Opinion Stephen Silvagni

[RedFury]

That club statement is a disgrace. So it's suddenly a conflict of interest due to SOS having family members on the list ... after 4 years of it.

If you're going to address your supporters and the general media, at least pay us some basic ****ing respect by not treating us like we're complete morons.

(okay a few of us may be .. but that's beside the point )

 

[Garters]

Gibbons is best 22.

Agree

 

[Azzurro]

Niall is spot on.

Liddle has to go. This situation has not been resolved with SOS going. It is cancerous.

Good article. Not sure about Liddle needing to go. But looks like good old HARKER got it right very early in this piece:

It seems we can't have a truly new Carlton with this old fractious board.

Let the baker bake the bread...

This sucks, and will hurt membership I have no doubt.

 

[TerryWallet]

Betts wasn’t toured behind SOS’ back though, was he?

The point being made though is true Stamos.

It has been reported that SOS is more upset about the Betts stuff than Ellis. He got his way on Ellis, but he didn't on Betts.

It is a much easier narrative to attack Liddle and Ellis than to attack Teague and Betts. And many have taken up that easy option.

 

[Azzurro]

That club statement is a disgrace. So it's conflict of interest due to SOS having family members on the list ... after 4 years of it.

If you're going to address your supporters and the general media, at least pay us some basic ******* respect by not treating us like we're complete morons.

(okay a few of us may be .. but that's beside the point )

Worst statement I've seen in a long time. Whoever wrote that, wrote it with a loaded gun pointed at the side of their head.

 

[DangerousD]

Ratten was very involved with list management, McLean, Lucas etc. It does happen.

I think people get confused with a coach telling his recruiting team, things like: we need outside pace, run and mids, with, I want Lucas.

The recruitment team still make the call on who to pick and if a mid is not a reach at the current pick.

Trades I see as a bit of a different story and I can accept that Ratts pushed for Mclean, I can’t recall MM pushing for a certain player, but I don’t see any problem with a coach saying, we need mids.

 

[F_therest]

Worst statement I've seen in a long time. Whoever wrote that, wrote it with a loaded gun pointed at the side of their head.

We'd have a PR person and media team, but work your way up the organisational chart through their direct managers and eventually you reach the CEO Liddle...so yeah i'm sure Liddle has his fingerprints all over that media release.

 

[TerryWallet]

Good article. Not sure about Liddle needing to go. But looks like good old HARKER got it right very early in this piece:

It seems we can't have a truly new Carlton with this old fractious board.

Let the baker bake the bread...

This sucks, and will hurt membership I have no doubt.

The Board have let the baker bake the bread. They have let the administration do their job. It is the CEO and Footy Manager's job to run the footy dept.

It just hurts the narrative and emotion to see this.

 

[Azzurro]

The point being made though is true Stamos.

It has been reported that SOS is more upset about the Betts stuff than Ellis. He got his way on Ellis, but he didn't on Betts.

It is a much easier narrative to attack Liddle and Ellis than to attack Teague and Betts. And many have taken up that easy option.

Does it matter though? In a race to the bottom of people's naughty list... The CEO is ALWAYS going to win if he's pitted against anyone else.

Either way, Silvagni was the list manager but was being overruled or having his turf stepped on by all and sundry.

I wanted Eddie, but if we didn't get him I would have understood why. I wanted Daisy, but we didn't keep him and I have come to accept it as a strong, brave list management call.

 

[El Topo]

Good article. Not sure about Liddle needing to go. But looks like good old HARKER got it right very early in this piece:

It seems we can't have a truly new Carlton with this old fractious board.

Let the baker bake the bread...

This sucks, and will hurt membership I have no doubt.

The board are just figureheads, the real problem is (and always has been) the Club's reliance on the Pratts and Mathiesons. These 'benefactors' are only relevant to the extent that the club's membership and revenue streams allow them to be. It's time for Liddle Cain to prove his worth.

 

[AlecDuncan]

Surely in these circumstances it was incumbent on MLG to stand up and reinforce the original agreement.

He's president, not king. Maybe the board thought otherwise, and he represents the board even if he doesn't agree with it.

Sticks had the same problem when the board decided to axe Ratts.

Don't be sucked into thinking MLG is the problem. Look behind the figure-head.

 

[BlueAbroad]

Amongst all the comments and opinions, one thing will always remain - the Silvagni legacy.

Let this be a moment of gratitude.

Our club is in as good a position as it's ever been since we won our last premiership.

Thank you SOS

 

[TerryWallet]

Does it matter though? In a race to the bottom of people's naughty list... The CEO is ALWAYS going to win if he's pitted against anyone else.

Either way, Silvagni was the list manager but was being overruled or having his turf stepped on by all and sundry.

I wanted Eddie, but if we didn't get him I would have understood why. I wanted Daisy, but we didn't keep him and I have come to accept it as a strong, brave list management call.

I do get this.

 

[Neese]

I think people get confused with a coach telling his recruiting team, things like: we need outside pace, run and mids, with, I want Lucas.

The recruitment team still make the call on who to pick and if a mid is not a reach at the current pick.

Trades I see as a bit of a different story and I can accept that Ratts pushed for Mclean, I can’t recall MM pushing for a certain player, but I don’t see any problem with a coach saying, we need mids.

You can't recall MM pushing for a certain player? Are you ****ing serious?

 

[Kruezing]

We all have differing perspectives on what went down here ... but one thing I believe we can all agree on is that this whole situation was handled in a very poor and unprofessional manner by the club ... and even worse given the status of the person involved ... he deserved better ... Much much better ...

 

[JustaBattler]

You can't recall MM pushing for a certain player? Are you ******* serious?

Rhetorical much? LOL

 

[Doro]

I think people get confused with a coach telling his recruiting team, things like: we need outside pace, run and mids, with, I want Lucas.

The recruitment team still make the call on who to pick and if a mid is not a reach at the current pick.

Trades I see as a bit of a different story and I can accept that Ratts pushed for Mclean, I can’t recall MM pushing for a certain player, but I don’t see any problem with a coach saying, we need mids.

There is no confusion, a couple of the itks posted that Ratten made the call on Lucas. Whether you choose to believe them or not is up to you.

 

[Beast__Mode]

I don’t think Liddle is some master conspirator. I think he was feeling himself a little too much with having such a strong performance in his core activities, and probably feeling (or being fed by Lloyd, Bolton, Teague) that SOS was too autocratic in his approach.

he clearly overstepped his bounds with Ellis.

Betts I view somewhat differently given the marginal cost in picks and $ and the history of the player with the club.

He’s cost himself big time. He’s significantly burned what was previously a very positive view from supporters members (for what that’s worth), he’s significantly shortened his leash and invited increased scrutiny on his performance within the club (worth plenty), and he’s eroded faith in him of board members (worth everything).

If he survives all of that long term he is absolutely the CEO we need because he’ll need to nail every decision to stick the landing here.

good luck.

 

[DangerousD]

And now you make assumptions about what I do and don't understand.

Conversely, I am not making an assumption. When I say that you know nothing, I mean that on evidence you literally know nothing. You are not an insider, you have no sources, you put forth no facts. You only have an opinion. Everyone has one of those. Many are also blessed with the ability to suppress the seemingly incessant need you have to make opinions known. As the saying goes, opinions are like...

SOS leaving is another sorry chapter in this club's sad recent history. I don't know why it has turned out this way, and I'm not happy about it. The club statement sucks, just like the Bolton one did, but this is way worse.

You are spouting negativity at other posters for expressing their passion, as well as rubbishing people for referencing points that have long been held as widely accepted information. It stinks. So I'm calling you out as being a manipulator of the very medium that you are accusing me of being unaware. You don't fool me.

I’m sorry if someone who has a different opinion to the majority, upsets you so much. I’m not an insider, never claimed to be, I do have a source and I have shared information passed on by this source, this information has been also reported by multiple other posters, this information is widely considered true. Plenty what I’ve written is fact, lots is opinion,So you are making assumptions here, you don’t know.

I have an incessant need to make my opinions known? Where do you think we are? We are on a club forum, where people come to share their opinions and thoughts on our club, I love talking footy and I take lots of good information and ideas from lots of people here, the premise of this site, is to share your opinion.

Posting that your done with the club and that you will hand back your membership isn’t passion.

Thanks for the chat.

 

[ChrisKaias]

What do you all want the media release to say?

It could have given Liddle's side of the story and listed some things negative to SOS. Instead it focused on something that SOS could not help, is a legitimate issue, and one that by all reports Liddle was concerned by.

Of course it's not the full story, and nobody thinks it is and the club doesn't expect people will think it is. But is it really the place to say 'he was a difficult personality who didn't play well with others yada yada'? Best to try and leave it on a good note.

Many of you won't like to hear this but the cult of SOS I'm witnessing really isn't that unlike the cult of Hird (and no, I'm not comparing the two, just the way they are revered by fans and can do no wrong). My biggest wish is that we never, ever have a club legend in a role like that again.

 

[TheRedPill]

And he wanted Dunkley. And he was overruled.

Have to pull myself up here - I misremembered, and it’s even worse. Hindsight and all that, but believe Marlion Pickett was actually the one.

 

[DangerousD]

You can't recall MM pushing for a certain player? Are you ******* serious?

I am referring g to the draft here, but good point

 

[rampar]

Conflict of interest my arse

 

[bluebrew]

Don’t let the door hit you, supporters who threaten to burn memberships throw them out, when something happens they don’t understand or like, aren’t true supporters.

And after 50 years as a supporter/ Member I really don't care 1 jot what you think.

 

[DangerousD]

And after 50 years as a supporter/ Member I really don't care 1 jot what you think.

I’m going out on a limb and saying, if you have been a member for 50 years and have gone through the countless sackings, boardroom fighting, salary cap scandals and everything in between, then you’re not giving up your membership because the CLUB decided to not renew SOSs contract.