+- Carlton Supporters Club (http://new.carltonsc.com)
+-- Forum: Princes Park (http://new.carltonsc.com/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: Robert Heatley Stand (http://new.carltonsc.com/forum-14.html)
+--- Thread: Daisy in strife (/thread-4339.html)
Re: Daisy in strife - Gointocarlton - 05-31-2019
(05-30-2019, 01:54 PM)DJC link Wrote:One of the few elder statesmen and influential mentors we have got on the sauce in public a couple of days before a game. That's setting a terrible example for the youngsters who clearly look up to Daisy."Kill one save many"
The easy option would be to fine him. The best and harder option is to hit him where it hurts and stop him playing the game he loves. That sends a message to the entire list that we're serious about driving change and striving to be our best at all times.
Re: Daisy in strife - LP - 05-31-2019
(05-31-2019, 03:54 AM)DJC link Wrote:I think "form" in that context refers to the blokes in the 22. If those playing Daisy-type roles do well, he stays in the NBs. If they play poorly, he comes back in. No disrespect to Daisy, but I'd prefer to see him languishing in the NBs for a while ... but I don't think that's going to happen.
I suspect you are right, I don't think Daisy has got any worries at all, half the kids in the team at the moment do not deserve their spot!
Re: Daisy in strife - PaulP - 05-31-2019
I think the Club's stance is a tad hypocritical and misguided. I much prefer the stance taken by the Hawks wrt Hodge. The message I get is every man for themselves. If someone like Mummy takes you out, you're on your own. And if you commit a minor misdemeanor, we'll hang you out to dry. That's not how you build unity, and it's far too literal an application of standards and values. What if there was no "optics"? What if it didn't come to the public's attention ? Would he still be dropped ?
Re: Daisy in strife - LP - 05-31-2019
(05-31-2019, 04:54 AM)PaulP link Wrote:I think the Club's stance is a tad hypocritical and misguided. I much prefer the stance taken by the Hawks wrt Hodge. The message I get is every man for themselves. If someone like Mummy takes you out, you're on your own. And if you commit a minor misdemeanor, we'll hang you out to dry. That's not how you build unity, and it's far too literal an application of standards and values. What if there was no "optics"? What if it didn't come to the public's attention ? Would he still be dropped ?
I agree with this 100%.
Privately we can do the discipline stuff but publicly we must be seen to "stick fat", and we are doing the opposite of "Stick Fat" whatever that is!
Re: Daisy in strife - Lods - 05-31-2019
(05-31-2019, 12:56 AM)LP link Wrote:As much as I respect that idea, I don't think it's that black and white Lods!
In the spectrum of participation, analogously AFL leadership groups sit somewhere between primary school and VCE, there will still be a guiding hand involved to some extent! So it's neither Lord of the Flies or Vladimir Putin!
We'll never know the extent of club involvement so we believe what we want to.
When Judd was asked what would happen to him on Monday night he said that it was "for the players to decide."
There may indeed have been some club 'suggestions' but in a week where the Captains took it upon themselves to have a player meeting I find it difficult to imagine that Cripps and Docherty would not have been quite comfortable with the penalty.
Re: Daisy in strife - PaulP - 05-31-2019
https://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/teams/hawthorn/luke-hodge-fined-5000-for-drink-driving-by-hawthorn-but-free-to-play-finals/news-story/03d5085aaf6c1cb0b9961fd5f48e7f0d
This is how it's done. Did Daisy even drive home, or did his partner drive ?
Re: Daisy in strife - Thryleon - 05-31-2019
The language used in the article is much better controlled than we have allowed. Particularly the rhetoric surrounding what happened.
There is a point of difference the incidents have. Hodge was fined by the police, and suspended so he had external punishment to go with it, and he was suspended from playing at the time of his indiscretion which means he was technically not breaking their team drinking rules.
Daisy seems to have.
I have really mixed feelings about it as I both agree and disagree with the outcome which means its probably ok.
Re: Daisy in strife - PaulP - 05-31-2019
(05-31-2019, 06:09 AM)Thryleon link Wrote:..............
There is a point of difference the incidents have. Hodge was fined by the police, and suspended so he had external punishment to go with it, and he was suspended from playing at the time of his indiscretion which means he was technically not breaking their team drinking rules.
..................
I'm not sure teams think it's ok to hit the turps if you've been rubbed out. He's already done the wrong thing by being suspended, and the drink driving was a 2nd wrong thing. In my view, it's worse than Daisy's situation. I'm also not sure that "the Police have already punished him" line is valid. If that was us, we would have punished way beyond a fine in my view.
Re: Daisy in strife - madbluboy - 05-31-2019
(05-31-2019, 06:02 AM)PaulP link Wrote:https://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/teams/hawthorn/luke-hodge-fined-5000-for-drink-driving-by-hawthorn-but-free-to-play-finals/news-story/03d5085aaf6c1cb0b9961fd5f48e7f0d
This is how it's done. Did Daisy even drive home, or did his partner drive ?
Train surfed home while drinking a bottle of Jack Daniels.
Re: Daisy in strife - PaulP - 05-31-2019
(05-31-2019, 06:22 AM)madbluboy link Wrote:Train surfed home while drinking a bottle of Jack Daniels.
Who ?