Carlton Supporters Club

Ok with all the drafting now finished I will have a early crack at our best lineup for 2014.

FB: Tuohy, Jamison, Everitt
 HB: Walker, Watson, Simpson
 C: Thomas, Gibbs, Lucas
 HF: Yarran, Henderson, Garlett
 FF: Casboult, Waite, Menzel
 R: Kreuzer, Murphy, Judd
 IC: Carrazzo, Robinson, Curnow, Docherty

 FB: Duigan, White, McInnes
 HB: Temay, Giles, Bootsma
 C: Graham, Mclean, Scotland
 HF: Armfield, Rowe, Ellard
 FF: Buckley, Reynolds, Bell
 R: Warnock, Cachia, Cripps
 IC: Wood, Johnson, Holman, Sheehan/Byrne

How anyone can say with a straight face that the  effectively saying "that is a matter for the Australian people" is the same as taking a stance on the republic issue is beyond me. It's hard to take anything after that seriously but lets try:

This argument that the any reasonable Australian adult would have voted for a change to the constitution, without knowing the changes upfront is lala land stuff. The best model and probably the only workable one was presented, one that I voted yes to, and was shot down fairly soundly.

We're still 10 years away.

Quote from: cookie2 on November 25, 2013, 09:35:37 pm

Quote from: Juddkreuzer on November 25, 2013, 08:24:51 pm

Australian monarchists have more of a problem with this than the Queen who clearly couldn't GAF.

Don't know whether the Queen couldn't GAF but she would NEVER publicly comment on Australian domestic affairs.

I am no definitely no monarchist but I have a problem with it - it just smacks of rank hypocrisy - that's my problem with it.

Actually the Queen did comment a few years ago, prior to the last vote. HRH clearly stated it was time for the mature country to decide for itself, and it was only the deliberate bogus phrasing of the question put to the public that biased the outcome. HRH didn't go so far as to offer a prescription, but the intent was clear, I dare say HRH would not have phrased the question the way Howard's Monarchists did either!

Since then a number of other royals have publicly stated it is inevitable, some even hint that it is well overdue!

Surprised LP hasn't blamed Tony Abbott

Quote from: Baggers on November 16, 2013, 04:41:32 pm

For mine it's the bottom six to eight... get across the board improvement from the Casboults, Rowes, Watsons, Lucus', Bootsmas, Bells, Cachias and Whites ... with the arrival of the Buckleys, Grahams, Menzels, Dochertys and whoever we draft. This lot will, in many respects, determine how well we do in 2014.

Sorry Baggers but you've slipped in to footy speak; we only have one of each of the players you've mentioned.

You're right about the bottom 6-8 improving though.  If we can achieve that, it will take so much pressure off the top 6-8 and make it so much harder for the opposition to keep our guns quiet.

Thomas, if fit, means that one of Murphy, Gibbs, Judd, McLean or Thomas himself will have the freedom to tear the opposition a new arsehole.

Rowe and/or Casboult stepping up gives us a genuine tall forward but the key to our success is Watson.  If he can hold down CHB, the ability to use Henderson as a key forward or swingman will give other coaches nightmares.

Quote from: Baggers on November 14, 2013, 08:56:34 pm

ruthless, power thirsty, shrewd, highly intelligent, cunning and highly manipulative yet charming embarrassment who can deliver exactly what his backers and funders want (the wealthy elite).

aren't these characteristics synonymous of sociopaths ?

Quote from: Baggers on November 14, 2013, 06:34:35 pm

Quote from: Lods on November 14, 2013, 01:35:01 pm

Quote from: Baggers on November 14, 2013, 10:09:03 am

Quote from: BigJack on November 13, 2013, 11:23:20 pm

Quote

K Rudd has just retired!!!

Thank f**k for that, untrustworthy little prick.

This thread reads like the old Fremantle Workers Club at 11pm on a Friday night, Wharfies loaded up on amber fluid pitting for the downfall of their arch enemy.

The majority of the voting populace has voted and they opted for a change.

At least the vote wasn't made by the cash grabbing obscure Independents of the house.

That comment reads like someone loaded up on single malt whiskey at the Melbourne Club.

That probably highlights the problems in any political debate.
To many generalisations and stereotypes.

There's a refusal by both sides to recognise strengths and weaknesses on the other side of the political fence.
It's a natural thing but it's strange how some of the most passionate of supporters of individual freedom and thought are so dismissive of the views of others.

It's why these things never end in agreement.....but they're funny to read.

If we all start agreeing with each other, LODS, things will become very boring very quickly... but in the spirit of your post, I did applaud the Howard governments initiative in including psychologists under MediCare (for rebates etc). And it was the Labor govt that reduced this initiative... disgraceful.

I think it's things like Politics and Religion....and of course Football where folks are usually pretty inflexible.
We have set points of view early on and it's difficult to accept an opposing viewpoint and give credit where it's due.
I'm not immune to that and have been particularly conflicted at times.
For most of my career I was involved in union activity, fighting for better working conditions.
I was a union representative and at one time a vice president of our particular branch...yet I've probably voted conservative at a federal level more than I've voted for the ALP over the years.

While that gives me a degree of impartiality it also has presented a conflict at times.
Tony Abbott doesn't inspire me to any great extent. I'd much prefer Turnbull, just as I'd prefer Albanese to Shorten (although he was pretty good in parliament today ).....but to dismiss Abbott as a dill, as some seem ready to do, is way off the mark.
Forget the  rest........You don't get to be where he is unless you're a very good politician.
Better than any of us who criticise him!
Whatever you might think about Hawke, Keating, Howard, Rudd and Gillard (and all those before them) they were all "politically" very good.

They developed contacts and support networks that enabled them to assume power...
And being a good 'politician' is the name of the game, because unless you have the power, you don't have the ability to really change things.

Quote from: Baggers on November 14, 2013, 10:09:03 am

Quote from: BigJack on November 13, 2013, 11:23:20 pm

Quote

K Rudd has just retired!!!

Thank f**k for that, untrustworthy little prick.

This thread reads like the old Fremantle Workers Club at 11pm on a Friday night, Wharfies loaded up on amber fluid pitting for the downfall of their arch enemy.

The majority of the voting populace has voted and they opted for a change.

At least the vote wasn't made by the cash grabbing obscure Independents of the house.

That comment reads like someone loaded up on single malt whiskey at the Melbourne Club.

That probably highlights the problems in any political debate.
To many generalisations and stereotypes.

There's a refusal by both sides to recognise strengths and weaknesses on the other side of the political fence.
It's a natural thing but it's strange how some of the most passionate of supporters of individual freedom and thought are so dismissive of the views of others.

It's why these things never end in agreement.....but they're funny to read.

[quote ]

K Rudd has just retired!!!

K Rudd has just retired!!!