Bluemour Melting Pot XXV

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Continued here ...


 
Hold on a second. What are we optimistic for at the moment?
Optimism?
The general tone of two threads is that its all over. Carlton are finished. Kaput. LOL.

Dressing room, first round next season
Teague...Well lads no point going out there tonight. SOS went on the radio.
Doch....Yes coach none of us have slept a wink since.
Cripps....It's so bothersome and Mr Liddle is a rotter.
 

Dunkley noise I heard awhile back seems to have something to it, makes me wonder why our interest seems to have gone cold. Is there maybe a better prospect lined up? I know we were talking to Dunkley progressively a month ago.


Carlton letting Dodoro have him so he can feel like a winner at the end of the trade period despite ultimately conceding in getting a lot less than what we put up for the Saad trade
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Exactly what truth do you think will come about playing a tit for tat game?
What sort of organisation do you think we should portray ourselves as? Are you even thinking this through or just playing the strawman?
....
Firstly, what’s a strawman?
 
I will use The Old Dark Navy's post as somewhat of a transcript on the Betts situation


BB, none of us here truly know whether the overriding conversation took place or not, but it seems like to me, it was implied that it didn't. Perhaps SOS should have made that clearer in the interview.

As a CEO, Liddle's role is to ensure aspects of the list management strategies remain on track and if there is any deviation to the whole, he should then step in, bringing the team back together to seek clarification on changes to that agreed strategy

The List Manager has a number of resources to work with, TPP, draft picks, tradable players to achieve the agreed strategies. It's his role to use them as he sees fit, meaning what each current or incoming player is worth individually.

Each role has it's own level of expertise

If Liddle believed the extra salary offer was crucial to securing Betts (this would probably have been a marketing/membership strategy, rather than a direct benefit onfield), Liddle should have gone back the the list management team as it was a deviation from agreed strategy.

Once that was thrashed out, Liddle could still have overridden SOS and requested he go back to Betts's management to deliver the updated offer, rather than delivering it himself


The differences are subtle, but crucial in any organization

Mods, please move to any other more appropriate thread

This is the bit I'm trying to understand. What has been said that makes you think it didn't happen? Because from what I can tell SOS hasn't said he was overridden secretly - just that Liddle made the call to up the offer to Betts. I'm trying to work out where you've made the jump from SOS getting overridden to Liddle overriding SOS without even telling him.

Getting into the Simmo/Betts stuff...why are we panning Liddle for making the call, but not SOS for choosing to "look eye to eye with them and say ‘this is all we can pay you’" when that clearly wasn't the case. We could pay Simmo more, we didn't want to. I'd be disappointed in Simmo if he was upset that Betts would earn more than him on a 1-year crossover contract. Simmo has been a loyal stalwart, and you want him to be suitably remunerated - but if we're honest with ourselves there is no doubt he was incredibly well paid for what he offered over the last 5 years given the profile of our list. We had list cloggers and stopgaps aplenty, a heap of draftees on minimum contracts, and a small number of senior players who would have presumably been given a bit extra to make sure we reached the minimum cap spend.
 
Totally disagree. The part that rings out to me is the Pres goes to the list manager and says he’s after you. Cohesive my sheep dag rear end. Liddle has lost me, and I’ll be honest, I’m re-evaloathing my 4 memberships. As a supporter, I’m filthy at Liddle. I’m not sure he has anything I wanna hear.

Anyway, not the platform for this anymore, Royal, I’m waiting. Get me Oliver.

Where has this been said and even if it was it casts more questions about our Pres than it does about our CEO.
 
Getting into the Simmo/Betts stuff...why are we panning Liddle for making the call, but not SOS for choosing to "look eye to eye with them and say ‘this is all we can pay you’" when that clearly wasn't the case. We could pay Simmo more, we didn't want to.

granted I couldn’t be bothered reading all the talk about SOS and his interview but I keep seeing stuff about the money for Betts and Simpson and I think ppl have it wrong.

I listened to the whole interview and what I heard was that SOS wouldn’t offer Betts more then what Simpson was getting paid and told Betts this.

SOS wasn’t lying to Simpson or Betts. Then Liddle went behind his back and offered Betts more.
 

Dunkley noise I heard awhile back seems to have something to it, makes me wonder why our interest seems to have gone cold. Is there maybe a better prospect lined up? I know we were talking to Dunkley progressively a month ago.


When Tom Browne says it's a "very real situation" what he's actually saying is "Yes, Essendon are trying to convince a quality, contracted player from another club to try and join them". Nothing to do with Dunkley, or the Bulldogs, being interested. And it's not exactly "news" that Essendon are going to be calling the manager of every decent contested mid in the comp to see if they get lucky.

And "I'll just let it play out"? Seriously, Tom - what the **** else are you going to do, you don't have any influence on anything?

And finally - "one of the arm wrestles of the trade period"? An arm wrestle requires two sides actively competing over something. This isn't an arm wrestle. It's Essendon, standing outside in the rain, tapping on Footscray's window and asking them for an umbrella.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

This is the bit I'm trying to understand. What has been said that makes you think it didn't happen? Because from what I can tell SOS hasn't said he was overridden secretly - just that Liddle made the call to up the offer to Betts. I'm trying to work out where you've made the jump from SOS getting overridden to Liddle overriding SOS without even telling him.

Getting into the Simmo/Betts stuff...why are we panning Liddle for making the call, but not SOS for choosing to "look eye to eye with them and say ‘this is all we can pay you’" when that clearly wasn't the case. We could pay Simmo more, we didn't want to. I'd be disappointed in Simmo if he was upset that Betts would earn more than him on a 1-year crossover contract. Simmo has been a loyal stalwart, and you want him to be suitably remunerated - but if we're honest with ourselves there is no doubt he was incredibly well paid for what he offered over the last 5 years given the profile of our list. We had list cloggers and stopgaps aplenty, a heap of draftees on minimum contracts, and a small number of senior players who would have presumably been given a bit extra to make sure we reached the minimum cap spend.

We will all make certain assumptions, based on what we have heard over the last 12 months, from SOS's departure and how that was communicated by the club, to what Liddle's involvement was in list management (ongoing) and how that was communicated and or delivered
 
granted I couldn’t be bothered reading all the talk about SOS and his interview but I keep seeing stuff about the money for Betts and Simpson and I think ppl have it wrong.

I listened to the whole interview and what I heard was that SOS wouldn’t offer Betts more then what Simpson was getting paid and told Betts this.

SOS wasn’t lying to Simpson or Betts. Then Liddle went behind his back and offered Betts more.

"...you’ve got a 17-year player sitting there who you’ve actually just done a deal with and you look eye to eye with them and say ‘this is all we can pay you’ and he’s been very loyal to his club, and I’m talking Carlton, and then another player comes in (Betts) that you’re bringing back and then you want to pay that player more than the player that has been sitting at your club, I don’t find that fair."

That reads pretty clearly as "we'd just done a deal with Simmo, and told him that our offer was as much as we could afford". Then we offer Betts more than we offered Simmo. Clearly, we had room to pay Simmo more, but it was a conscious decision not to.

Is it "fair"? No.

But it's not "fair" that Williams will be paid more than Walsh. Or that Martin was paid more than Casboult.

Length of tenure isn't the only factor in how much a player is to be paid. And - I'm assuming here, so people are welcome to correct me if they have contrary information - I don't see how Simmo wasn't paid overs for the last half a decade at least. Our list was gutted, we turfed a heap of "overpaid" players, replaced them with draftees on draftee contracts and stopgaps like Palmer, O'Shea, Shaw etc. But we still had to meet the minimum cap requirements. It stands to reason that the "loyal" servants in Simmo, Kreuzer, Murphy etc. would have been on the end of some slightly inflated contracts rather than the pockets of transient players being filled.
 
We will all make certain assumptions, based on what we have heard over the last 12 months, from SOS's departure and how that was communicated by the club, to what Liddle's involvement was in list management (ongoing) and how that was communicated and or delivered

I get that, I'm asking why or how you've come to that assumption.

What was said that has you taking "I was overruled" as "This was done without my knowledge"?
 
Liddle is NOT happy
So what. We all have days when we are not happy.
Harden up and move on.
Actions have consequences.
Let's get back to NOW shall we?
 
I had a friend with the surname of Walsh who lived at number 18 Wash St in Coburg in the late 70s/early 80s.......eerie when I think of it now, on second thoughts, maybe i've just been locked up in the house for too long

Haha I lived at 14 Southey st Elwood with Joel.

Joel’s elwood 14
 
It seems to be that Eddie is carrying on the role Andrew Walker was recruited for a few years ago.
Eddie is such a happy and loveable personality, together with his footy smarts, he's an asset for all players at the club. A quality human being.

i suggest this was a big reason why we wanted him back at the club.
 
Re. Liddle?

All he really has to say is,"We're a very happy, united and cohesive group at the CFC".

That's all he has to say other than that he won't answer any more questions in regards to SOS's statements.
No many words but says a lot and flips the tables completely on SOS.

I like it


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top