http://www.realfooty.theage.com.au/real ... 10264.html

Sorry Tim, I can't support you here. Your failure to realise the intangibility of the culture of a club is so much more important means that you refuse to acknowledge that we have problems.

Having said that Brittain was treated very poorly.

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

- Igor Stravinsky

Why bring this up now? It happened 3 years ago.

Full of nostagia and sentiment is Timmy.
He wants us to stay at Optus.
Was outraged when Denis tried to trade Lance
Now he just about says he prefers Britain to Denis...what dark chapter in our history did Britain over see Timmy?
What was Britain doing last year??
Whats he doing this year???

I think the problem with our supporters at the moment is they cant understand whats happening... and why the old days are gone..

Brave new world.. there is no room for nostalgia and sentiment.

Coreywas to become our messiah and Denis lost him...

Earth to Timmy.... hes shit at North again and we have Teague...

_________________
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.

HAH!!

Good on ya Tim

_________________
*(grow - fun - gah)

Yeah but whatabout your whataboutism.

I agree with Tim lane actually - although its all hypothetical had we retained brittain, I dont think we would be far off from where we are at this stage.

We can talk about the resurgence of Fev as a Pagan influence, but I'd argue that it was more the fact that he was almost booted out of the club that changed him - not the fact that pagan 'loved' him

The other pagain influence - Houlahan - was always going to develop as a player.

For all the debate as to players that have improved under pagan, we also have players that regressed under the pagan system. There is no reason why Mckernan couldnt have continued to perform to the or above the level of 02 in 04/04 seasons under Brittain. Arguably Livingston would be more progressed now were it not for the Martyn recruitment.

The thing is BOTH systems can work in developing a commited and successful team - its basic management practice - top down vs empowerment. The major problem that we had was the transition process that took place - it was too sudden and people were displaced as a result - You would experience the same in ANY workplace if u went from one management practise one day to the other.

Its a disgrace that Brittain was made (and is still made) the scapegoat for what happened in 2002.

Perhaps because popular media doesnt question Pagan's performances despite a somewhat disappointing start to the season. Were it another coach 3 years into his tenure and perhaps another club - an 85 point loss would be result in a LOT more media coverage

Wouldnt of expected anything else from you synbad
1. The article wasnt about leaving optus. Irrespective of what people might think of the home game issue, they can still have an opinion on football (I know we had to move and that we had no choice in the matter - would have prefered MCG home ground)
2. Lance - you could probably argue that lance is one of the players that has gone backwards under pagan (rather than losing form). I'd be interested in his 02 stats relative to the pagan years
3. The statement of prefering one coach to another is an overly simplistic arguement. Tim Lane never actually said that Brittain should be coaching instead of pagan - rather he said that brittain was harshly treated.

Its all about management styles - some people work better under some systems and others better under others. Its how you deal with people that are uncomfortable with your system that makes you a great manager (read coach).

Pagans policy is to just remove those that arent suited to a certain style - thats not great management as you lose a lot without knowing it.
Brittains style of empowerment didnt suit some - his failing wasnt that he empowered some, but that he didnt keep tabs on it or recognise that some players needed more pressure than others (these statements based only on what is posted on these boards - ie unlike the pagan comments I've no idea on their accuracy)

Probably had something to do with the fact that Collingwood lost by 112 points...

_________________
Formerly Blues-Back2003.

Synbad, I think you have nailed it. In the past we could behave differently, we had that luxury. Now, to return to our position of greatness, hard, ruthless decisions need to be made, against a backdrop of competition from all other clubs and the league who still reckons we have not had it hard enough for long enough yet.

Ah F$@k it - I'm going to abuse Milburn tonight just to remind myself of the good old days!

_________________
"Two roads diverged in a wood,
and I,
I took the one less travelled by,
and that has made all the difference."

Robert Frost

Brittain was unlucky getting the job when we were nose diving but at the same time he wasnt the man for the job...we need a cleanout and some discipline....we didnt even have a weights program until Pagan came along....start of any rebuilding is getting a A grade coach...
He probably was a very good game day coach but we needed more than that.....

You're not Grant Thomas are you Mr. Chicken?

The problem I have with Mr. Cornflakes is the same problem I have with what you've just written.

Football teams are not corporations. A corporation can perform remarkably well even when only 90% of its employees are pulling in the direction management chooses as the righteous path. If 10% of a football team is pulling in the opposite direction it's going to win a wooden spoon.

I'm not a fan of military analogies (sorry BlueMark) but it's not dissimilar to being in the army. Everyone needs to follow the leader if you're going to survive. You're only as strong as your weakest link blahdeblahdeblah...

In fact for corporations it doesn't hurt to have some people pulling in new and interesting directions as it can open up a culture to new ideas.

What do you think happens when a football club has 10% of its team pulling in the wrong direction?

If Pagan is the reason for his decline in form it's strange that he's even worse now than when he was under Pagan.

Didn't Brittain sit along side Parkin for several years and thus was responsible for list and player management.
To say he is hard done by because of our worst ever year disregards the fact that he'd been involved in list management for several years prior to the spoon.
Sure, we got injuries etc but what happened to players coming through the ranks etc, that good coaches are on top of at all times. We drafted garbage, no kid development etc etc.
Brittain just played players he and Parko had played for some years and when they were all broken there was nobody else to play.

Tim's gotta get over it. Referring to Elliot chasing Pagan as a big fish to prop his own bad management and to save his skin is about the only thing that's really accurate. For mine, the rest is very half arsed.

_________________
This might sound extreme in the context of alleged sexual assault, drunken violence and a drug trafficking charge...

Most families usually have one sibling who is "Looney Tunes" in this case we have the exception to the rule.

_________________
"Hence you will not say that Greeks fight like heroes but that heroes fight like Greeks"?

Winston Churchill

The thing that crippled Brittain was the injuries that our players sustained in 2002 (pun intended). We were just decimated and Corey was one of the few that played the majority of games. Sure is sounds like we had ordinary preparation. We needed a comprehensive weights program and discipline. But he has been unfairly criticised. I don't believe that one year is enough to adequately assess a coach... even Frawley had four years.

Tim could do worse than to come into Talking Carlton or one of the other CFC boards and discuss some of his ideas. Many of us have put up posts that we've reflected on later as being not quite as well thought out as they might be.

When people who care about the club give input into a discussion you initiate it adds to your overall view of a situation. Often there are other considerations you haven't taken into account when you've fired off your first missive.

That article reads like the sort of post that many of us are guilty of putting up at times. Problem is, where we might come around to a broader perspective on a particular issue due to the input of our Carlton brethren, Tim is probably bouncing his ideas off his ill-informed, non-Carlton supporting journo buddies.

I can see it now...


Tim: Carlton are shit!

Connolly: Yeah Carlton are shit!

Sheahan: You guys need Brittain back!

Tim: Yeah - great idea Mike! And maybe Beaumont, Allan and Murphy too!

Connolly: That Pagan with his new-fangled ideas and weight training and shit. It'll never work.

Tim: See ya guys - got an article to write...

Amazing how some people knock TRUE CARLTON supporters, because there opinion differs.

Tell me Clem...what have you contributed to the Carlton Football Club compared to Tim Lane? Anyone really, Synbad?

So anyone who has had an official role with the club (and therefore likely to have contributed more than the majority of us) be it as a player, coach, director or perhaps as a high profile media personality is also beyond criticism for their opinions/actions?
Wow gonna be an interesting forum this one.

Apart from having a brother or something who was a runner or whatever it was, what has Tim Lane contributed to the club? He is a media commentator with much better journalistic ethics than Eddie so he's never going to cross a line for the Blues while holding that position.
He's never been on the board. He's never coached. He's never played. He's never been part of a coterie. He's a member but so are the rest of us. Why is he more a TRUE Carlton supporter than the rest of us Ostrich?

_________________
The only way for some people to understand is for them to be on the receiving end

Left wing moralists
In self serving denial
They shit me no end

Maybe I had my "I Like Tim Lane" hat on when I read it - but I didn't disagree with the article at all. My interpretation of his point was more that he was suggesting we target our criticism of "the culture" of the time at the group. I also saw him try to preserve the fact that Brittain was (and is) a decent coach who has every right to bemoan the cards he was dealt during his tenure in a similar manner to Denis.
But then - I like Wayne Brittain too, and don't blame him or his coaching style for our finish....