Basically it comes down to this anyway:

PP is redeveloped, and Carlton lose complete control of PP, and we get screwed for either playing matches there or training there. Because the AFL is not going to let us retain control over PP if AFL matches are to be hosted there.

PP gets properly developed as a training facility heads and shoulders over what we've had previously, matching the massively rich elite facilities of interstate clubs, and it remains our base, and under our control.

What would you rather?

Personally, I would have said it would be better to have PP as a top-notch VFL ground and training facility under our control. But what would I know, huh?

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

It's all part of the negotiation process. The MCC and Etihad management will eventually reconsider.

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.

After having read everything the last statement by Kouta is right on the money ... Flower ES and Flower the AFL ... ES will be begging us to resign way before our contract comes up for renewal .. as we will be in a massively better financial and drawing position.

We as Carlton supporters know the next 5-10 years should bring a number of finals campaigns and hopefully a couple of flags ... do you think ES would not want to sweeten the pie considerably to get that ... earlier and lock us in?

From what I hear and read PP is being developed into an amazing base for us to train ... why give that up? So we can lose control to play 2-3 games there a year?

We were dissed, spat upon and humilated by the AFL on the ES deal but we have long memories ... All I ask as a minimum is we get the same deal at Essendon* to stay at ES, otherwise I am sure the MSC will be willing to accomodate us with a pretty good deal too ... and if, if the AFL dangle the right carrot in regards to redeveloping PP that suits us to a tea (highly unlikely) then why not.

I think we have the right people in charge and are in a supior bargaining position now to get the things we deserve as a powerhouse club of the AFL ... lets not throw the baby out with the dishwater again.

The past is the past ... but learn from it ... start to act like the ES and AFL need us rather than the other way around ... because when we needed them they right royally screwed us ... lest we forget.

I think you are seriously underestimating how personal the attitude towards Carlton from the powerbrokers of the AFL had become. For various reasons the relationship was poisonous.

Recently on ABC radio Wayne Jackson cited Carlton poaching players from SA during the form four era as one of the reasons we deserved our punishment. That resentment probably stemmed from his time on the SANFL football commision and player retention committee, but how was that relevant to what we were hammered for. Jackson had an axe to grind and when given the chance he pounced.

We deserved a fair whack for what we did, but the glee shown by those who handed down the penalties was a major worry. The AFL probably wouldn't have dared relocate us, but I don't think that we could have afforded to give them the chance, as I don't think that they were thinking totally logically and impartially where we were concerned. It was personal and where egos are involved anything can happen.

No.
Try Melbourne, Western Bulldogs and North Melbourne for starters. They continually whinged and complained about the AFL scheduling their games at PP.

I didn't hear that. What a disgrace.

Did Carlton break the rules per se in the 80s re Form Fours? Weren't many clubs doing the same?

Wayne Jackson has just come out and said that Melbourne and North Melbourne should merge and create a superclub.
Eugene Rocca response was as follows: "Why would I want to listen too Wayne Jackson? His legacy to the AFL are the current stadium deals. I estimate that these deals have cost 4 to 5 Melbourne clubs 100 million dollars".

I like Arocca, he's got balls for a CEO. He's far more of a leader than that milquetoast Brayshaw. Arocca is playing North's only card, the PR card, and he does it very well. Has raised issues well, and spun them better.

We should have gone to the G when we had the opportunity and it was offered... but we opted to stay and go broke!!!

So we ended up with a take it or leave it offer and instead thought we can go ... just as North have one that they will rue now.

Once missed the opportunity it was all over red rover...

_________________
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.

The Adelaide commentary team didn't even pick him up on it

We weren't the only ones to use the form fours, nor did we break any rules, but we were the most vocal critic of the draft and the salary cap.

It also didn't make us popular by picking up Braddles, Sticks and Motts, plus Dorotich from WA just before the first proper draft. That just confirmed us as the bogeyman plundering the rest of the footy world in many eyes.

The fact that we didn't have to fit them into our salary cap until 88 also didn't help (I can't remember why we were able to do that and if it just applied to us?) The flag in 87 would have had them spitting chips I imagine.

All the history just culminated in us being the preferred target to use as an example to the rest of the comp. They would have rubbed their hands in glee...got 'em.

We loaded the gun, but the AFL just loved pulling the trigger.

and as i have said previously, they can get stuffed.

they had a cheaper alternative!!

_________________
Got to love the stare Down by Setanta on Llyod

Agree with Synbad - 21 see my earlier posts as to the true story re Telstra Dome - AFL TO BLAME no one else


Best option would have been way back instead of putting up Legends stand at PP use the money to build A CARLTON SOCIAL CLUB at the "G" and become home tenant -would have underpinned our future forever -was a very real option and would have meant we werent in the position to be forced to the dome - Elliott wouldnt stand for it and option never saw the light of day

Good point re: We will get a better deal next time as we are in a much stronger position.

As for North, Melbourne, Bulldogs, St Kilda (everyone) complaining about having matches scheduled at the then Optus Oval, weren't the same stadium deals in place back then (early days of Docklands Stadium) as now? Surely something must of clicked they were being screwed over, or did they think it was going to magically work itself out?

Didn't we still make money out of other clubs playing at Optus Oval at the time? That may of really cheesed off the clubs playing there (and rightly so, but still wouldn't of been worse than Docklands).

No use ranting about the past...put quite simply when ur in a weak negotiating position (which we were) you get screwed...thats how the world works..and when ur in strong negotiating position you cut a deal that best suits YOU...which we will be in a position to take advantage of next time.

_________________
"Truth, for the tyrants, is the most terrible and cruel of all bindings; it is like an incandescent iron falling across their chests. And it is even more agonizing than hot iron, for that only burns the flesh, while truth burns its way into the soul"     — Lauro Aguirre

Well we had all the signage and catering rights to start with. Not sure what the corporate box situation was back then, but knowing Elliot the other clubs would have had to pay through the nose to get access to them if they even had any access.

Basically a smaller version of Etihad, except we were the ones doing the screwing.

From their point of view, when an opposition club is doing it, it is MUCH worse than an anonymous corporation.

That is why Carlton would have to give up all power over the ground if the ground is ever revamped.

The other clubs will not have a bar of it if Carlton are to benefit in any substantial way.

_________________
|♥♥♥♥♥♥| http://www.blueseum.org |♥♥♥♥♥♥|

I agree that the chances of playing again at Visy are remote but the crowds you mentioned include Medallion club and Access members and corportae boxes that are ES specific. The true attendance would be below 25000.

My reading is that Carlton would retain its lease over Visy park but sign over Matchday control to the AFL, also advertising, catering etc would be AFL controlled but Carlton would retain use of the stadium fo training. We may also collect a small rent cheque

_________________
T E A M