Correct me if I'm wrong, my understanding is that players who achieved 100 games automatically acquire life membership (as do all premiership players).

I don't have a problem with acknowleging such milestones, though I feel there is more to a life membership than just number of games and/or a premiership cup.

However, being a pragmatic iguana and not wanting to necessarily change the criteria, perhaps such milestones should make players eligible for life membership at some point in the future, say at the end of a career or at a point where they have made a significant and enduring contribution to the Club.

The current arrangement does not deal with players changing clubs.

By way of example (rather than because of) Fev has played over a 100 games for the Blues and therefore a life member, yet he is now playing for another team and potentially may also become a life member there.

I just think holding off awarding life memberships to players till the boots are hung up is an appropriate time to acknowledge an individual's contribution, irrespective of who he played his last game with.


R.I.

_________________
NG
S M C , S F L

I thought it was 100 games = name on locker, 200 games = Life Membership.

_________________
“It is a state of mind, a system of belief, a way of seeing the world, a deep faith that, because you are Carlton, you belong to something great.” - Mike Fitzpatrick articulating what Out of the Blue means.

Wiggo got his life membership at December's AGM, must be 100

_________________
NG
S M C , S F L

It's actually 8 years + service and recommendation by board sub-committee.

Criteria must be “for being a good bloke”.

Fev will qualify under the “he’s good with the kids” criteria

_________________
"I had to eat"

Didn't the Rhino get his life membership and play 50 games in the 1 year, lending support to the Doc's criteria.

_________________
Yazz - The only way is up

The award is of a little significance due to the criteria, particularly for footballers.
They are handed out like free tickets to the mens gallery.

Right on the money Doc.

Woof, I disagree, anybody that can last 8 years on the list has to be a bloody good footballer.

_________________
The problem with Socialism is, you eventually run out of other people's money.

Fair enough. I have just been brought up in a club environment that had very few life members due to significance they placed on the award.

I would imagine that Fev and Houlihan would be life members based on service, yet they have tarnsihed the club along the way. I would imagine that when Betts and Walker get to 8 years they will automatically get one as well.

If it were up to me, I'd place some other criteria on the player getting Life Membership. That would take the form of off-field leadership and perhaps going out of the way to do the hard yards with Carlton's Community Partners.

Some of the work guys like Setanta O'hAilpin, Dennis Armfield and Caleb Tiller do with Challenge, Peter Mac, Royal Children’s Hospital and the Victorian Bushfire Appeal (that don't get a single mention) is highly commendable. People inside the club notice these things though and that's why guys like Simon Wiggins are good choices - not only because they're good clubmen.

The AGM's I've attended where the club has recognised (for instance) a boot studder who worked with the club for eons with Life Membership means more to me as a member than a footballer, who despite their talent, has in this day and age - set themselves up for life.

Yeah heavin forbid - John Nicholls tarnised the club as did Jimmy Buckley as did many more so whats your point?

My point is that Nicholls and Buckley have football awards such as a B&F that recognises their on field achievements. A life membership should put as much value on off field performance as on field performance.

Given Adrian Whitehead's injury and subsequent court case, IIRC the club withheld his life membership even though he is a Carlton premiership player.
Is this still the case ? Or has he since been awarded his LM ?

_________________
The problem with Socialism is, you eventually run out of other people's money.