Judd's 'secret' pokies stake

[E Shed]

But what you said wasn't even true. LOL

The bloke actually said he and the entire MRP were comfortable with the decision.

The inference was that in hindsight, due to the outcry and eventual Brownlow win, the MRP should have cited Judd and let the tribunal decide. Nothing at all mentioned about a suspension.

Small victory indeed

the outcry and and Brownlow wasn't mentioned by Carey, just the journo but you are substantially correct. Hey if it was Pav or Crowley on Judd I'm sure you guys would have been just as upset. Thing is Crowley would have been done for it and gotten weeks. Anyway, enough derailing the thread, I'm out of here.

 

[Faz 2000]

I wish I had half a mil invested in pokies. Those things make some serious coin.

 

[Kaiser Powser]

So you admit that you are just trolling Carlton supporters?

But i'm not trolling ODN.

If you actually read my comments re Judd, they are generally mild.

I have admitted that list of actions (which were in reply to a question) had a cynical wording, but they are all actual incidents.

The responses have been heavy handed and I am enjoying replying to them.

 

[Little Big John]

Here it is.

How is that a quote?

Looks like a question to me. And an apt one considering James Hird was a director for 4 years of National Leisure & Gaming, something I'd consider more serious than Judd's indirect investment.

Hence the the use of the word serious.

Like I said. Shit roof.

 

[Kaiser Powser]

How is that a quote?

Looks like a question to me. And an apt one considering James Hird was a director for 4 years of National Leisure & Gaming, something I'd consider more serious than Judd's indirect investment.

Hence the the use of the word serious.

Like I said. Shit roof.

That is so stupid that I would stick to the mis-quote theory if I were you.

 

[Kaiser Powser]

So you admit that you are just trolling Carlton supporters?

It's a bit of an indictment that you think this is a troll.

I have put forward some (mild) critisms, then replied to endless, generally excessive, responses.

This is Bigfooty, you need to expect some negative opinions from time to time.

 

[bourbons]

If he had nothing to hide, why would he attempt to conceal anything?

Some of the responses in this thread don't give you a clue?

Chris stared forlornly at the morning paper. He'd been promised his investment in the pokie club would remain as secret as his erectile dysfunction problems.

But Bec broke the crisp silence of their $150,000 Italianate marble inlaid kitchen with Swedish teak fittings with her perfectly modulated tones.

"BABES! What is this? You're investing Oscar's future in a bath of blood?"

"It's not like that!" Chris protested, "We live in a society where individuals are trusted to express their free wil ..."

He was cut short by the sound of his beloved Mongolian lentil pot smashing against the wall inches from his head, right next to one of the more vital pressure points.

"I DON'T CARE CHRIS! This stinks and Oscar will get teased at Montessori kindy!" Bec shouted. "Get it sorted out!"

As the sound of his beloved tearing up their chi chi Prahran street in her environmentally sound 2012 ivory coated roadster faded, Chris punched the relevant numbers into his.

"Mrs Pratt? Yeah, its Chris, look, I need a favour ..."

Quality, loving the return of the Mongolian lentil pot

Geez that was a good thread

 

[Little Big John]

That is so stupid that I would stick to the mis-quote theory if I were you.

So because you can't argue against the logic and plainly presented evidence, you resort to calling it stupid.

Which is what you've been doing the whole time in this thread. Weak.

 

[Kaiser Powser]

So because you can't argue against the logic and plainly presented evidence, you resort to calling it stupid.

Which is what you've been doing the whole time in this thread. Weak.

There was no logic there.

I had a whole list of actions which I said IMO led to a minor character flaw.

You blundered back with "so does James Hird have a serious character flaw?"

I honestly thought it was the wackiest reply on the thread, hence why I ignored it.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

But i'm not trolling ODN.

If you actually read my comments re Judd, they are generally mild.

I have admitted that list of actions (which were in reply to a question) had a cynical wording, but they are all actual incidents.

The responses have been heavy handed and I am enjoying replying to them.

As you admit your list was cynical, wouldn't you have expected heavy handed responses?

I mean my response was heavy because it lead exactly like someone who wanted to have a kick, not discuss and belong on the Bay. I don't reply in a heavy handed manner to everything. I'd suggest you brought those responses on your own.

As for actual incidents, you're taking some poetic license there. The Campbell Brown eye gouge, I could concede on, although I'm not as cut and dried as some people. He was under Brown and was not looking at his face or in a position to see where his fingers were. If someone said that it could have been an inadvertent and careless action, but still classed as an eye gouge, I'd have to concede that is likely and step back. There are extenuating circumstances and wearing tags like 'dog', 'dirty sniper' etc, do not sit well with me, unless the evidence suggests the player knew exactly what he was doing.

In the case of the Rischitelli suspension, I would argue that Judd's actions were very deliberate, he knew exactly what he was doing, but what he was doing was not an eye gouge. It was a facial massage/prodding/poking and was most likely designed to cause pain or discomfort, and was probably born out of some frustration on Judd's behalf. At no point did he seek out the eye or touch the eye, despite being in a position to see it and do just that.

I'm also one to appreciate what the gun ball players in the comp go through, and the odd jab or back elbow (whilst trying to move forward whilst being held by the jumper without the ball), whilst against the rules, are completely understandable in a physical emotional game such as ours. I do not feel that makes the person a bad person or a sniper, at least not when it happens infrequently. Snipers are usually at the lower end of the talent pool and use these sort of tactics because they can't get near the ball or want to take someone out of the game.

Judd said he was leaving West Coast two years before he did, then opted for another contract. West Coast were hoping he would keep re-signing him each time, but he was true to his word. There was zero character flaw involved in him returning to his home state, after having flagged this was a possibility.

As far as Visy goes, he is not Bob Johnson from down the street, selling an image that nobody knows. Judd's image is helpful to Visy. A lot of top flight footballers can earn more money doing a lot less than we can, simply because of the publicity it brings. Originally it was said the amount was barely 6 figures so we are thinking 100k. It has since been accepted at the norm that the amount is around 200k so we can go with that. At any rate, it is hardly half to most of his salary like many have speculated on here on the boards. You can be cynical, but you are using some pretty uncertain information to form your opinion as a whole. Dare I say that if he was an Essendon player, you'd be seeing a lot of circumstantial evidence. Not sure why you think that Carlton supporters have to account for a lack of objectivity.

Did I miss the player Judd supposedly backstabbed to pad out your opinion of him? Will have to go back and have another read.

With this investment nonsense, he invests in a company that loans money to a hotel. Now yes, they are expecting a return on their investment. Is that through pokies, alcohol, entertainment, dining or just an overall profit picture? Footballers being involved in pubs is a real knockabout footy player tradition throughout decades. Judd could have decided to protect his anonymity for many reasons. Not wanting the public to know how much he is worth is a good one for a start. Plenty of people who might want to take advantage of a rich person though his business or his family. He might have realised that appearing on a public register for investing in pokies might make it look as though that was his only interest and knowing how things get blown out of all proportion, especially with him, wanted to guard against that. There is no public register for investing in a pub for its entertainment, dining, or alcohol sales is there? Stand alone it would cause cynicism. People extrapolating that to Judd being a cold hearted vulture looking to capitalise of the weaknesses of others is just taking it one step too far. How can we possibly know?

I know most people here wouldn't want assumptions like that made based on how you perceive the person based on tribal allegiances. I'd hate to be in the public eye like some of these guys are.

 

[rainman06]

Some of the responses in this thread don't give you a clue?

This is about the 20th Carlton supporter to present this 'argument'.

Do you realise the logic behind this drivel is the equivalent of defending a criminal who didn't tell anyone of his crimes because he would get in trouble?

Chris Judd, a role model and public figure, was happy enough to make money through unethical practices yet clever/dumb enough to try and conceal his involvement, lest he get in trouble.

It's classic Carlton.

 

[Little Big John]

There was no logic there.

I had a whole list of actions which I said IMO led to a minor character flaw.

You blundered back with "so does James Hird have a serious character flaw?"

I honestly thought it was the wackiest reply on the thread, hence why I ignored it.

So you're willing to admit that you made a mistake in accusing me of mis-quoting you?

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

It's a bit of an indictment that you think this is a troll.

I have put forward some (mild) critisms, then replied to endless, generally excessive, responses.

This is Bigfooty, you need to expect some negative opinions from time to time.

Hmm you replied twice to the same post. You said you were sitting back enjoying the heavy handed responses. What else would I think but you laid out some bait and are smiling at what you are catching?

If not fine, but I am just responding to what you are posting.

 

[bobsyouruncle]

Actually one of the articles on the Age clearly states that he made it as an investment way back in January 2009, and only more than an entire year later when the directors quit the companies involved in the dealings, and the companies broke apart, did he try and get his money back from the company he gave it to.

Judd simply thought he was being clever by ‘loaning’ the money to the company raking in the money from the pokies, and in turn being paid a special ‘interest’ rate/dealing equivalent to anyone who had of instead ‘invested and held equity “proof of ownership” with the company making the gambling revenue, which would have required their name being listed publicly.


So Judd had essentially what was an investment, not a ‘loan’ being touted by some with seemingly only half a brain, and was happy to keep it there, until suddenly the companies and their “special dealings” broke up. The attempt to conceal a persons name from having an interest/stake in gambling business is illegal, hence why the Gaming regulators are seemingly about to prosecute Judd for.

So all the Carlton fanboys can probably quit the ‘he gave them the money not knowing what it was for, or that only upon realising that he couldn’t make the investment without having his name listed that he tried to get his money back)

So apparently you have the ability to read Judd's mind and feeling as he made those decisions. I think you should apply for the James Randy $1million Challenge, as they award anyone with proof of supernatural ability $1million. And since you no doubt have this uncanny ability of reading people's thoughts and emotions, even through time, you should have no worries claims the prize. Good luck to you.

 

[Donstuie]

This is about the 20th Carlton supporter to present this 'argument'.

Do you realise the logic behind this drivel is the equivalent of defending a criminal who didn't tell anyone of his crimes because he would get in trouble?

Chris Judd, a role model and public figure, was happy enough to make money through unethical practices yet clever/dumb enough to try and conceal his involvement, lest he get in trouble.

It's classic Carlton.

HA! Love it

 

[Monkey King]

This is about the 20th Carlton supporter to present this 'argument'.

And it's a poignant 'argument' that you keep 'proving' with every post.

Do you realise the logic behind this drivel is the equivalent of defending a criminal who didn't tell anyone of his crimes because he would get in trouble?

Interesting that your analogy involves crime when there is no wrong doing on Judd's part in any legal sense whatsoever. We could just as aptly say it's like concealing the fact Santa Claus doesn't exist from your kids so you maintain the illusion of an innocent jolly man delivering you gifts.

Judd has noted that people perceive him as a role-model, which he believes is their flaw; and that some people such as yourself, who are prone to irrational hyperbole, would claim this perfectly legal activity as an unethical practice, despite very much supporting others who collect profits. Why wouldn't you want to side step that?

Classic Essendon. Throw mud about shit of which they're as guilty as anyone

 

[Kaiser Powser]

As you admit your list was cynical, wouldn't you have expected heavy handed responses?

I mean my response was heavy because it lead exactly like someone who wanted to have a kick, not discuss and belong on the Bay. I don't reply in a heavy handed manner to everything. I'd suggest you brought those responses on your own.

As for actual incidents, you're taking some poetic license there. The Campbell Brown eye gouge, I could concede on, although I'm not as cut and dried as some people. He was under Brown and was not looking at his face or in a position to see where his fingers were. If someone said that it could have been an inadvertent and careless action, but still classed as an eye gouge, I'd have to concede that is likely and step back. There are extenuating circumstances and wearing tags like 'dog', 'dirty sniper' etc, do not sit well with me, unless the evidence suggests the player knew exactly what he was doing.

In the case of the Rischitelli suspension, I would argue that Judd's actions were very deliberate, he knew exactly what he was doing, but what he was doing was not an eye gouge. It was a facial massage/prodding/poking and was most likely designed to cause pain or discomfort, and was probably born out of some frustration on Judd's behalf. At no point did he seek out the eye or touch the eye, despite being in a position to see it and do just that.

I'm also one to appreciate what the gun ball players in the comp go through, and the odd jab or back elbow (whilst trying to move forward whilst being held by the jumper without the ball), whilst against the rules, are completely understandable in a physical emotional game such as ours. I do not feel that makes the person a bad person or a sniper, at least not when it happens infrequently. Snipers are usually at the lower end of the talent pool and use these sort of tactics because they can't get near the ball or want to take someone out of the game.

Judd said he was leaving West Coast two years before he did, then opted for another contract. West Coast were hoping he would keep re-signing him each time, but he was true to his word. There was zero character flaw involved in him returning to his home state, after having flagged this was a possibility.

As far as Visy goes, he is not Bob Johnson from down the street, selling an image that nobody knows. Judd's image is helpful to Visy. A lot of top flight footballers can earn more money doing a lot less than we can, simply because of the publicity it brings. Originally it was said the amount was barely 6 figures so we are thinking 100k. It has since been accepted at the norm that the amount is around 200k so we can go with that. At any rate, it is hardly half to most of his salary like many have speculated on here on the boards. You can be cynical, but you are using some pretty uncertain information to form your opinion as a whole. Dare I say that if he was an Essendon player, you'd be seeing a lot of circumstantial evidence. Not sure why you think that Carlton supporters have to account for a lack of objectivity.

Did I miss the player Judd supposedly backstabbed to pad out your opinion of him? Will have to go back and have another read.

With this investment nonsense, he invests in a company that loans money to a hotel. Now yes, they are expecting a return on their investment. Is that through pokies, alcohol, entertainment, dining or just an overall profit picture? Footballers being involved in pubs is a real knockabout footy player tradition throughout decades. Judd could have decided to protect his anonymity for many reasons. Not wanting the public to know how much he is worth is a good one for a start. Plenty of people who might want to take advantage of a rich person though his business or his family. He might have realised that appearing on a public register for investing in pokies might make it look as though that was his only interest and knowing how things get blown out of all proportion, especially with him, wanted to guard against that. There is no public register for investing in a pub for its entertainment, dining, or alcohol sales is there? Stand alone it would cause cynicism. People extrapolating that to Judd being a cold hearted vulture looking to capitalise of the weaknesses of others is just taking it one step too far. How can we possibly know?

I know most people here wouldn't want assumptions like that made based on how you perceive the person based on tribal allegiances. I'd hate to be in the public eye like some of these guys are.

My list was made in response to a poster who was asking what possible questions of character Judd could have. I did not create it just to upset Blues fans. As soon as I made it, i knew I shouldn't have taken the bait.

I haven't even really weighed into the debate re the pokies, aside from stating that it doesn't really bother me.

The player i was referring to was Fev. After the Brownlow, Judd made it clear that he would not be at the same club as Fev. Pretty much signed his papers. Unnesesary as Fev had already signed them himself.

I also cleary stated that each of those items were not really the bad, in isolation. But i've just gradually been growing a dislike, and I guess it is here now. I'm entitled to that. As I said, i've had to put up with a general hatred of Lloyd, which I often struggled to work out why. Seems like a decent guy to me, but hey that is Footy.

I've replied to sensible posts, sensibly. Stupid posts, stupidly. But no trolling.

Anyway I have to go now. Sorry if I have upset anyone. I have never suggested Judd is anything less that a star on the field. Collingwood fans take hatred and dislike as a compliment. Maybe take my dislike of Judd as a compliment. i'm sure if he played for my mob, I would love him and turn the other cheek for each of the minor issues that rise up in every players career.

 

[reg_lower91]

This is about the 20th Carlton supporter to present this 'argument'.

Do you realise the logic behind this drivel is the equivalent of defending a criminal who didn't tell anyone of his crimes because he would get in trouble?

Chris Judd, a role model and public figure, was happy enough to make money through unethical practices yet clever/dumb enough to try and conceal his involvement, lest he get in trouble.

It's classic Carlton.

LOL you hatred for Carlton and, hence, Judd is, well, classic everyone else!

a) It is in absolutely no way shape or form even CLOSE to criminal activity. Why? Because what he did was completely legal and is nothing to be frowned upon. He was strengthening his own financial position from a smart investment. If you were in the same shoes, I'm sure you would have invested your money the same.

b) Nice little use of emotive language such as "role model" and "public figure", but he has in absolutely no way damaged his reputation by partaking in what is a completely ETHICAL and LEGAL investment.

 

[bobsyouruncle]

Wow!

Post a negative opinion of Judd and look at em go, talk about precious.

Lucky this isn't the Carlton board where anyone who doesn't sprout pro-Carlton propaganda is banned on the spot.

Bomber supporters tolerated crap for years becuase Lloyd was generally disliked, sometimes you just have to man up and accept others opinions, especially on BF.

I guess it is lucky for you that you can sprout anti-Carlton propaganda without proof and not get banned on the main board. Nice work troll

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

The player i was referring to was Fev. After the Brownlow, Judd made it clear that he would not be at the same club as Fev. Pretty much signed his papers. Unnesesary as Fev had already signed them himself.

There were rumours and plain old fashioned BigFooty style speculation that Judd gave some sort of ultimatum but I have never seen a quote from Judd to that effect .... have you? For Judd to have made something clear, it has to come from the man itself.

 

[bulletproof]

It is amusing that he did not want to be seen taking food off the table of honest hard working Carlton families who are ploughing money into these slot machines. He hasn't done anything terrible but it shows him in a bad light that he thought it was the wrong thing to do, but did it anyway.

We've all made little mistakes in our time, this is just funny because Judd is such a humourless character who obviously takes himself a bit too seriously.

 

[bobsyouruncle]

treating pokie addicts

Ok if this was a joke, then it's a pretty pathetic way of deflecting the arguement which you have lost.

Tell me, are you serious?

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Chris Judd, a role model and public figure, was happy enough to make money through unethical practices yet clever/dumb enough to try and conceal his involvement, lest he get in trouble.

It's classic Carlton.

LOL ... lest he get in trouble.

Aside from the fact that we don't know the exact nature of the investment and you blokes are narrowing in on the pokies component as though that IS the investment, there was no trouble in this for Judd.

If he was concealing his involvement specifically because he was making profits from pokies (and that is a big if), it would be lest ignorant people start assassinating his character in places such as this without being in possession of the facts. I bet you he could set his watch by this type of public hand wringing and judging, perpetuated by a pathetic media that the hand wringers don't give the time of day to usually, unless they single out a mutual target.

Judd could stand up there thumb his nose, say 'spend up big losers' ... while singing 'Im in the money' and laughing maniacally, and he wouldn't be in any trouble. In fact, he really couldn't get much more attention than the media and BF are already giving this, without having barely a shred of knowledge on the topic. Let's face it, Judd knew how the haters perceive anything he does and he was right.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

It is amusing that he did not want to be seen taking food off the table of honest hard working Carlton families who are ploughing money into these slot machines. He hasn't done anything terrible but it shows him in a bad light that he thought it was the wrong thing to do, but did it anyway.

We've all made little mistakes in our time, this is just funny because Judd is such a humourless character who obviously takes himself a bit too seriously.

How do know that he simply doesn't want any investments to be public knowledge and it has nothing to do with any pokies that might be there? Do you know about his other investments or do you think they are all morally questionable if you have not heard of them?

It's a giant leap people are taking here.

 

[bulletproof]

How do know that he simply doesn't want any investments to be public knowledge and it has nothing to do with any pokies that might be there? Do you know about his other investments or do you think they are all morally questionable if you have not heard of them?

It's a giant leap people are taking here.

I don't think an investment in pokies is morally questionable, I just think it is amusing that he takes himself so seriously that he thinks he should be afforded special privacy because he is the tenth best player of a game played in half a country. Like most AFL players he has a warped sense of his own importance and this is nice little illustration of that.