Given Judd was quoted yesterday as saying that the issue was out of the playing group's hands, I simply can't agree with the point of view that says this is the playing's group doing. I'd prefer that it was the case but I'm pretty disillusioned with the club's handling of the entire situation.

It's taken until today for an official statement to be made about something that occurred ten days ago. That's allowed the media to effectively place the club in a position where if they had decided to keep Fev then they would have been criticised for being weak. The $10 grand fine was never going to satisfy anybody. The media has been incredibly unfair on him but the Club has allowed it to happen by not getting on the front foot.

Personally, I think if they had come out on Wednesday last week saying that it was unacceptable behaviour and suspended for the first four matches next year, the issue goes away. I also think that it would have been a better decision to keep and suspend rather than put him up for trade but that's effectively an argument not worth having anymore. It does raise the issue of what happens if he doesn't get traded? Will he then be suspended or is being put up for trade some type of punishment? It's embarrassing yeah but I don't think it would say as much as putting him out for a month.

My vote now is ring up Essendon* and ask for a straight trade - Hurley for Fevola - cos Hurley should be up for trade right? Or is being charged with assaulting a cabbie a lesser offence than getting drunk and making an idiot of yourself? Yeah, he's a bit younger and it's the first offence but the Fev can't be accused of being anything more than an idiot whereas Hurley's case is a lot nastier. Blatant hypocrisy from the media.

It's taken until today for an official statement to be made about something that occurred ten days ago.

If you want knee-jerk reactions, you might be happier at Punt Road.

Not sure how quick you can possibly expect a $700,000 decision to be made?

Given Judd was quoted yesterday as saying that the issue was out of the playing group's hands, I simply can't agree with the point of view that says this is the playing's group doing. I'd prefer that it was the case but I'm pretty disillusioned with the club's handling of the entire situation.

I posted in another thread the 3AW interview with Brian Cook tonight. Cook said that the leadership group's decision to punish Steve Johnston was a major part of Geelong winning the '07 flag, he said it was when the players and the club finally understood what was required to win a Premiership, and finally put the tough measures in place.

Tuning into the passionate response from all types of carlton supporters has been rather interesting.

Those that are negative about the clubs decision, clearly are choosing to throw the issue at the hands of the administration and coach ie "shouldn't have supported rehabilitation, too valuable" etc.

I have no doubt that key members of the playing leadership would have been consulted on this..... and will be supporting the decision. They will recognise the stakes and equally will recognise what is required to enjoy sustained success. In fact, one of them has won the three highest awards a player would enjoy - he knows the importance of tough decisions. To win, you need to be brave.

Given Judd was quoted yesterday as saying that the issue was out of the playing group's hands, I simply can't agree with the point of view that says this is the playing's group doing.

Judd was quoted yesterday as saying that the issue was out of the playing group's hands

What a load of BS! So being the best team didn't win it for them, it was suspending one of their own players??? Why did they win it this year? Who did Hawthorn suspend last year????

Tuning into the passionate response from all types of carlton supporters has been rather interesting.

Those that are negative about the clubs decision, clearly are choosing to throw the issue at the hands of the administration and coach ie "shouldn't have supported rehabilitation, too valuable" etc.

I have no doubt that key members of the playing leadership would have been consulted on this..... and will be supporting the decision. They will recognise the stakes and equally will recognise what is required to enjoy sustained success. In fact, one of them has won the three highest awards a player would enjoy - he knows the importance of tough decisions. To win, you need to be brave.

Deal is done and dusted, but I think it is worth noting that the playing group had NO input at all into the decision.

Quote from Kernahan -
“This decision is based on what we believe is best for the Carlton Football Club, importantly the playing group or individual players were not involved in the decision, it was a matter for the club and not just an on-field issue.”

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/b ... 5784897145

Obviously, that doesn't mean it's a bad decision but I think failing to have the players' support is a fairly major oversight. Anybody ask Jamo how he'd feel going 1-on-1 with the Fev?

I had hoped that the major reason for moving him on was the playing group being fed up with him - a lot of commentators were suggesting this was the case. Turns out that it was a decision by the administrationi based on ... well, your guess is as good as mine....

Mate, I barely believe a single word that comes out of club official's mouths in cases like this. Club presidents, CEO's, coaches... they all lie through their teeth to the media. Sticks may well just be doing what he should be doing: presenting it as a decision that came solely from the top. What sticks said contradicts many of the reports regarding the fallout from brownlow night, but it would sound pretty unprofessional for Kernahan to come out and say much else, really.