Carlton and the Bullants afiliation to continue.

camel · **Posted:** Wed Sep 12, 2007 11:21 pm

BrizzyBlue wrote:

Jarusa wrote:

Number of AFL teams with a VFL affiliation to win a premiership = 0.

Sandringham x 2, Jars. Affiliated with the Dees, yes?

In that example, I think Jars will ask you to count Melbourne's premierships while they have been aligned with Sandy.

Jarusa · **Joined:** Sat Feb 26, 2005 9:00 am **Posts:** 23123

camelboy wrote:

BrizzyBlue wrote:

Jarusa wrote:

Number of AFL teams with a VFL affiliation to win a premiership = 0.

Sandringham x 2, Jars. Affiliated with the Dees, yes?

In that example, I think Jars will ask you to count Melbourne's premierships while they have been aligned with Sandy.

Exactly.

We are in the business of proper premierships.

BrizzyBlue · **Posted:** Wed Sep 12, 2007 11:30 pm

Are you 2 wombats ganging up on me just because I can't read?

Jarusa · **Joined:** Sat Feb 26, 2005 9:00 am **Posts:** 23123

BrizzyBlue wrote:

Are you 2 wombats ganging up on me just because I can't read?

Are you saying I am someone who eats roots and leaves!

BrizzyBlue · **Posted:** Thu Sep 13, 2007 1:29 am

Jarusa wrote:

BrizzyBlue wrote:

Are you 2 wombats ganging up on me just because I can't read?

Are you saying I am someone who eats roots and leaves!

Not exactly. Wombats are well known for: "Eats, Roots, Shoots and Leaves! :wink:

keogh · **Joined:** Fri Jul 29, 2005 6:36 am **Posts:** 6439

IMO its a Carlton seconds team or nothing else.

Magoos footy at AFL level is about player development mainly.

Have a look at Geelongs flag in 2002. That is the greatest proof you can have to having a stand alone seconds team in the AFL

The guys play as a team

The guys develop faster because they are all playing a higher standard of footy

Having seen secondsVFL footy , the standard is akin to lower level country football. Players simply will develop slower.

The move to M C Labour is a plus, but is still not good enough

A guy like Benjamin isnt going to improve if he is playing at Cramer street at 11:15am on a Saturday morning

This is disappointing news.

My main concern is the 12/10 or 10/12 rule or whatever rule. If that stays , we will still see young kids development hindered .

blueycarlton · **Posted:** Thu Sep 13, 2007 9:34 am

It seems obvious that the Bullants-Carlton set-up is not working to develop our players as well as it should be.

A stand alone Carlton side is the way to go. We can play blokes in different positions to try them out without the pressure of having to win games as happens now. Top up players could come from the U18.

It is a pity that the Reserves, and to a degree, that the U19 comps disappeared.

Elwood Blues1 · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:10 am **Posts:** 4827

I would prefer a stand alone team, some of your senior listed players end up playing Bullant reserves and in comparison the interstate teams have their kids playing seniors in the SANFL and WAFL which has to help their development.
Geelong are another team who have been stand alone and are having success....

anfield · **Joined:** Tue Mar 07, 2006 2:47 pm **Posts:** 580

Molly wrote:

It is all easy to get sentimental and say that we should have our own VFL side again.

But people on this site are really getting a name at the moment for over-scrutinising every move the club makes. I don't think some of you will be satisfied until the Board agrees to run all decisions past a binding vote of TC

Realistically, the guys who are running our club are not fools. It seems apparent from all discussion throughout the year that they put strong consideration into going it alone again in the VFL. The fcat they didn't means that there were some very good reasons they didn't. I am sure they have thought about player development in all of this... just because it hasn't worked in the past doesn't mean that we don't have enough good operators to set up the structure so it works more in our favour from now on.

It really is time that people started giving this board some credit for making the best possible decisions. If you don't want to do that... then vote them out. But don't sit around taking easy pot shots when

a) you aren't aware of all the facts behind a decision
and
b) you don't have any concrete idea of how the whole Bullants / Carlton relationship is going to be structured moving forward

This post is far too sensible.

Synbad · **Posted:** Thu Sep 13, 2007 12:33 pm

Tractor Boy wrote:

Synbad wrote:

Great move for the time being but the club needs to make that marriage work for it.
The Bullants are Northern suburbs and we have had a few players from that area on our list/
Kouta
Ang Christou
Scotto
Stevens
Lance
and KREUZER!!!

So lets go farming the northern suburbs for members and supporters also.
It has a rich history of footballers and football.
We should be using the Bullants/Knights for intelligence of kids coming through the area. Just as Geelong have an advantage in identifying and recognising Falcons kids better than anybody else.

To me its a massive plus. If it can be harnessed and used to our advantage.

Bring back zones Synbad ???? Could it be done ?Not would it but could it ?

Hey Tractor Boy.. id love the Notrhern Zone...
I reckon entrench ourselves there and then have the draft scrapped!!!

Wed have a great bunch of kids from there
Kreuzer
Cotchin
Grimes

and a bunch of hardcore football supporters...

Key kingkerna.. im way ahead of you...thats why we disagree...

:wink:

linchpin · **Posted:** Thu Sep 13, 2007 12:42 pm

blueycarlton wrote:

It seems obvious that the Bullants-Carlton set-up is not working to develop our players as well as it should be.

A stand alone Carlton side is the way to go. We can play blokes in different positions to try them out without the pressure of having to win games as happens now. Top up players could come from the U18.

It is a pity that the Reserves, and to a degree, that the U19 comps disappeared.

With the problems between Mitchell and Pagan for the last 18 months now behind us, Barry should be judged on what he does more so from here on in. Working along side Ratts will possibly be the extra % we need. With communication, Barry will be able to work on specific areas a lot closer with a unified coaching panel behind him.

blueycarlton · **Posted:** Thu Sep 13, 2007 12:58 pm

linchpin
Who knows if Mitchell will be there next year.
But unless he is a Carlton employee he will always be coaching for his life at the end of each season.
If we can't have a stand alone reserves,
I would prefer Peter Dean, but if it's Mitchell, to be paid by Carlton to coach the Bullants.
The Bullants to be under the direction of Carlton to to develop CARLTON players, not have them in the Bullants seconds.
If we had our own side then this ridiculous rule of having so many VFL players in the side would not be a problem.

buzzaaaah · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:31 am **Posts:** 17893

Shaun Hampson benefitted from the increased game time of Bullants 2nds.

jimmae · **Posted:** Thu Sep 13, 2007 1:57 pm

buzzaaaah wrote:

Shaun Hampson benefitted from the increased game time of Bullants 2nds.

Hammer won't be competing with anyone for game time next year... except maybe Ackland.

Donstuie · **Posted:** Thu Sep 13, 2007 1:58 pm

linchpin wrote:

blueycarlton wrote:

It seems obvious that the Bullants-Carlton set-up is not working to develop our players as well as it should be.

A stand alone Carlton side is the way to go. We can play blokes in different positions to try them out without the pressure of having to win games as happens now. Top up players could come from the U18.

It is a pity that the Reserves, and to a degree, that the U19 comps disappeared.

With the problems between Mitchell and Pagan for the last 18 months now behind us, Barry should be judged on what he does more so from here on in. Working along side Ratts will possibly be the extra % we need. With communication, Barry will be able to work on specific areas a lot closer with a unified coaching panel behind him.

Ryan Jackson and Mark Jamison, recommended by Mitchell to Ratts for senior game-time. Need we say any more?

budzy · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 11:17 am **Posts:** 8128

blueycarlton wrote:

It is a pity that the Reserves, and to a degree, that the U19 comps disappeared.

More like a tragedy!! ...thank the AFLPA for that

camel · **Posted:** Thu Sep 13, 2007 2:39 pm

They're not real happy on the VFL forum with the Bullants playing so many home games at PP.

Seems like a good idea to me.

But then, a marriage of (in)convenience is never going to please everyone.

Jarusa · **Joined:** Sat Feb 26, 2005 9:00 am **Posts:** 23123

cb, when the legends stand was built the dimensions of the ground were changed so that the length of the ground is now the same as the MCG.

camel · **Posted:** Thu Sep 13, 2007 2:57 pm

Jarusa wrote:

cb, when the legends stand was built the dimensions of the ground were changed so that the length of the ground is now the same as the MCG.

Ahh, thanks Jars, what's the width comparison like?

Kaptain Kouta · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 12:41 pm **Posts:** 63509

camelboy wrote:

Jarusa wrote:

cb, when the legends stand was built the dimensions of the ground were changed so that the length of the ground is now the same as the MCG.

Ahh, thanks Jars, what's the width comparison like?

These are the official AFL dimensions, from 2001 (I had them in an old email):
MCG: 160m x 138m
Princes Park/MC Labour Park: 160m x 139.2
Telstra: 158m x 128m
Kardinia Park: 172m x 117.5m
SCG: 147m x 136m
Manuka: 162.5m x 138.4m
Football Park: 165m x 133m
Gabba: 166m x 133m
Subiaco: 175.6m x 122.4m

I think that the pockets at the 'G are deeper though, making it more circular, to PP's more oval shape, even though the dimensions are so similar

Carlton and the Bullants afiliation to continue.

Who is online