- Moderator
- #9,726
Bluemour Season Blast Off Edition XXXIII
- Thread starter The Old Dark Navy's
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Status
- Aug 24, 2009
- 1,721
- 6,053
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- May 1, 2002
- 12,130
- 20,693
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Careful. There is no bias.....
Far too many? Could you name, 3?
I’ll start- 16 Premierships
Wickzki
Definitely Sam MacLure.
- Oct 1, 2010
- 26,501
- 63,684
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Ophidians Old Boys, Blazers, MCFC
I hear this from Carlton fans. I've bought into it in the past.
I hear this from * fans.
Ultimately, the last twenty years has much more to do with both clubs being corrupt and incompetent - and varying degrees of both at various times - than anything else.
I'm no doubting that there's people on the inside that hate one or both clubs.
But what motivation does the AFL - on the whole - have to keep one or both clubs down when it's been proven throughout the history of the league that when one or both clubs are successful the competition - again as a whole - benefits tremendously.
It doesn't make logical sense to me.
- Moderator
- #9,732
I think the AFL, the AFL industry and the umpires have a bias, unconscious or otherwise towards (in favour of) successful teams and star players, rather than a set against us specifically.
Last edited:
thylacine60
Post-Human
- Banned
- #9,733
how do they implement it ya reckon, branester?
- Moderator
- #9,734
Memetic transfer
thylacine60
Post-Human
- Banned
- #9,735
figured that too...........
- Moderator
- #9,736
Stuff like Cripps getting a few more steps than a run-of-the-mill players, players from recently successful clubs getting huge PR pushes when they've been reported (tom Stewart et al), free kick hawthorn (dogs, cats, eagles) when they needed it during their peak(s).
Reckon it's not corruption but an underlying AFL preference for winners that goes down to the core rules - the line between in the back and a mark is not the action but the outcome, even if both can end up with a knee to the back of the head.
Salary cap schemozzle that nearly sent us to the wall, nothing before that or ever since has even come close
Jarrad Waite non compo, plenty before and since that got compo that we didn’t get
Numerous times we’ve been the victim of rule/charge of the week, been butt ****ed at the tribunal and then nothing come close since
I can keep going, there’s wayyyyy more
Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
- Apr 16, 2008
- 10,766
- 31,031
- AFL Club
- Carlton
The Waite no compo was pathetic
thylacine60
Post-Human
- Banned
- #9,739
let's say you're right re cripps - how does the afl disseminate this to the umpires? as in, when and how?
KohPhi
Brownlow Medallist
- Jul 24, 2015
- 23,536
- 95,516
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Jedi mind tricks.
Personally, haven’t liked Vossy’s tone or dialogue on the subject.
Not sure why we’d be such a closed book, he was a good clubman and valuable team member that could still offer plenty at CFC.
- Jun 20, 2019
- 4,216
- 14,059
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Does this mean in AFL lookalikes there needs to be a picture of Gill and Palpatine, together with Scott and Darth Vader emerging from his pod...?
To add:
1) Rule change ahead of the 2006 'super draft' regarding priority picks. From memory if a club had 5 or less wins in a season they were entitled to a priority
pick before the first round. Hence in 2005 we received Pick 1 (Murphy, our priority pick before the first round) and 4 (Kennedy, our first round pick).
Then 2006 was shaping to be a super draft and we won less than 5 games (and we could've ended up with Gibbs + Selwood / Boak / Hansen) so the criteria was changed to if you won less than the specified number of games (5) in TWO consecutive years....we still would've been eligible so the number of specified games was also changed from 5 (our 2005 tally) to conveniently....4.5 (which ruled us out due to 2005 by 0.5 games)
2) After our two win 2018 season when Gold Coast also struggled badly but we still finished lower, AFL desperately wanted to give the golden child priority picks but couldn't with a straight face given we finished lower than them....so we got 'priority assistance' of pre-listing state league players. Then when Gold Coast did finish bottom in 2019 the AFL couldn't give them priority picks quick enough. Pick 1 (Rowell), a mid-first round pick, a second round pick, a first round pick in 2020 etc
3) And for the long memories, when Matthew Lloyd was coming through as a father son for us the criteria for games played was changed from 30 games to 50 games to be eligible that very season (from memory his father played ~35 games for us)
I don't really subscribe to the 'AFL have it in for us' theory but I do find it amusing that we seem to be disproportionately on the wrong end of most of the AFL decisions
. I don't think the AFL is actively trying to get us but I don't think they're falling over themselves to help either, especially in our dark dark times in mid-2000's and late 2010's when it was pretty bleak. We were left to completely fend for ourselves and dig out from the holes, unlke Melbourne, Essendon, Gold Coast etc who also badly mismanaged their clubs.Watch them give North the GC style treatment (at a reduced compensation but still).
Couldn’t agree more. For the past ten years we have been umpired like a bad team. The benefit of the doubt always went against us as the assumption was, well their players aren’t any good so it’s probably their error. Commentators do the same.
This year the tide has turned a little. Well except for that cheat Williamson.
On a similar vein, if the umpires has cracked down on selwood at the start of his career they wouldn’t have the cluster frack they have now. They didn’t because he’s a “ great” player. Not respected, but great. IMHO
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
thylacine60
Post-Human
- Banned
- #9,745
oh god......
- Nov 27, 2016
- 18,671
- 36,381
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Don’t tell me we could of got him as well with a PP......
Forgot about this one. Apparently we received AFL approved brown paper bags, along with a CD of the club theme song which had subliminal messaging to rort the cap in 94, 99 and 01, only to go harder in 2002, by paying several players under the table.
The CD also contained a spell which saw our club remain arrogant by never embracing a rebuild strategy and our list managers/recruiters incompetent.
Lucky a new super Wizard walked into the club and broke that spell by starting our first ever rebuild strategy that now has us on the cusp of making finals for an extended period
The infamous Waite compensation.
Trigg said "The club was expecting to receive a 3rd round selection for losing Waite" We really must have rated Waite, with such a sizeable offer to only ensure a 3rd rounder pick.
But then, Trigg said "Blues had not planned how they would have used the 3rd round pick, but admitted, it would have been very handy pick" Impressive strategy, to not only be guessing what the compensation should have been, as well as having no idea how it would be used
The Hawks must also be fuming and surprised they too aren't stating that the AFL is conspiring solely against them, when they also lost a 31 year old, 4 time premiership player, Grant Birchall, to the Lions and received ZERO compensation
Can you give me specifics of this butt farking as all club supporters state this
Please keep going, I am really interested in how only Carlton is singled out by the AFL
Last edited:
- Oct 3, 2015
- 1,993
- 9,096
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Ok… I’m staying clear of the others. But the salary cap penalties are an interesting one.
In 2003, Ben Buckley (I forget the title, but basically Deputy Head of the AFL) came to Hobart as a guest speaker for a marketing association. My role was to accompany him before and after his speech, and to get him to where he needed to be.
Of course, we chatted almost exclusively about football. I was still upset at the AFL sanctions and let him know. I made a comment along the lines of “what would have happened if you gave those penalties to Footscray? They wouldn’t have survived.”
His response… get ready… “we wouldn’t have given those penalties to the Bulldogs.”
In 2003, Ben Buckley (I forget the title, but basically Deputy Head of the AFL) came to Hobart as a guest speaker for a marketing association. My role was to accompany him before and after his speech, and to get him to where he needed to be.
Of course, we chatted almost exclusively about football. I was still upset at the AFL sanctions and let him know. I made a comment along the lines of “what would have happened if you gave those penalties to Footscray? They wouldn’t have survived.”
His response… get ready… “we wouldn’t have given those penalties to the Bulldogs.”
- Status
