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

Tim Lane... traitor!
http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=21830		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  George Harris [ Sun Jun 22, 2008 8:10 am ]
Post subject:  Tim Lane... traitor!
AFL compromised in case of Cousins v Pratt

by Tim Lane

http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/c ... 73091.html
Author:  Doull [ Sun Jun 22, 2008 8:20 am ]
Post subject: 
Written by the same bloke who continually condemned the club for broadening its horizons by leaving Princes Park.

To Tim Lane I give the same message as I'd give to Patrick Smith: Pratt was not found guilty of any criminal offence, therefore there was no legal reason why Pratt should've stepped down.

Righteous indignation might make for a good headline, but it's not much good for those of us who prefer facts.
Author:  verbs [ Sun Jun 22, 2008 8:26 am ]
Post subject: 
Old news. This has been his viewpoint all along.

Cousins was shafted by West Coast and the AFL IMO.
Author:  budzy [ Sun Jun 22, 2008 8:32 am ]
Post subject: 
verbs wrote:
Old news. This has been his viewpoint all along.

Cousins was shafted by West Coast and the AFL IMO.


Yeah, old news. Tim's a Carlton man ..in a different kind of way

Cousins was more a victim of AFL incompetence.
Author:  Kaptain Kouta [ Sun Jun 22, 2008 8:54 am ]
Post subject: 
My reading of the article, and the motives for writing it is for Tim Lane to show the world, especially the world of footy journalism, that he holds no bias towards Carlton, and can be critical of the decisions and movements in the Club. Unlike another Age Senior footy write.

The article in itself reminds me of the lines from Macbeth: A tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
Author:  fmurphy30 [ Sun Jun 22, 2008 9:31 am ]
Post subject: 
I thought it was a pretty thoughtful article. He made some good points, and lets face it: if Collingwood had been on the verge of bankruptcy and was then bailed out by a wealthy benefactor who was the subject of federal investigation, we'd all have a go at them.

Carlton can't live in glass houses. I saw no problem with him continuing whilst the matter was restricted to civil considerations. Once it became a criminal matter, it was the right decision to go. Should he have gone sooner? Possibly. But it's better to look forward than to look back.

No one disputes that Pratt has been great for Carlton. That aside, Tim Lane and anyone else (with the exception of that agenda-ridden moron Patrick Smith) is entitled to their opinion about whether he should have been allowed to stay there.
Author:  pj_canus [ Sun Jun 22, 2008 10:02 am ]
Post subject: 
I thought the article was generally pretty fair. Demetriou and co are rightly saying that Pratt is entitled to a presumption of innocence until proven guilty. Counsins was deprived of that fundamental right and so the two matters have been handled inconsistently.

However, I do not like Lane's final paragraph:


Quote:
Now that Pratt has stood himself down as president, Carlton and its wealthy backers should do some serious soul-searching. This is a club that, based on its past 30 years of history, seems unable to survive without molly coddling itself in the bosom of a wealthy and autocratic president. It has won premierships in the process but ultimately lost respect. It is time the Carlton Football Club grew up.


I do not think this is a reasonable conclusion from the facts and reasoning that precede it in Lanes article. The past five years aside, survival has not been an issue at our club, and a that bleak period was preceded by the events of black Friday which would have signaled the end for almost any other Victorian club.

That period aside, I cannot see how it can be sensibly argued that the 'management style' of our club can be inferred as childish or less deserving of respect than others.
Author:  verbs [ Sun Jun 22, 2008 10:05 am ]
Post subject: 
pj_canus wrote:
I thought the article was generally pretty fair. Demetriou and co are rightly saying that Pratt is entitled to a presumption of innocence until proven guilty. Counsins was deprived of that fundamental right and so the two matters have been handled inconsistently.

However, I do not like Lane's final paragraph:


Quote:
Now that Pratt has stood himself down as president, Carlton and its wealthy backers should do some serious soul-searching. This is a club that, based on its past 30 years of history, seems unable to survive without molly coddling itself in the bosom of a wealthy and autocratic president. It has won premierships in the process but ultimately lost respect. It is time the Carlton Football Club grew up.




I do not think this is a reasonable conclusion from the facts and reasoning that precede it in Lanes article. The past five years aside, survival has not been an issue at our club, and a that bleak period was preceded by the events of black Friday which would have signaled the end for almost any other Victorian club.

That period aside, I cannot see how it can be sensibly argued that the 'management style' of our club can be inferred as childish or less deserving of respect than others.


I'm of pretty much the same opinion.

I agree about the Cousins bit, and I disagree about the growing up bit. I reckon it's a good thing to have wealthy autocratic presidents.
Author:  kingkerna [ Sun Jun 22, 2008 10:21 am ]
Post subject: 
Cousins did get shafted, should have fought the suspension.
Author:  Princes Park Whistler [ Sun Jun 22, 2008 10:22 am ]
Post subject: 
Tim Lane is an intelligent journalist and i can understand where he is coming from but i think he`s forgetting a few major points in this article. Without RP we were gone. Does he think its wrong of our supporters to want to compete against other clubs both on and off the field and to stand on our own two feet?
He accuses RP of being an autocratic leader yet he had to be coerced into the roll and heads a Board of 13 which, in contrast to the previous Board, is stable and unified.
RP made sure we identified ways of raising revenue for the club without him just pouring money in personally.
Record memberships occurred in spoon seasons when there was no white knights and nobody wanted to know us.
Up until 2002 the members didn`t know of the salary cap rorting of Elliott(other than the amnesty which many clubs were involved in)and promptly voted him out.
What club doesn`t have a wealthy President?Thats why they are there.Thats the nature of business and football is business like it or not.
There have been question marks against other club`s presidents over the years as well but it seems we are the only "dodgy" club.
To have a crack at us in our current situation is poor form.
Author:  Synbad [ Sun Jun 22, 2008 10:43 am ]
Post subject: 
Princes Park Whistler wrote:
Tim Lane is an intelligent journalist and i can understand where he is coming from but i think he`s forgetting a few major points in this article. Without RP we were gone. Does he think its wrong of our supporters to want to compete against other clubs both on and off the field and to stand on our own two feet?
He accuses RP of being an autocratic leader yet he had to be coerced into the roll and heads a Board of 13 which, in contrast to the previous Board, is stable and unified.
RP made sure we identified ways of raising revenue for the club without him just pouring money in personally.
Record memberships occurred in spoon seasons when there was no white knights and nobody wanted to know us.
Up until 2002 the members didn`t know of the salary cap rorting of Elliott(other than the amnesty which many clubs were involved in)and promptly voted him out.
What club doesn`t have a wealthy President?Thats why they are there.Thats the nature of business and football is business like it or not.
There have been question marks against other club`s presidents over the years as well but it seems we are the only "dodgy" club.
To have a crack at us in our current situation is poor form.
i dont know why people get worried about this kind of stuff...

Football isnt a business per sey... it doesnt manufacture anything material...
it manufactures emotions and feelings and a sense of belonging

its closer to entertainment than it is to building cars..

At the end of the day its all about "One day in september"

To the winners on that day is glory....

So if we win a premiership.... who flower cares what bananas trying to philosophise footy think... COS WE HAVE ANOTHER FLAG AND TROPHY IN THE flower TROPHY CABINET!!!... wich means our emotions and entertainment and sense of belonging was hightened....!!!

which is what we all follow a footy club for....

This other over philosophising what footy is .. is fantasy....

Its not what it is....!!!... its about your club and winning a flag!!!

These people are wankers!!!.. theyre so far removed from what footy is about that theyre just flogging themselves to death now with pseudo intellectuaism...its like theyre handing in a thesis for their PHD on stupidity...

@#$%&! off wanKers!!!

We have a premiership to win!!! :lol:
Author:  Megaman [ Sun Jun 22, 2008 11:29 am ]
Post subject: 
Is Lane ever happy with anything Carlton related?
Author:  bluedog [ Sun Jun 22, 2008 12:11 pm ]
Post subject: 
Synbad wrote:
[Its not what it is....!!!... its about your club and winning a flag!!!


And preferably in a competition that is fairly structured.
Author:  Synbad [ Sun Jun 22, 2008 12:28 pm ]
Post subject: 
bluedog wrote:
Synbad wrote:
[Its not what it is....!!!... its about your club and winning a flag!!!


And preferably in a competition that is fairly structured.


structured it is... there is a ladder... there are x amount of teams and there is a fixture.. home and away grounds and games...

Should everything be contrived so there is an artificial competition???
Author:  bluedog [ Sun Jun 22, 2008 12:47 pm ]
Post subject: 
Synbad wrote:
bluedog wrote:
Synbad wrote:
[Its not what it is....!!!... its about your club and winning a flag!!!


And preferably in a competition that is fairly structured.


structured it is... there is a ladder...


And, as this picture shows, you can reach the top.

Image

The problem is, some will be favoured in their attempt to reach the top,





















and not just because of their superior playing list.
Author:  Pafloyul [ Sun Jun 22, 2008 5:11 pm ]
Post subject: 
pj_canus wrote:
I thought the article was generally pretty fair. Demetriou and co are rightly saying that Pratt is entitled to a presumption of innocence until proven guilty. Counsins was deprived of that fundamental right and so the two matters have been handled inconsistently.

However, I do not like Lane's final paragraph:


Quote:
Now that Pratt has stood himself down as president, Carlton and its wealthy backers should do some serious soul-searching. This is a club that, based on its past 30 years of history, seems unable to survive without molly coddling itself in the bosom of a wealthy and autocratic president. It has won premierships in the process but ultimately lost respect. It is time the Carlton Football Club grew up.


I do not think this is a reasonable conclusion from the facts and reasoning that precede it in Lanes article. The past five years aside, survival has not been an issue at our club, and a that bleak period was preceded by the events of black Friday which would have signaled the end for almost any other Victorian club.

That period aside, I cannot see how it can be sensibly argued that the 'management style' of our club can be inferred as childish or less deserving of respect than others.


I don't know about the inference that we are childish...regardless it is time that we realised that we can't always buy our way out of trouble.

The "we are Carlton **** the rest!" attitude is outdated.
Author:  Pafloyul [ Sun Jun 22, 2008 5:21 pm ]
Post subject: 
Synbad wrote:
bluedog wrote:
Synbad wrote:
[Its not what it is....!!!... its about your club and winning a flag!!!


And preferably in a competition that is fairly structured.


structured it is... there is a ladder... there are x amount of teams and there is a fixture.. home and away grounds and games...

Should everything be contrived so there is an artificial competition???


You seem to be forgetting the powers that be and their ability to rain on our parade.

You have to work within certain constructs to an extent or it might all fall down on top of you.

I'm sensing 'poor man's' (figuratively speaking) John Elliott in all of this.
Author:  1979 Norm Smith medal [ Sun Jun 22, 2008 6:20 pm ]
Post subject: 
Must admit one thing, though, I wasn't happy seeing John Ell..tt on Channel 7's Game Day show today.

He has had his time in the sun - 20 years in the sun. Please let the club move on and respect where the club has to go without your embarassing media comments.
Author:  BlueMark [ Tue Jun 24, 2008 12:53 pm ]
Post subject: 
Gave up on Tim Lane long ago, like Fatpat gave devoting any energy to them at all.
Author:  Siegfried [ Tue Jun 24, 2008 5:26 pm ]
Post subject: 
I think it is a fairly pointed article actually. What Lane is doing more than anything else is showing up the AFL for it's lack of consistency.

I find it disappointing that as soon as any journalist writes something negative about Carlton, people on here jump down their backs and declare them to be morons.

As fmurphy says, we can't live in glass houses. Fact is, CFC is not perfect. Fact is, CFC over the last 6 years has been diabolical. There has been plenty to criticise the Club over.

And yet, every time it happens, there is an outcry on here from many (not all) about these so-called morons.

We need to be better than that. We need to be able to accept criticism when it is given, even when it may not be 100% deserved. We need to be strong enough to take it on the chin, imrpove, and move forward.

And we need to accept that different people have different opinions (and within that, different agends, but we all do, even on here. To refer to fmurphy once again, if this was all about Eddie and Collingwood, how many on here who are defending Pratt would be calling for Eddie's resignation?), and tha they are entitled to them.
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC + 10 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/