On Thursday morning there was a conga line of experts expressing their dismay at Mitch McGovern choosing Carlton as his preferred location to ply his trade in 2019 and beyond. Rather than believing that the Crow might see a bright future for a club with 12 players under 23 and taken at 16 or better in the draft, they questioned his motives.
Carlton won two games. He can’t be serious, he cannot say that with a straight face, surely.
The AFL Media’s master at manufacturing drama when there is none, there wasn’t a single person surprised that Kane Cornes would have an outraged response. What was surprising though was the fact that another talking head made him sound positively reasoned and measured.
How can you make a decision like that? Tell the truth, ‘I’m going for cash because I’m hungry for cash’.
Firstly, are we still that immature that we demonise professional sportspeople for negotiating the best possible deal for themselves in an incredibly brief career? Secondly, the belief that Carlton will continue to languish at the bottom of the ladder is incredibly short sighted. Doubly so when we look at comments both have made in recent times.
Nothing lasts forevers … either at the top or the bottom of the AFL ladder.
Malcolm Blight 10.09.18
Yep, the same Malcolm Blight who this week is of the view that McGovern could only be motivated by cash was less than a fortnight ago a little more philosophical about the cyclical nature of football in an article for News Limited on Melbourne’s revival. He even went so far as to suggest that the Demons were an interesting case study for the likes of St Kilda, Gold Coast and Carlton as they planned their own rises from the lower reaches of the ladder. I guess actively convincing quality players of the future you are building isn’t part of the plan for Blight.
“Watching this kid (Lukosius) run around and thinking the damage that he and Charlie Curnow could do for the next 10 years is frightening. He is a star.
Kane Cornes – June 2018
This one is a whole lot more confusing than Blight’s position. Prior to the Blues bottom of the ladder clash with Brisbane, Cornes implored them to lose the game because he was convinced that 18-year-old Jack Lukosius would, in tandem with Charlie Curnow, do damage in the AFL. Somehow, despite his own public declarations of how improved Carlton could be with the addition of just one player, he now questions how McGovern could reach the same conclusion.
While George Bernard Shaw might argue that those who can’t change their mind can’t change anything, these comments from Blight and Cornes are ridiculous. How can Blight on one hand preach that fortunes change quickly in football then condemn a player for trying to enact that change? How can Cornes be so convinced that one player could turn the Blues around that he urged them to tank, be so dismissive that a player might feel likewise?
If that’s not enough, Blight and Cornes are also conveniently forgetting that McGovern is a player with just 48 games to his name and has been told by the Crows that he might be surplus to their requirements in 2019. That said, why would they let a little thing like the facts get in the way of their outrage when they won’t let their earlier contrary positions?
What do you think, are Cornes and Blighty on the money or should they both take a chill pill? Let us know in the comments below or like us on Facebook or follow us on Twitter to join the conversation on line.