Garry Lyon's six-month rescue mission over

[The Third Eye 269]

Read the next line after the one that you quoted.

Oh that force!

My apologies for missing it.

And I suppose Jimmy told everyone that Garry was what forced him and the board to decide not to retain Bailey and that otherwise they were oblivious to any problems with the coach and they would never have even thought about it. Not even after the insipid and disgraceful exhibition we put on at Skilled.

[nutbean 8,838]

I do not what is "real" and what isnt. I dont know who did what and who didnt.

What I do believe is that Jimmy was the "catalyst" for change part one and Garry Lyon to a certain extent was "catalyst" for change part two ( the disclaimer is that there had to be change after the 186 point loss anyway) and I thank them both.

( As an aside - I think our Jimmy has been brilliant beyond belief. I believe he can make a contribution as president by just being Jimmy and I would think ( hope) that the board and management are filling in the gaps that he obviously cant perform because of his health - even if his position is purely ceremonial if he is willing to continue in the role then i say hooray)

[daisycutter 29,737]

Don't rewrite history, ...........

Lyon threw Jimmy under a bus by directly forcing him to get involved, then stepped in to clean up his own mess, but only if it could be done in the off season when he doesn't have to host the footy show.

Now that is definitely revisionist Thomo

A board and president who are forced by a mere club member/supporter - some board!

And then to blame the 'mess' of the club on someone who is not employed by the club - wow!

I think your agenda might just be showing

[Guest Jackie]

Now that is definitely revisionist Thomo

A board and president who are forced by a mere club member/supporter - some board!

And then to blame the 'mess' of the club on someone who is not employed by the club - wow!

I think your agenda might just be showing

And Phill Scully is really Gary Lyon wearing a fat suit.

[Pennant St Dee 13,304]

That's a big part of the concern I've got with Garry - doesn't want to commit to real ongoing involvement but wants to stick his oar in when it suits him.

No he doesn't want to commit he has openly said he likes his life the way it is, he does not want to be like eddie & jimmy working 24/7 not everyone is suitable for that. Let me just add yes Gary loves the club but what he did was for Jimmy more than the club. He knows how much the club means to Jimmy and when he visited Jimmy and spoke with him after the Kardinia debacle he understood the job ahead for Jimmy at the club and he was asked to help not for the first time.

Gary had said no before for the reasosn discussed in paragraph 1 but it was now his opinion that he did not feel Jimmy could do this whilst also battling for his health. This was said by Gary in numerous interviews and on TFS people can have an agenda against Gary and take shots at him being half in and half out. I care about the club and took him on face value when he came in 6 months ago that he would do what was best for the club. IMO he has done that and even more than I expected but it is not solely his work and it is not over.

Let's just wait and see how the structures he and the others have put into place pan out before we start firing missiles at him

[jnrmac 20,185]

Plenty of mindless speculation here.....

[McQueen 17,867]

If I was to have a go at dreaming up what happened at the Club (like many others have attempted) it would be as follows:

Garry facilitated a great deal of the change purley through asking some really good but invasive questions. He was exposed to a lot more of the conjecture about the club in media circles whereas the people within the club were trying to avoid addressing it in anyway. These questions were the catalyst for the hard decisions to be made by many people. Who knows but I bet most of the people that were shown the door probably asked where it was after things started getting uncomfortable.

I also suggest that it was Garry who brought back the meaning of passion and defined it at the MFC that attracted Neeld, Craig, Misson and Co.

At the time, I also was pretty disappointed by Garry giving the 186 debacle more fuel on his radio show - thinking that Jim's health would be put under more pressure by such comments. However, looking back at it all now, I doubt all of this would have happened had it not played out the way it did. Dealing in hypotheticals I know, but the rapid turn-around in positions, staffing, structures etc may not have happened if Garry hadn't have shot his mouth off to begin with. Maybe it was Jimmy who give it to him that got him at the club?

All I care about now is the current status, of which appears to be a massive improvement. But, talk is cheap and 4 points are not.

[McQueen 17,867]

Plenty of mindless speculation here.....

Thanks for your mindless contribution.

[rpfc 28,769]

Thanks for your mindless contribution.

And thank you for the juxtaposition that made jnrmac's mindless contribution apt.

[s-t-i-n-g-a 439]

And thank you for the juxtaposition that made jnrmac's mindless contribution apt.

I appologise for this mindless contribution but thank you too for your mindless contribution about mcqueens juxtaposition that made jrmacs mindless contribution apt...

Hmm can't wait for the footy to start!

[robbiefrom13 892]

picture the incredulity of all in the football world - and everyone else - if the Melbourne Football Club now chose to sack Jimmy Stynes!!

Sure it's a forum, and everyone can have their say - and sure we are curious about how things happened at the time. But going from raking it over to talking as though our president should be measured against a conventional job description seems undignified and shameful. Ignorant too - if that were all he was, we may have already been extinct. Bailey's failure and the Geelong disaster are now water under the bridge, and surely things are going a lot better. Jimmy Stynes is not visibly hindering progress, surely? Isn't tearing up what he has built?

The goodwill and inspiration around him is immense, of enormous value to the club. History will stand in awe of what this man has done and still is now. Ask anyone, who has not read this forum.

What I agree with is, I can't wait for the footy. We may have tears up ahead, but we needn't have shame with it.

[bing181 9,328]

That's just for a start. Adelaide replaced Craig and did it gracefully. Footscray replaced Eade professionally. We replaced Bailey and looked like the Keystone Cops.

Nice bit of revisionism there, worth of the aforementioned North Koreans. It was messy all round, and the follow up, especially from Adelaide, was seen as bumbling and amateurish - go type "Neeld" in the search window on some of the Adelaide boards to see what their supporters thought of AFC and their president.

186 was a shattering, traumatic, and yes, chaotic weekend for the club and everyone connected to it. But the seeds for what has happened since were sown in those 48 hours.

[McQueen 17,867]

And thank you for the juxtaposition that made jnrmac's mindless contribution apt.

Fair bump, play on...

[Whispering_Jack 30,640]

Three days ago I wrote that I thought Garry Lyon had done a wonderful job. On reflection, after reading through this thread one more time, I think I might have underestimated his contribution.

I wasn't previously aware, but accept the word of those who claim that in the aftermath of the Geelong game, Lyon convinced the Board that the proper course was to retain Cameron Schwab as CEO and to terminate Dean Bailey's contract as coach. In other words, Garry intervened to put the case  for Schwab and against Bailey to the key personnel on the Board on that fateful Sunday after the Geelong game. It's not clear whether or not he was invited to do so but he convinced enough of them to take the tough decisions which, given the accolades now being heaped on Schwab and the almost  universal view that Bailey had to go sometime soon, then the outcome has been to the club's benefit notwithstanding that it might have been carried out clumsily and poorly.

Such a conclusion will inevitably lead to argument about whether the end is justified by the means and, as we've already seen, the historians and revisionists on this site have already joined in the rush to judgement. 

Was Lyon entitled to enter into the "inner sanctum" and offer his advice on the coaching position? I think one could mount a strong argument in his favour whether he was invited to do so or not.

Lyon is a friend of Stynes, a former captain, club champion who played in excess of 200 games. In 2007, the previous board invited him to take part in the selection process to recommend a new coach after Neale Daniher. On Footy Classified he had expressed the view that he wouldn't relish being involved in such a process again. His views as to whether Bailey had lived up to his expectations would have been relevant and valuable to Board members in their deliberations at a time when the club was in crisis.

Some might have a problem with that but I don't - we keep getting reminded that the club deliberately tanked for draft choices and handled the dismissal of a former captain poorly. We even once unceremoniously boned a club president in mid-term who had kicked $2.7m into the club. Compared to that where is the problem with taking advice from a former club icon at a time of crisis? Was the club placed at a disadvantage in doing so?

But that's not all.

The fact that every man and his dog seems to know that Garry was definitely involved somehow in the process that led to the decisions of 31 July 2011 is a prime example of the insidious process of information being leaked from the board - something that has been systemic at this club since the 60s. The failure to keep things "in house" is generally indicative of an organisation that is run poorly and it doesn't give me much pleasure to say this but over the years we've had many boards and administrations that have been poorly run and some were totally dysfunctional.

And guess what?

During those 5½ months with Lyon in charge, the decisions taken were, by and large, announced by the club without prior leaks to the media. A number of the appointments caught the media by surprise. Lyon was honest and transparent when questioned by the media but never gave them too much. He said we weren't after Ross Lyon and we weren't but the media continued to speculate. They got most of it wrong. Garry and co got things right. After all this time I consider this to be a breath of fresh air for the club.

Garry's livelihood is in the media where he is a bit of a megastar and prime property for the 9 network. Can we begrudge him the right to an income at his time of life when he has three kids and family matters to address? Not everyone's an Eddie McGuire!

So I'll say again that we owe a great debt to Garry, Don, Cam and Jimmy for the inspiration behind the last half year. But they're not gods.

However, that these guys have achieved so much in such a short time and yet, there are those out there wringing their hands and angry about some perceived injustices which might well be grounded in the fertile imaginations of some mischief makers suggests to me that some of our supporters need to follow the lead of our new coach and the playing group and harden up.

[Kento80 83]

If anyone is the unsung hero, its Schwab

I've got to agree with this sentiment DWA

Three days ago I wrote that I thought Garry Lyon had done a wonderful job. On reflection, after reading through this thread one more time, I think I might have underestimated his contribution.

I wasn't previously aware, but accept the word of those who claim that in the aftermath of the Geelong game, Lyon convinced the Board that the proper course was to retain Cameron Schwab as CEO and to terminate Dean Bailey's contract as coach. In other words, Garry intervened to put the case  for Schwab and against Bailey to the key personnel on the Board on that fateful Sunday after the Geelong game. It's not clear whether or not he was invited to do so but he convinced enough of them to take the tough decisions which, given the accolades now being heaped on Schwab and the almost  universal view that Bailey had to go sometime soon, then the outcome has been to the club's benefit notwithstanding that it might have been carried out clumsily and poorly.

Such a conclusion will inevitably lead to argument about whether the end is justified by the means and, as we've already seen, the historians and revisionists on this site have already joined in the rush to judgement. 

Was Lyon entitled to enter into the "inner sanctum" and offer his advice on the coaching position? I think one could mount a strong argument in his favour whether he was invited to do so or not.

Lyon is a friend of Stynes, a former captain, club champion who played in excess of 200 games. In 2007, the previous board invited him to take part in the selection process to recommend a new coach after Neale Daniher. On Footy Classified he had expressed the view that he wouldn't relish being involved in such a process again. His views as to whether Bailey had lived up to his expectations would have been relevant and valuable to Board members in their deliberations at a time when the club was in crisis.

Some might have a problem with that but I don't - we keep getting reminded that the club deliberately tanked for draft choices and handled the dismissal of a former captain poorly. We even once unceremoniously boned a club president in mid-term who had kicked $2.7m into the club. Compared to that where is the problem with taking advice from a former club icon at a time of crisis? Was the club placed at a disadvantage in doing so?

But that's not all.

The fact that every man and his dog seems to know that Garry was definitely involved somehow in the process that led to the decisions of 31 July 2011 is a prime example of the insidious process of information being leaked from the board - something that has been systemic at this club since the 60s. The failure to keep things "in house" is generally indicative of an organisation that is run poorly and it doesn't give me much pleasure to say this but over the years we've had many boards and administrations that have been poorly run and some were totally dysfunctional.

And guess what?

During those 5½ months with Lyon in charge, the decisions taken were, by and large, announced by the club without prior leaks to the media. A number of the appointments caught the media by surprise. Lyon was honest and transparent when questioned by the media but never gave them too much. He said we weren't after Ross Lyon and we weren't but the media continued to speculate. They got most of it wrong. Garry and co got things right. After all this time I consider this to be a breath of fresh air for the club.

Garry's livelihood is in the media where he is a bit of a megastar and prime property for the 9 network. Can we begrudge him the right to an income at his time of life when he has three kids and family matters to address? Not everyone's an Eddie McGuire!

So I'll say again that we owe a great debt to Garry, Don, Cam and Jimmy for the inspiration behind the last half year. But they're not gods.

However, that these guys have achieved so much in such a short time and yet, there are those out there wringing their hands and angry about some perceived injustices which might well be grounded in the fertile imaginations of some mischief makers suggests to me that some of our supporters need to follow the lead of our new coach and the playing group and harden up.

Sensational post WJ.

Kento, I agree with most of what you've written. Empathy is a funny one: I am a psychologists, and I have empathy for most of my patients and that absolves them of none of their responsibilities. Jimmy has responsibilities. On his watch, with his role, the FD wobbled and now has almost been entirely replaced. Did he let it happen so Bailey could be easily replaced? DId he just not notice? Ws he too sick? Why sack a bloke over the phone? What the hell were the rest of the board doing?

 

My concern is that Jim is controlling and relatively effective at the 'house-building' that you've described. That means decisions (of a size) get left up to him...and when he doesn't make them they don't get made by anyone. From outside, I think that is what happened. As pres, the buck stops with Jim. He needs to take responsibility and hold himself and his board to account. If he cannot do it then it begins to compromise board functioning. Can Melbourne, so flush with life but so bloody vulnerable afford that risk now? A board that didn't know what the footy dept was doing, that was unable to stop FD and admin quarrels and that was interviewing players about club functioning? WTF? All with Jim front and centre.

 

Thanks Jim. Without you, my kids would not know the Dees and that is a debt I can never repay. What I'll do is brainwash them and take them to games and pay my memberships and post on forums and be active and interested in the life of my club. And it is now time to recognise your limits, hand the job to a man you trust and respect and see that your job is continued.

 

I have empathy for Jim; I don't think he can do that job (too sick) or that the board can carry him and I don't think it should carry him. I wonder if he thinks it should? They've shown little ability to step up when Jim was so sick this year - hell they needed gary to come in and do stuff (or let schwab do stuff) to fix the mess. It might make Jim sad, but at least telling him to step down would be being honest about his capacity, genuine in assessment and respectful of where he and the club are and need to be. Empahy is great, however, if you sacrifice your values in order to not make someone feel bad, then you are basically lying to them and yourself. So that you and they can feel better. Not my thing.

I absolutely see where you are coming from timD, and don't begrudge you that opinion. I am interested to know if Jimmy is still earning a presidents salary, as I do not know, and I think that is the most important thing in all of this. I have no problem with him remaining pres whilst his duties are diminished, but his salary should be similarly diminished, and if so then fine by me. I think it is interesting that you say "A board that didn't know what the footy dept was doing", and this is something that Jimmy should be on top of, but the biggest issue there to me seems to be the lack of a FD head. I know Jimmy was meant to be taking on that role in the interim, but that should have never happened. The thing is that we have apparently almost filled that role, so hopefully this issue is now sorted, and from the outside in it seems to me that that may have been (mostly) the issue that was bringing the whole house down with it. If so then I am more than happy for Jimmy to go back to his role of being a figurehead, revered, but with a diminished role. As along as it isn't costing the club (I don't know) and isn't hurting the club (I personally think not)

[Range Rover 1,935]

Three days ago I wrote that I thought Garry Lyon had done a wonderful job. On reflection, after reading through this thread one more time, I think I might have underestimated his contribution.

I wasn't previously aware, but accept the word of those who claim that in the aftermath of the Geelong game, Lyon convinced the Board that the proper course was to retain Cameron Schwab as CEO and to terminate Dean Bailey's contract as coach. In other words, Garry intervened to put the case for Schwab and against Bailey to the key personnel on the Board on that fateful Sunday after the Geelong game. It's not clear whether or not he was invited to do so but he convinced enough of them to take the tough decisions which, given the accolades now being heaped on Schwab and the almost universal view that Bailey had to go sometime soon, then the outcome has been to the club's benefit notwithstanding that it might have been carried out clumsily and poorly.

Such a conclusion will inevitably lead to argument about whether the end is justified by the means and, as we've already seen, the historians and revisionists on this site have already joined in the rush to judgement.

Was Lyon entitled to enter into the "inner sanctum" and offer his advice on the coaching position? I think one could mount a strong argument in his favour whether he was invited to do so or not.

Lyon is a friend of Stynes, a former captain, club champion who played in excess of 200 games. In 2007, the previous board invited him to take part in the selection process to recommend a new coach after Neale Daniher. On Footy Classified he had expressed the view that he wouldn't relish being involved in such a process again. His views as to whether Bailey had lived up to his expectations would have been relevant and valuable to Board members in their deliberations at a time when the club was in crisis.

Some might have a problem with that but I don't - we keep getting reminded that the club deliberately tanked for draft choices and handled the dismissal of a former captain poorly. We even once unceremoniously boned a club president in mid-term who had kicked $2.7m into the club. Compared to that where is the problem with taking advice from a former club icon at a time of crisis? Was the club placed at a disadvantage in doing so?

But that's not all.

The fact that every man and his dog seems to know that Garry was definitely involved somehow in the process that led to the decisions of 31 July 2011 is a prime example of the insidious process of information being leaked from the board - something that has been systemic at this club since the 60s. The failure to keep things "in house" is generally indicative of an organisation that is run poorly and it doesn't give me much pleasure to say this but over the years we've had many boards and administrations that have been poorly run and some were totally dysfunctional.

And guess what?

During those 5½ months with Lyon in charge, the decisions taken were, by and large, announced by the club without prior leaks to the media. A number of the appointments caught the media by surprise. Lyon was honest and transparent when questioned by the media but never gave them too much. He said we weren't after Ross Lyon and we weren't but the media continued to speculate. They got most of it wrong. Garry and co got things right. After all this time I consider this to be a breath of fresh air for the club.

Garry's livelihood is in the media where he is a bit of a megastar and prime property for the 9 network. Can we begrudge him the right to an income at his time of life when he has three kids and family matters to address? Not everyone's an Eddie McGuire!

So I'll say again that we owe a great debt to Garry, Don, Cam and Jimmy for the inspiration behind the last half year. But they're not gods.

However, that these guys have achieved so much in such a short time and yet, there are those out there wringing their hands and angry about some perceived injustices which might well be grounded in the fertile imaginations of some mischief makers suggests to me that some of our supporters need to follow the lead of our new coach and the playing group and harden up.

Ripping post.

The skill with which Garry (and Schwab) counter-acted the public relations fall-out from 186 and the Scully debacle (ie. the timing of the Trangove re-signing, the Neeld appointment and the acquisition of Clark) was also quite brilliant.

A few noses got put out of the joint in the process? ... too bad.

Edited January 20, 2012 by Range Rover

[Demon3 2,541]

Don't rewrite history, Lyon said no to helping out when he was asked..

Garry was asked by Jimmy and the board and he said no, several times. Instead he took pot-shots for six months from the sidelines. He forced Jimmy to get out of his sick bed and take action to sack Bailey. When he mouthed off on radio he did not say that he would contact the club, the board, the ceo or that he would do something himself. He said that he would be phoning Jimmy to have him do something. After Jimmy had to sack Bailey, and front the media looking extremely ill, Lyon then turned up to get involved, but said that he was not willing to put in more than a few months.

Bailey had to go, no doubt about it, but the club could have done it on their terms, and had McClardy, Schwab or Connelly do it. Lyon threw Jimmy under a bus by directly forcing him to get involved, then stepped in to clean up his own mess, but only if it could be done in the off season when he doesn't have to host the footy show.

That is a disgrace of a post. you should be ashamed even thinking that motives like that were behind any involvement Garry had.

I really am shocked with the negative posts towards Garry. Amazing.

[Sir Why You Little 37,125]

That is a disgrace of a post. you should be ashamed even thinking that motives like that were behind any involvement Garry had.

I really am shocked with the negative posts towards Garry. Amazing.

Yep. I am with you on this. Some of the venom being thrown in here at G.Lyon is totally disgraceful.

Some of you people need to go to the hall of mirrors & have a good hard look at yourselves.

[felixdacat 459]

That is a disgrace of a post. you should be ashamed even thinking that motives like that were behind any involvement Garry had.

I really am shocked with the negative posts towards Garry. Amazing.

This thread started out congratulating and commending a job well done to Garry Lyon and has turned into a scathing attack and load of accusations about his motives and why won't he commit to the club. Then some of you decide to put the boot into Jimmy and suggest that he should step down or forced off because he is not able to do the job. One poster even suggested that empathy for someone should not come at the price of your values. Apparently you would be lying to yourself and them, but to me that statement only means your lying about the fact you have empathy at all. To me its like premising everything with "No offence but..." Either you feel empathy for some one or you don't. Don't hide your lack of empathy behind misplaced values and what you perceive is best for the club.

Furthermore the Chairperson and the role of the chairperson is a figurehead in most ways, The running of the club administratively is run by the CEO and the Football department is now being run by Neil Craig with both area's reporting to the Board as a whole. Jimmy is not a dictator the Chairperson's power and influences stem from the boards support and the rule set out by the Club. Jimmy unwell is still able to assist the club , as Jimmy also has his persona, integrity and the networks he has built and forged in Melbourne both inside and outside of football. These are what he has used in the improvement of the club off field. Kick him out and see what happens to the people Jimmy has influenced in his life.

Finally, what value do people think would be displayed by this club if it asked Jimmy to step down? If Jimmy said tomorrow he would step down then so be it, but to suggest we should ask him to step down, that would be a deplorable and cut throat act.

[Elwood 3184 1,338]

Yep. I am with you on this. Some of the venom being thrown in here at G.Lyon is totally disgraceful.

Some of you people need to go to the hall of mirrors & have a good hard look at yourselves.

That's the thing about forums such as these.

Somebody sums up the contribution of a person during his tenure in a particular position and others who might for some reason think that person's not such a good bloke will throw in their opinion. The discussion becomes focussed on something entirely different to the role that person played (in this case Garry's 6 months in what was virtually the football director's seat). Suddenly, everyone who has an agenda against the person in question comes out of the woodwork and the thread's been hijacked by people wildly speculating about people's motives and intentions.

Let's face it. This is a forum and, as long as people stick within the rules, for better or worse we're going to have to put up with reading stuff that's untrue and with opinions we don't like. It's up to all of us then to use our own judgement and make up our own minds about a particular issue.

Getting back to one G Lyon, I agree with the view of many here that under his watch and with the help of others, the club is in a much better place than it was six months ago.

[Biffen 12,946]

Garry is a Demon champ and has done a top job off field for us since 186.

I really do wish he would quit that stupid show and get a more dignified job - regardless of cash.

I think we would all like to see him doing something respectable for a living .

Hanging with Brayshaw, Eddie, Sam et. al. is not good for any self-respecting human.

[Guest Jackie]

Many sporting club presidents are the modern day versions of olden day robber barons and warlords who had their own private armies. Today day these types own or run big league sporting clubs. It all for power, prestige and ego, "all about me" and not the club. Jim Stynes and Garry Lyon do not fit into this mould. Jimmy would have to be one of the most selfless club presidents there ever was and Gary has demonstrated he does not lust for power and position and would not drag down the club if he can't give a 100% commitment.

[timD 994]

Felix, I talked about empathy and I don't think that there is any conflict. Two states exist and neither should impinge on the other. I feel sympathy for Jim; I seriously question whether he can do the job. I think he has done a hurculean job for the club; I strongly suspect he is a figurehead president who is being carried by the board. I hope they have replaced his functional role. Empathy and sympathy are very different things BTW (they are often used interchangeably too). Empathy is feeling what someone else feels; sympathy is varying states of pity or compassion for another.

And if you want to discuss it (and I mean discuss), PM me. It is a hell of a cheek to state that my values are 'misplaced' (what does that mean anyway - sounds meaningless to me) and then to state that I'm hiding them behind a feeling I may or may not have. I made the statements - use my name and if you want to see what I mean, ask.

This is very simple in the end. It is evident to everyone that Jimmy's functioning in general is grossly compromised by cancer & its treatment. It is evident that the Board were ineffective at managing the FD/admin issues. Jimmy was responsible for reporting to the board about the FD - a position HE took after Leoncelli left. Then Geelong, no coach etc. It is evident that Jimmy was unable, with his board, to rectify things on their own. Gary came in and WHAM!...we have now. The board got themselves into a stinking mess that they should have seen coming. The man who had the most contact, theoretically, was unable to intervene or adequately inform the board. Jimmy is front-and-centre of that effing mess. Jimmy handed the reigns of fixing it to someone else. This, as a buisness process, as a governance process, is a worry. It is not the end of the world or anything dramatic, but, it falls way short of good practice or effective leadership. What standards do you people want to hold for your club?

If he were an aussie cricketer you would want him gone now. If he were PM, your accountant, your GP, your CFO, your stockerbroker, your kids' nanny, your uni lecturer..

Truth is, Felix, that Jimmy's leadership makes people feel good and they (you) use that to justify ignoring failures he is responsible for (not wholly, but in significant part). You justify keeping him on b/c the poor man is dying and he has done great things. Now who is hiding behind what?

[Dr. Gonzo 24,291]

Agree.

It would have been best for Jim to do it in person rather than on the phone. Other than that, taking into consideration the magnitude of the loss and the KPI's from the season, and given Adelaide were already in the market, we had to move. It's a dog eat dog world out there. It wasn't a time to play Mr.Nice and think we would just land the best available letting Bailey finish his tenure, especially after that 186 disaster. So much has to be taken into consideration, including corporate dollars. We could have lost more with inaction, not just the best coach prospect.

I agree - this has been discussed before but I'd just like to raise the issue about "firing by phone" again. In the best of all possible worlds, I agree sacking someone by phone should not be done and should be done face to face. However there may have been reasoning behind it other than just being under the pump from 186. The media being what it is and the leaks coming out of the club at the time would have been a consideration as you would not want Bailey finding out he was sacked by reading the Herald Sun the next morning. Hearing it over the phone is much more preferable. The other issue is calling Bailey to an early Monday meeting and not telling him why could be seen as just as bad as firing him by phone. He knows whats going on, you know whats going on, the media and supporters know whats going on so why go through the charade? Best to be up front about it & tell him whats going on.

As someone else mentioned this wasn't just a knee-jerk decision following 186. The writing was on the wall after the WCE debacle. It got much much worse after the Carlton debacle and could have come to a head soon after - why do you think there was so much relief after the Essendon win?

The past is done and maybe could have been done better but the actions of the club since that time and the personnel they have recruited to the club has me feeling confident again about the club. Only time will tell if that confidence is real or just more false hope.

[rumpole 522]

Truth is, Felix, that Jimmy's leadership makes people feel good and they (you) use that to justify ignoring failures he is responsible for (not wholly, but in significant part). You justify keeping him on b/c the poor man is dying and he has done great things. Now who is hiding behind what?

You make some very good points and I think this debate cries out for its own separate thread and with the use of discretion in the way the debate is conducted rather than here where there is an element of muckraking and bravado from posters with various agendas for and against the individuals involved.

FWIW, I think it's fair to say that a dying man is still capable of making good and bad decisions and that whilst Jimmy didn't handle the football director post well, leading us to the disaster of late July, it was he who asked for and persuaded Garry to step in and that was a good decision for which most of us are now thankful. The decision has now been apparently made that Greg Healy is to come on board as Football Director with Neil Craig reporting to the board on football matters. Time will tell if that eventuates and whether it works out well for the club. In the meantime, and with thanks to Garry, Don McLardy, Cameron Schab and others, Jimmy can go back to being the chairman in a low key way and concentrate on his health issues at the same time.

Most (good) club chairman are usually pretty anonymous in what they do and it's only a few of the more vocal ones that we ever get to hear from. Good clubs act together in the way a good team should. It's not just about one man and I reckon 99% of the football public wouldn't know the name of the chairman of Geelong or most of the other clubs. Give me an ill Jimmy with a supportive board, administration and functioning football department over an allegedly healthy in mind and body Jeff Kennett any time.