I've refrained from making a comment on the whole saga up till now; however, a couple of points, if I may:
[*] The booze cruise highlighted CFC's drinking culture- correction, binge drinking culture. What I don't understand is, unlike most of us who work in p/t and f/t jobs, these players have countless opportunities to drink (yes, even in the "on-season"). Why binge-drink? Why the urgency to drink copius amounts of alcohol, just so you can't remember what funny (or stupid) thing you did to your teammate ("Oh yes, chaining Levi to the sinking boat was hilarious!!!!), all for the sake of "bonding"? Now, I'm not against alcohol consumption- I will say, what is wrong with moderate intake? Furthermore, what is wrong with a moderate alcohol intake for each player whilst they are representing a supposedly professional sporting organisation. I would assume for all who works in p/t and f/t jobs that it's not a good idea to 1) drink large amounts repetitively; and 2) at some point, your alcohol consumption will prevent these players from achieveing their optimum and reflect their best, not only on, but off the field.

[*]The club has made the correct call on Betts, Wlaker and Houlihan. As someone pointed it out earlier, cultural change at a football club takes a generation/s to change. Back at the turn of this century (or last decade, to be precise), players like Fevola and Houlihan represented the changing of the guard. Later on, Walker and Betts represented hope of what turned to be the worst period for the club (and in many ways, a unique one, in that we didn't know how to deal with it). February 2007 signalled the turning point of the great club's fortunes; it ushered the club into an expectation (and possibility) of a new, uncompromised professionalism epitomised by Geelong. But these changes are like Bob Dylan says, a slow train comin'- they have to be for them to sustain. Morever, in order to learn from the detrius of the late 1990's-entire 2000's, CFC has to do it slowly.

[*] A lot of posts I've read have urged the administration to take drastic action over this. There are a couple of issues I have with this. One is that, well, was the admin at fault for this? Was it their booze cruise to condone or sanction? It's all very well for the club to provide minders for the players but what are they saying to the players if they did this? "Listen, you can go on the cruise but all of you are absolute pissheads that you can't be trusted- hence, the minders...." One of the cliches we all hear from players when they retire/leave a club is, they are a better person then when they started- where's the players' reponsibility in all of this? As someone else has related, this episode will have a galvanising force for the playing leadership- hopefully, they will take the welfare of the players far more seriously that has been hitherto at this point- and that of the club. The CFC is not a nanny state- only an employer. It's high time the players took pride in the club and cooperated with the administration in presenting a untied, professional operation.

Here endth the lesson.........

Not beyond the realms of possibility.

But that wouldn't appeal to the hysterical masses brainwashed by tabloid journalism and sensationalism. The headlines read that Andrew was involved in a "Booze fueled fight" at Crown and therefore action must be taken.

If the club had've removed Andrew from the sanctions there would've been talkbalk and forum meltdown!!!

Perception can be a killer at times, especially when the masses have been conditioned to react to headlines and a devious media pack

Seeing there seems to be a perception that everything in the papers is factual, let me point out some journalistic excellence in the big paper today.
Jesse Hogan wrote the Carlton ''bad boys'' were each fined $10k. I thought the maximum any player could be fined was $5k, under the agreement with the players association.
Then he/she goes on to say our first NAB game is against North Melbourne. (silly me I thought our first game was against Sydney at Blacktown).
Admittedly a minor issue, but does anyone proof read what these people write anymore ?

Seeing there seems to be a perception that everything in the papers is factual, let me point out some journalistic excellence in the big paper today.
Jesse Hogan wrote the Carlton ''bad boys'' were each fined $10k. I thought the maximum any player could be fined was $5k, under the agreement with the players association.
Then he/she goes on to say our first NAB game is against North Melbourne. (silly me I thought our first game was against Sydney at Blacktown).
Admittedly a minor issue, but does anyone proof read what these people write anymore ?

No mention of any punishments for Hurley over at Essendon* from that pontificating, plagiarising sorry excuse for a journalist Damien Barrett.

Last time I checked, assualting a cab driver based on ethnicity at 4am whilst drunk after a club function with legal charges still pending is a little more serious than being seen in your underpants at Crown Casino.

VB, I agree with you. I just find it peculiar that journalists can write whatever they like, accuracy not being a priority. I believe their creed is something like : What's more important being first or being right ?
Answer : Being First.

Sorry, but I just don't buy that.

I don't think there is any doubt the club would come out and state loud and clear that Andrew was not in the wrong, if that were the case. The club would take any opportunity they could to limit the damage. They have to respond to the AFL, so if 1AW's actions weren't that bad, they would be telling the AFL this for sure.

Robinson was not given extra punishment, so obviously his sins were not that great.

But Walker got the full whack.

Put 2 and 2 together.

There's the nub of it though, isn't it?

Thanks for your input, DOA.

No mention of any punishments for Hurley over at Essendon* from that pontificating, plagiarising sorry excuse for a journalist Damien Barrett.

Last time I checked, assualting a cab driver based on ethnicity at 4am whilst drunk after a club function with legal charges still pending is a little more serious than being seen in your underpants at Crown Casino.

Time to just make the whole season redundant for mine. No Judd until Round 4, players suspended for the entire NAB Cup and start of the season, Fevola gone, no Stevens, it's time to play the kids. Play the kids from the start of the year, right from round 1 to round 22. Don't worry about finals, we wouldn't win the Grand Final anyway. The year 2010 should be and for mine will be a development year, we will be 1-8 after 9 rounds lets face the facts, and hey, Essendon* have already predicted a wooden spoon for us so I think it's fair to say goodbye Carlton 2010 and start preparing for 2011. If there are any players with any niggles or anything, put them in for extensive surgery now. Our club has hit and all time low, rock bottom for mine, the HUN outlined that we were in debt and barely surviving, and we are again the subject of much controversy. We are back in the pits of 2002-2007, it is all doom and gloom from here on in, but the question is this time, who's gonna save us???


now that is going a little far isnt it?? 'WE' are a bloody proud club with a bloody good list. simmer down, pay your membership and stop banging on with this 'we are gone' mentality. not sure the club is at an "all time low", that comment suggests that you havent really much knowledge of the current situation

2010 will surprise alot of people. including yourself. Bring on rd1