Talking Carlton Index Lochie O'Brien Kerryn Harrington Lochie O'Brien Kerryn Harrington CFC Home CFC Membership CFC Shop CFC Fixture Blueseum
It is currently Sun Jun 22, 2025 12:18 am

All times are UTC + 10 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 309 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 ... 16  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 26, 2005 12:16 pm 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 6:31 pm
Posts: 24457
Location: Heartbroken
So how's about that Lance Whitnall? I wonder where he is at in his career?

_________________
Richard Pratt - A Carlton legend.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 26, 2005 2:17 pm 
Offline
Geoff Southby
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 3:54 pm
Posts: 5274
Location: Melbourne
CarltonClem wrote:
verbs wrote:
CarltonClem wrote:
verbs wrote:
So you would ignore Camporeale, someone you've never met, know virtually nothing about, have no knowledge of his personal/family life, and who's biggest crime is to have played AFL at the highest level?

Or would you call him Cancereale to his face?

Based on your comments above, you would ignore him, which I hope would be true. If not, that is a much sadder way to view the world and other people as opposed to pointing out errors on an internet forum.



And your bringing down posters who you've never met, know virtually nothing about, have no knowledge of his personal/family life and who's [sic] crime is to post on the TalkingCarlton forum is no different to what I'm doing?

Camporeale has to earn back my respect for what he's done to the footy club I love. Walking out on it in its greatest hour of need is not going to change things.


I was hardly bringing you down, merely saying that if you are being truthful in what you said, I find that quite sad. Is that such a bad thing to say?


Am I being truthful? Well, I guess you've never met me so you don't know.

The original comment was that I wouldn't say anything online that I wouldn't be prepared to say to someone's face. If I was challenged to, yes, I would say it to his face. Would I deliberately go up to the guy and say it? No, that's not decent behaviour.

I think that point of view has been lost. The original point was "whether we'd be game enough if challenged to say it to another person's face". And my answer is yes. But would I deliberately set to do so? No, of course not.


Backpeddling? CarltonClem wrote
Quote:
Easy for you to hurl abuse behind a computer screen. Try saying it to their face.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 26, 2005 7:14 pm 
Offline
Mike Fitzpatrick

Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 9:26 pm
Posts: 4719
Location: Parliament House, Canberra
You can interpret what I said in a number of ways because it's text.

You've proved my point about TC posters wanting just to point out errors etc. etc.

_________________
"A good composer does not initiate. He steals."

- Igor Stravinsky


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 26, 2005 8:07 pm 
Offline
formerly Army the Wonderkid
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 8:30 pm
Posts: 2058
Location: The Burbs
verbs wrote:
I'm not talking about the difference between players getting paid less in years gone by and more now though KK. I'm talking about how money has corrupted the supporter base. It has made supporters angry. It has created negativity. Accusations and finger pointing. It has diminished the enjoyment many have of the game.

I was at a Brisbane Lions match this year, and after four consequtive grand finals, Lions supporters were still yelling at their players to do better because that's what they are paid for.

It's no longer about going to the footy to watch a game. It's about going to the footy to expect a return on investment.

It's really very sad.


Huh? It's always been this way, ever since I started watching football 20 years ago. Fans demand that the high paid players perform - as you would in your current job demand that the highest paid people perform. With high pay in the real world comes an expectation of sacking someone, with high pay in the footy world, you cant exactly sack them until a certain juncture in the season so you demand performance.

There is nothing wrong with it, it is entirely normal and consistent with everyday values.

_________________
Formerly: Ackland the Wonderkid / Army the Wonderkid / quivering mess / molsey / Tony Lynn Fan Club


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 26, 2005 8:16 pm 
Offline
Stephen Silvagni
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 10:04 am
Posts: 28377
Location: *Currently banned*
Athorn the Wonderkid wrote:
verbs wrote:
I'm not talking about the difference between players getting paid less in years gone by and more now though KK. I'm talking about how money has corrupted the supporter base. It has made supporters angry. It has created negativity. Accusations and finger pointing. It has diminished the enjoyment many have of the game.

I was at a Brisbane Lions match this year, and after four consequtive grand finals, Lions supporters were still yelling at their players to do better because that's what they are paid for.

It's no longer about going to the footy to watch a game. It's about going to the footy to expect a return on investment.

It's really very sad.


Huh? It's always been this way, ever since I started watching football 20 years ago. Fans demand that the high paid players perform - as you would in your current job demand that the highest paid people perform. With high pay in the real world comes an expectation of sacking someone, with high pay in the footy world, you cant exactly sack them until a certain juncture in the season so you demand performance.

There is nothing wrong with it, it is entirely normal and consistent with everyday values.


They have? Back in 1986? What were the "high paid" players earning back then? $1000 a game?

It's always been this way? ah.......I don't think so Tim.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 26, 2005 9:07 pm 
Offline
Bruce Doull
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 11:27 am
Posts: 33188
Location: In the box.
Bainuzz wrote:
Synbad wrote:
Getting back to Anthony RoccA.
What he does is if youre a midfielder looking at going forward when you look up and see a Collosus standing at CHF you have great confidence in kicking to him.
When you cant see anyone standing our in particular it makes it harder.

The other thing is Malthouse says Rocca has a low fitness base and works HARDER than EVERYBODY else to bring himself to a point where he can EFFECTIVELY play AFL football.


Then why are we using Fisher as the go to guy in the forward line? Is it because Lance isn't up to it? Is it because Fisher has a better pair of hands eben though he is built like Orlando Bloom? Or is it just because we don't have that collosus you speak of?


Well when you have a few blokes taking up the lions share of the salary cap and playing with all the conviction of Prlando Bloom in Troy... you struggle in alot of areas.. finances... playing list... leadership etc.

Were shit with what we have .. but last year we paid out number 5 in the league.

_________________
Due to recent budget cuts and the rising cost of electricity, gas, and oil....... the Light at the End of the Tunnel has been turned off. We apologize for the inconvenience.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 26, 2005 9:31 pm 
Offline
formerly Army the Wonderkid
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 8:30 pm
Posts: 2058
Location: The Burbs
verbs wrote:
They have? Back in 1986? What were the "high paid" players earning back then? $1000 a game?

It's always been this way? ah.......I don't think so Tim.


Who is Tim?

Bollocks. When we went over and bought the West Australians and the South AUstralians on big bucks we expected performance. Didn't you?

Big money = big expectations = big disappointment upon failure.

_________________
Formerly: Ackland the Wonderkid / Army the Wonderkid / quivering mess / molsey / Tony Lynn Fan Club


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 26, 2005 9:34 pm 
Offline
Stephen Silvagni
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 10:04 am
Posts: 28377
Location: *Currently banned*
Athorn the Wonderkid wrote:
verbs wrote:
They have? Back in 1986? What were the "high paid" players earning back then? $1000 a game?

It's always been this way? ah.......I don't think so Tim.


Who is Tim?

Bollocks. When we went over and bought the West Australians and the South AUstralians on big bucks we expected performance. Didn't you?

Big money = big expectations = big disappointment upon failure.


If you are trying to compare supporters expectations with now and 20 years ago, you are way off the mark.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 26, 2005 9:34 pm 
Offline
as seen on carltonfc.com.au
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 9:19 pm
Posts: 73
Dear present givers

We at the Buzz do not like to intrude on the valid arguments for & against on the performances of certain players. However, we do have one question when it comes to Mr.Lance Whitnall.

If he is so smart, why does he continually give away this free kick?

http://carltonfc.com.au/default.asp?pg= ... eid=241739

You know you've seen it before - why why why?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 26, 2005 9:39 pm 
Offline
formerly Army the Wonderkid
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 8:30 pm
Posts: 2058
Location: The Burbs
verbs wrote:
Athorn the Wonderkid wrote:
verbs wrote:
They have? Back in 1986? What were the "high paid" players earning back then? $1000 a game?

It's always been this way? ah.......I don't think so Tim.


Who is Tim?

Bollocks. When we went over and bought the West Australians and the South AUstralians on big bucks we expected performance. Didn't you?

Big money = big expectations = big disappointment upon failure.


If you are trying to compare supporters expectations with now and 20 years ago, you are way off the mark.


No I am trying to refute your political stance on football by saying that football fans expect more from higher price players. That is one the key arguments in this Whitnall thread - imagine if he hadn't have been paid so much over the past few years, do you really think we'd be on the 13th page of this thread?

_________________
Formerly: Ackland the Wonderkid / Army the Wonderkid / quivering mess / molsey / Tony Lynn Fan Club


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 26, 2005 9:42 pm 
Offline
Stephen Silvagni
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 10:04 am
Posts: 28377
Location: *Currently banned*
Athorn the Wonderkid wrote:
verbs wrote:
Athorn the Wonderkid wrote:
verbs wrote:
They have? Back in 1986? What were the "high paid" players earning back then? $1000 a game?

It's always been this way? ah.......I don't think so Tim.


Who is Tim?

Bollocks. When we went over and bought the West Australians and the South AUstralians on big bucks we expected performance. Didn't you?

Big money = big expectations = big disappointment upon failure.


If you are trying to compare supporters expectations with now and 20 years ago, you are way off the mark.


No I am trying to refute your political stance on football by saying that football fans expect more from higher price players. That is one the key arguments in this Whitnall thread - imagine if he hadn't have been paid so much over the past few years, do you really think we'd be on the 13th page of this thread?


Um....maybe you should go over those 13 pages and read where I wrote the only reason this thread exists is because of money being paid to Whitnall???


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 26, 2005 9:43 pm 
Offline
Mike Fitzpatrick

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:10 am
Posts: 4827
Bainuzz wrote:
Synbad wrote:
Getting back to Anthony RoccA.
What he does is if youre a midfielder looking at going forward when you look up and see a Collosus standing at CHF you have great confidence in kicking to him.
When you cant see anyone standing our in particular it makes it harder.

The other thing is Malthouse says Rocca has a low fitness base and works HARDER than EVERYBODY else to bring himself to a point where he can EFFECTIVELY play AFL football.


Then why are we using Fisher as the go to guy in the forward line? Is it because Lance isn't up to it? Is it because Fisher has a better pair of hands eben though he is built like Orlando Bloom? Or is it just because we don't have that collosus you speak of?


Thats why we had to get Kennedy....big body, good pair of hands, and hard worker....Fisher too light..Lance cant mark the footy and isnt up to it.....we need our own "out of the box" CHF or we are going nowhere...its no secret that if you have a good CHF you are half way to having a good team..as good as Marc Murphy will be, we need a powerhouse at CHF to channel Murphys work through and make life easier for Fevola.

Rocca has limitations with fitness and moblity but is better than he was, I expect Kennedy to be more the complete package than Rocca..Synbad is right though..when you look up field you want a decent target and Rocca can mark the footy in contested situations....

_________________
"When you have the attitude of a champion, you see adversity as your
training partner."
- Conor Gillen


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 26, 2005 9:48 pm 
Offline
formerly Army the Wonderkid
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 8:30 pm
Posts: 2058
Location: The Burbs
verbs wrote:
Athorn the Wonderkid wrote:
verbs wrote:
Athorn the Wonderkid wrote:
verbs wrote:
They have? Back in 1986? What were the "high paid" players earning back then? $1000 a game?

It's always been this way? ah.......I don't think so Tim.


Who is Tim?

Bollocks. When we went over and bought the West Australians and the South AUstralians on big bucks we expected performance. Didn't you?

Big money = big expectations = big disappointment upon failure.


If you are trying to compare supporters expectations with now and 20 years ago, you are way off the mark.


No I am trying to refute your political stance on football by saying that football fans expect more from higher price players. That is one the key arguments in this Whitnall thread - imagine if he hadn't have been paid so much over the past few years, do you really think we'd be on the 13th page of this thread?


Um....maybe you should go over those 13 pages and read where I wrote the only reason this thread exists is because of money being paid to Whitnall???


Your inference being that we have to disagree on every point? You can't ignore that he was massively overpaid on performance 2002-2004, and that Camporeale was in the same boat? Maybe you have confused me with that disgraceful signature of yours.

My only response on this long-winded rehash of the last 147 other Whitnall threads is your comment about how our expectations drive our negativity and all that throwaway neo-socialist response on page 11 or 12.

And ElwoodBlues if Kennedy isn't miles better than Rocca we're going nowhere!

_________________
Formerly: Ackland the Wonderkid / Army the Wonderkid / quivering mess / molsey / Tony Lynn Fan Club


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 26, 2005 9:54 pm 
Offline
Stephen Silvagni
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 10:04 am
Posts: 28377
Location: *Currently banned*
Athorn the Wonderkid wrote:
verbs wrote:
Athorn the Wonderkid wrote:
verbs wrote:
Athorn the Wonderkid wrote:
verbs wrote:
They have? Back in 1986? What were the "high paid" players earning back then? $1000 a game?

It's always been this way? ah.......I don't think so Tim.


Who is Tim?

Bollocks. When we went over and bought the West Australians and the South AUstralians on big bucks we expected performance. Didn't you?

Big money = big expectations = big disappointment upon failure.


If you are trying to compare supporters expectations with now and 20 years ago, you are way off the mark.


No I am trying to refute your political stance on football by saying that football fans expect more from higher price players. That is one the key arguments in this Whitnall thread - imagine if he hadn't have been paid so much over the past few years, do you really think we'd be on the 13th page of this thread?


Um....maybe you should go over those 13 pages and read where I wrote the only reason this thread exists is because of money being paid to Whitnall???


Your inference being that we have to disagree on every point? You can't ignore that he was massively overpaid on performance 2002-2004, and that Camporeale was in the same boat? Maybe you have confused me with that disgraceful signature of yours.

My only response on this long-winded rehash of the last 147 other Whitnall threads is your comment about how our expectations drive our negativity and all that throwaway neo-socialist response on page 11 or 12.

And ElwoodBlues if Kennedy isn't miles better than Rocca we're going nowhere!


I'm confusing you with the "disgraceful" TV show Coupling?

I doubt anyone was assessing perfomance against pay in 1985. I'd like someone to tell me how they were doing that 20 years ago, but I'd be surprised if anyone puts their hand up.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 27, 2005 11:21 am 
Offline
Laurie Kerr
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2005 7:04 pm
Posts: 130
Location: Not Telling
Elwood Blues1 wrote:
Thats why we had to get Kennedy....big body, good pair of hands, and hard worker....Fisher too light..Lance cant mark the footy and isnt up to it.....we need our own "out of the box" CHF or we are going nowhere...its no secret that if you have a good CHF you are half way to having a good team..as good as Marc Murphy will be, we need a powerhouse at CHF to channel Murphys work through and make life easier for Fevola.

Rocca has limitations with fitness and moblity but is better than he was, I expect Kennedy to be more the complete package than Rocca..Synbad is right though..when you look up field you want a decent target and Rocca can mark the footy in contested situations....


The difficulty is Elwood that Lance has been around already for what 9 or 10 seasons?? Brown and Tredrea and Riewoldt et al have all surfaced in that time, with Lance still not even looking like an old man. I'm not sure the biggest hole in our team during that 10 years have been at CHF, hence why would we have even targeted to recruit a CHF? Maybe that's where they see the problem now.

If Kennedy works out better than Rocca, I'll be happy, if he works out better than Lance, I'll be even happier, the guy has played alot of games for us and was the youngest ever to reach either 150 or 200 games for the club (is that right? I'm not big on stats as I'm sure you can tell) I think the match committee and the coaching staff see alot in Lance that those who are critical of him don't see.

_________________
Forgotten, but not gone


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 27, 2005 11:49 am 
Offline
Ken Hunter
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 11:12 am
Posts: 10402
Location: Coburg
verbs heard of Diamond Jim? Not sure of the year but they sure as hell were doing exactly that with him, papers, television etc. And demons fans, ohh the sad demon fans screaming for some value for their investment.

_________________
This type of slight is alien in the more cultured part of the world - Walsh. Its up there with mad dogs, Englishmen and the midday sun!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 27, 2005 11:53 am 
Offline
Stephen Silvagni
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 10:04 am
Posts: 28377
Location: *Currently banned*
dannyboy wrote:
verbs heard of Diamond Jim? Not sure of the year but they sure as hell were doing exactly that with him, papers, television etc. And demons fans, ohh the sad demon fans screaming for some value for their investment.


I'm sure there are isolated examples. Today it is widespread...throughout the entire supporter base all over the country (hence my mention of Lions fans, a supporter base which has nothing to whinge about).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 27, 2005 11:58 am 
Offline
Ken Hunter
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 11:12 am
Posts: 10402
Location: Coburg
yeah so it started to happen and grew from there. i understand what you're saying verbs but athorn is right, it happened in the eighties. The rest is degrees.

_________________
This type of slight is alien in the more cultured part of the world - Walsh. Its up there with mad dogs, Englishmen and the midday sun!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 27, 2005 12:16 pm 
Offline
Stephen Silvagni
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 10:04 am
Posts: 28377
Location: *Currently banned*
dannyboy wrote:
yeah so it started to happen and grew from there. i understand what you're saying verbs but athorn is right, it happened in the eighties. The rest is degrees.


Well, Athorn said it's always been that way. I chose the 80s because I don't remember much beyond '82. I remember very little talk about money, and though I'm sure it happened, it wasn't a fiaxation of supporters back then like it is now, which is what I've been saying all along...and in particular that fixating on money is always going to bring negativity.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 27, 2005 1:07 pm 
Offline
Bruce Doull
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 12:41 pm
Posts: 63509
Verbs, you're 31. The concept of thinking about how well remunerated the players are when you're 10-13 is a bit much.

Ask any kid today, they don't think cash payments, back-ended contracts and the like, they just look at the field and see superheroes.

_________________
And so while others miserably pledge themselves to the pursuit of ambition and brief power, I will be stretched out in the shade, singing.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 309 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 ... 16  Next

All times are UTC + 10 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ByteDanceSpider, Majestic-12 [Bot] and 44 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group