_7 [ Thu Oct 18, 2007 3:46 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Just like the Baraby French deal for us in 2002, JK will be allowed to stay at West Coast as the Judd deal was struck before the Cousins fiasco happened.. |
|
| Author: | AGRO [ Thu Oct 18, 2007 3:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Dominator_7 wrote: Just like the Baraby French deal for us in 2002, JK will be allowed to stay at West Coast as the Judd deal was struck before the Cousins fiasco happened..
But French wanted to leave Port Adelaide - I dont think that Josh really wanted to leave Carlton.
|
|
| Author: | Dominator_7 [ Thu Oct 18, 2007 3:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
It wont happen... but imagine we get JK back.... The feral opposition supporters will go ape sh*t on SEN again calling us cheaters etc...Just like after we got Judd, I'll sit back and laugh my bloody head off... |
|
| Author: | Koutamagic [ Thu Oct 18, 2007 4:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
remember, we are getting the old blues spirit back. It wouldn't surprise me if discussions have already been held behind closed doors... imagine. how good would that be, having JK back in the fold. That would keep JK's grandma off the papers as well! for those who don't know what I'm talking about: http://realfooty.com.au/news/news/trade ... 59492.html |
|
| Author: | Koutamagic [ Thu Oct 18, 2007 4:24 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
forgot to add. We have Fitzpatrick looking after the sanction / punishment as well... who did Fitzpatrick play for again? 
|
|
| Author: | Donstuie [ Thu Oct 18, 2007 4:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Koutamagic wrote: forgot to add. We have Fitzpatrick looking after the sanction / punishment as well... who did Fitzpatrick play for again?
Because lord knows we don't have enough people at the moment accusing us of being dodgy
|
|
| Author: | buzzaaaah [ Thu Oct 18, 2007 4:42 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Forget it. Do you think West Coast are that stupid. They took no risks by playing Ben Cousins. before they cleared him, they got AD to talk to him and got his clearance before he played. AD can't say "You should have known better" because that would mean he should have known better. And AD is never wrong remember. There will be no penalty. JK isnt coming back. Fatprick is still just a bitter and twisted old windbag |
|
| Author: | blu944 [ Thu Oct 18, 2007 4:51 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
That is one of the worst pieces of print journalism I have ever seen. Blatant sensationalist, hate-driven drivel. To think that he even imagines it possible for the AFL to deconstruct the last two decades of the drafting system by allowing players to choose not to play for the Eagles is mind boggling. If I were a West Coast supporter I'd be writing into the Australian asking for his head. Fatprick just reinforcing his well earned position as sport's most irrelevant identity. |
|
| Author: | camel [ Thu Oct 18, 2007 4:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Demetriou will be coming home next week to deal with the Cousins issue, according to SEN. Although, conveniently after the Rugby World Cup final. There was nothing Smith's article to suggest he wanted anything returned to Carlton, and I think, if pressed, he would probably want us penalised for sending Josh away against his wishes. So don't go thinking Smith has gone soft on us. 
|
|
| Author: | Filthy Teeve [ Thu Oct 18, 2007 6:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
This is a stupid comment from the article Quote: And the league must grant any player subsequently chosen by West Coast with its remaining picks the right not to go to Perth.
How on earth are they going to police that on Draft Day? Will they physically call each kid West Coast pick and ask him if he wants to go? What if he says no? What if he is uncontactable? Or later says no? Do you hold up proceedings until you get a response? Will WC get to pick another kid or simply lose the pick? What a legal can of worms that would be. What if he says no, and the kid after him, and the kids after him? What if Melbourme (who for some reason seem to have every pick after WC) get in the ear of Kid X and say "You refuse to go, and we'll pick you up with our next pick". The rorting would be massive (and Carlton will get the blame for it no doubt). Nothing will come of all this. At 'worst' a fine which will be nothing more than a nuisance to West Coast. |
|
| Author: | Fabulous [ Thu Oct 18, 2007 7:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Dominator_7 wrote: Just like the Baraby French deal for us in 2002, JK will be allowed to stay at West Coast as the Judd deal was struck before the Cousins fiasco happened..
I would love JK back, but you are 100% correct. Ww have no chance of getting him back! |
|
| Author: | Headplant [ Thu Oct 18, 2007 7:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
JK is gone guys, and the AFL is as complicit in this as Eagles, so what Fatprick suggests is rubbish and will not happpen ... come to think of it, how often does anyting this tosser suggest actually happen? |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC + 10 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|