Garry Lyon's six-month rescue mission over

[rpfc 28,247]

In what way rpfc have i been over the top concerning the work of Jim Stynes towards the MFC since 2008?

Well, just off the top of my head:

From the Leadereship Crisis Thread...

Lutz said "The crisis was 5+ years ago, but not many realised...

Not enough, anyway."

WYL replied "Jimmy did thankfully."

In three words you have implied that Jim Stynes has fixed, will soon fix, our on-field leadeership problems, that he is the panacea to all our woes.

That is a little over the top...

[Sir Why You Little 36,954]

Well, just off the top of my head:

From the Leadereship Crisis Thread...

Lutz said "The crisis was 5+ years ago, but not many realised...

Not enough, anyway."

WYL replied "Jimmy did thankfully."

In three words you have implied that Jim Stynes has fixed, will soon fix, our on-field leadeership problems, that he is the panacea to all our woes.

That is a little over the top...

Jimmy stood up in 2008 and said "Enough is Enough i want my kids to be able to support the MFC" and then jumped on board. Everything else to this day is still evolving, and yes we have had rocky times and will probably have more.

But let us remember what has been achieved thus far. Membership has improved each year under the Stynes Board. We now are aligned again with our heritage (The MCC) and i say again uf Jim had not stood up in 2008 this club would now be the GC Demons. Jim is not a messiah, but he is a great communicator. He will need assistance moving forward, but will always be an assett to us all. If that is "going over the top" rpfc...so be it.

[old55 23,353]

It;s ironic that the concern with Jimmy is that he's giving more than he possibly can given his circumstances and the concern with Garry is the opposite.

[Sir Why You Little 36,954]

It;s ironic that the concern with Jimmy is that he's giving more than he possibly can given his circumstances and the concern with Garry is the opposite.

Couldn't agree more! Stuff is getting done...finally. Does it matter how or by who? This board is at least bring the club back together so past champions do want to be involved. 6 months of hard work is just that. Appreciate it..look at the results!

[Guest melbman]

Bring on the captaincy, please.

haha, queue board meltdown

[Pennant St Dee 13,064]

Excellent post . And one that should hopefully hit home .

But It probably won't because the "Stynes detractors" have got their back's up .

In a way , these "Stynes detractors" are on safe ground because their "wish" to replace Jimmy is never going to eventuate . Therefore they can nitpick and take potshots to their hearts content and pick up the dummy vote .

Some people are just never happy . Muckrakers , who are not team players , and never will be . The type who would rather find fault than acknowledge good points . These type's usually disappear when the going gets tough . Yet they want team success . Astonishing.

Cheers Ben-Hur and keep up the good work .

Macca

Just about says it all

[rpfc 28,247]

Jimmy stood up in 2008 and said "Enough is Enough i want my kids to be able to support the MFC" and then jumped on board. Everything else to this day is still evolving, and yes we have had rocky times and will probably have more.

But let us remember what has been achieved thus far. Membership has improved each year under the Stynes Board. We now are aligned again with our heritage (The MCC) and i say again uf Jim had not stood up in 2008 this club would now be the GC Demons. Jim is not a messiah, but he is a great communicator. He will need assistance moving forward, but will always be an assett to us all. If that is "going over the top" rpfc...so be it.

As I have said - we all need our heroes WYL.

I am simply saying that some of the credit we give is overblown and you get involved in that as many of us on here do.

I don't have an issue with it, but I can see why people do, when we see the great things that have been done and give credit to one individual.

That is all.

[hoopla 418]

Bonkers, I think it is important to recognise what Jim has done, what he has failed to do and what he has not done at all. It is a myth that Jim has saved the club. Saving the club is a massive operation that has demanded many things and is not done yet. jim effectively demolished the debt with member/supporter help. He did not improve our facilities, change our list, develop Casey etc etc. All essential ingredients. Jim's done none of them. Not one. The one thing he did do was preside in an essential way over the debt demolishion. Jim hads not put the club ahead of himself. He has put himself at the head of the club. I'm not being smart - that is his position. Hundreds of members paid their money to save the club. jim did not do it by himself. He is necessary but not sufficient. It takes no balls to come in to a hopeless situation because no one will blame you if you fail. No-one at all. It is a free swing.

Did he inspire and unite - hell yes! Was he essential - yes! Is he responsible for [censored]-ups -hell yes. Has the board appeared disengaged or paralyzed behind him - yes. Are things better now - well, they look it, don't they. My hope is that Jim's figurehead position is being maintained while his responsbilities have been redistributed within the board somehow. Best of both worlds.

What an absolute load of nonsense.

You state that it is a myth that Jim saved the club because he did not personally improve our facilities, build our list or develop Casey etc.. Yet you acknowledge that these things wouldn't have happened without him - and you agree that he inspired and united. What the hell do you expect a leader to do? Under your thesis, Churchill didn't beat Hitler because he didn't get into the bunker with a a machine gun!

What has JIm done wrong? Was it his fault that, our Football Director ( Andrew Leoncelli) moved to Sydney - and that no-one else was prepared to step forward to fill the void?

I am delighted that so many others have torn this critical post to threads

[mauriesy 7,256]

To me, the main reason Jim Stynes has been great for the club is because he is an iconic, motivational, charismatic figure who has galvanised supporters, especially to eliminate debt and put the club financially back on track. It's not something just anyone, especially in a suit, could have done.

That doesn't mean he's untouchable or perfect in a board and managerial sense, or that we need to lower the standing of his predecessors for any good things that occurred before he became President.

Someone mentioned "group think". The worst group think is when people become so fervent, in a quasi-religious way, that they fail to see any negatives, faults or bad decisions at all. Hence my earlier comment about "is this a religion?" when someone mentioned "belief" in Jimmy. I don't want to 'believe' in anyone. I just want to see positives promoted and negatives eliminated, and the club thrive under good management, on and off the field. I also don't want to see anyone who dares to criticise Jim being rounded on and called some sort of 'disbeliever', like it's a black or white issue.

There have been some monumental blunders committed, on much higher planes and in more important circles than the Melbourne football club, when a sense of over-whelming rightness (or 'righteousness') overtakes a group. There have also been a few blunders made under Jimmy's watch (many caused by his inability to keep his hand on the tiller due to his health) and we ought to be able to discuss these without the idea that to do so will sink the ship.

[stuie 7,374]

There are only a couple of people expressing the view that you have outlined and ironically through this comment you have been sucked in to the negativity.

Where exactly is my negativity there? "Lift your game"? Is that deemed as negative now? Geez I would think Neeld must be a very negative coach then....

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

That doesn't mean he's untouchable or perfect in a board and managerial sense, or that we need to lower the standing of his predecessors for any good things that occurred before he became President.

Someone mentioned "group think". The worst group think is when people become so fervent, in a quasi-religious way, that they fail to see any negatives, faults or bad decisions at all. Hence my earlier comment about "is this a religion?" when someone mentioned "belief" in Jimmy. I don't want to 'believe' in anyone. I just want to see positives promoted and negatives eliminated, and the club thrive under good management, on and off the field. I also don't want to see anyone who dares to criticise Jim being rounded on and called some sort of 'disbeliever', like it's a black or white issue.

There have been some monumental blunders committed, on much higher planes and in more important circles than the Melbourne football club, when a sense of over-whelming rightness (or 'righteousness') overtakes a group. There have also been a few blunders made under Jimmy's watch (many caused by his inability to keep his hand on the tiller due to his health) and we ought to be able to discuss these without the idea that to do so will sink the ship.

Hear Hear. Particularly the ironic reference to :"groupthink". The misrepresentation of those that have asked the question is Jimmy well enough to continue in a demanding role His health issues have clearly hindered that) and has the Board now got in place the proper structures to ensure the wheels did not come loose again like they did last year is laughable. And the questions that are asked and standards expectaed of our on field leaders, players, coaches etc surely can be expected of the senior off field people. If this is seen as too heretical for some and the non believers infidels then that is more a reflection of the accusers. Proper responsibility and accountability at all levels of the Club should not be so difficult for people. Oh welll.....

[Demonsterative 3,020]

I do think its heartless that some say Jim should resign as his sickness is stopping him from being an effective Pres. My reasoning is that i have not seen any evidence to say he and the board are not doing their job.

Yes the board (and jim) could have handled the sacking of DB better, and the period surrounding 186. But what came out of this was Garry came to the club in an active role. Something many previous Boards had tried and failed to do. A strategic move that has paid dividends. He came to the club due to Jims sickness. If you want to pick a positive from a dreadful circumstance, this is an example where his illness worked to Jims and the clubs benefit.

Nothing makes me 'feel good' in this circumstance! I would hope this is the case with everyone! But, IMO this board is the most successful in modern history. This not a sentimental statement. The facts are

Paid debts. Debt free. I dont care if donations paid the debt, the club no longer wastes money on interest the debt incurred. All i see is that Jim utilised and transfered his skill from the Reach program (fundraising) and paid off the MFC debt. Kudos MFC board and CEO!

Club resources. Training facilities. Multiple coaches. Sport science expertise and facilities to support the expertise. One big sponsor (2nd sponsor is a worry).

Big recruits. Clark. Neeld. Craig and Mission. All these guys made a CHOICE to come to our club. If the Board was unstable, they would have gone elsewhere.

Does this make me feel good? Yes. Why? Because i measure the success with the facts and applaud a functional board and Pres. Thet fact he is an inspirational spiritual leader is a bonus

[Sir Why You Little 36,954]

Hear Hear. Particularly the ironic reference to :"groupthink". The misrepresentation of those that have asked the question is Jimmy well enough to continue in a demanding role His health issues have clearly hindered that) and has the Board now got in place the proper structures to ensure the wheels did not come loose again like they did last year is laughable. And the questions that are asked and standards expectaed of our on field leaders, players, coaches etc surely can be expected of the senior off field people. If this is seen as too heretical for some and the non believers infidels then that is more a reflection of the accusers. Proper responsibility and accountability at all levels of the Club should not be so difficult for people. Oh welll.....

Why bring Religion into your paragraphs Rhino...? We all know you want Jimmy pushed quietly sideways (for the good of the club of course)....You cold heartless Human....Jim Stynes will continue at the MFC even in a small capacity if need be.

Without him & the Board this club would be dead.

But Jimmy will be around as long as he can....Longer than you give him credit.

Edited January 27, 2012 by why you little

[old55 23,353]

Yes the board (and jim) could have handled the sacking of DB better, and the period surrounding 186. But what came out of this was Garry came to the club in an active role. Something many previous Boards had tried and failed to do. A strategic move that has paid dividends. He came to the club due to Jims sickness. If you want to pick a positive from a dreadful circumstance, this is an example where his illness worked to Jims and the clubs benefit.

The problems between club Admin and the FD were telegraphed long before this when Jim felt forced to step in as Director in charge of football matters despite the parlous state of his health. These problems clearly spiralled out of control to 186 on Jim's watch - but I'm not going to blame him. Where was his great mate Garry when this was happening? I would have a lot more regard for Garry if he's stepped up at start rather than cleaned up the mess.

[mauriesy 7,256]

Club resources. Training facilities.

But let's be clear that a lot of the improvements in training and resources, and the decision to develop into AAMI park, pre-date the current board.

The credit should be applied where it is due and not wholly attributed to the messiah.

[old55 23,353]

When we win the flag and I reflect on the input of Dean Bailey and Garry Lyon, I'll be reminded of the relative contributions of the pig and the chicken in the traditional big breakfast.

[rpfc 28,247]

The problems between club Admin and the FD were telegraphed long before this when Jim felt forced to step in as Director in charge of football matters despite the parlous state of his health. These problems clearly spiralled out of control to 186 on Jim's watch - but I'm not going to blame him. Where was his great mate Garry when this was happening? I would have a lot more regard for Garry if he's stepped up at start rather than cleaned up the mess.

But would he have stopped that mess?

Because if he didn't then he would have been a part of the ills of the club.

The narrative wouldn't be the same.

And would the conclusion to the story be what it is today - a rather successful consultation?

These are all 'unknown unkowns' as a poor excuse for a human being once said, but they do make one think...

I do agree that he should be more involved in the club, considering the clout he seems to have, but maybe we are better off for his recalcitrance, as you imply - that at least he knows he isn't fit to do more.

[Sir Why You Little 36,954]

But let's be clear that a lot of the improvements in training and resources, and the decision to develop into AAMI park, pre-date the current board.

The credit should be applied where it is due and not wholly attributed to the messiah.

The Previous Board do get some kudos from me, but when Gardiner & Co stepped down they were spent of ideas...the interest payments were strangling any progress.

[hoopla 418]

But let's be clear that a lot of the improvements in training and resources, and the decision to develop into AAMI park, pre-date the current board.

True .... and the previous Board initiated reconciliation with the MCC. Gardner, Phillips and Co developed many of the ideas Jim, Don and Co. have run with.

[Demonsterative 3,020]

If CS and DB were in a war as suggested, they are responsible for their actions. The Boards role is to fix the problem, not Jim alone. Its an aspect of this boards reign that was not handled that well, not exactly reflective of its overall performance.

Ive been in management for a while and sackings are always ugly. Being informed of your role being terminated over the phone is poor form. But no one is aware of the circumstances that lead to this.

[Demonsterative 3,020]

No point having resources if they arent utilised. Mission has the runs on the board to suggest he knows sport science. So does Craig

[rpfc 28,247]

If CS and DB were in a war as suggested, they are responsible for their actions. The Boards role is to fix the problem, not Jim alone. Its an aspect of this boards reign that was not handled that well, not exactly reflective of its overall performance.

Ive been in management for a while and sackings are always ugly. Being informed of your role being terminated over the phone is poor form. But no one is aware of the circumstances that lead to this.

We do know that Leoncelli leaving left a hole that Jim attmepted to fill but couldn't.

The board knew very little of the grievances of the FD/players which led to a naive McLardy asking a pre-pubescent Green of his thoughts, and in his role as the tail in this approaching metaphor, attempted to wag the dog.

Jim should never have agreed to step in for Leoncelli, the Football Director is the conduit between the board and reality.

And reality is important to realise.

[Whispering_Jack 29,757]

The problems between club Admin and the FD were telegraphed long before this when Jim felt forced to step in as Director in charge of football matters despite the parlous state of his health. These problems clearly spiralled out of control to 186 on Jim's watch - but I'm not going to blame him. Where was his great mate Garry when this was happening? I would have a lot more regard for Garry if he's stepped up at start rather than cleaned up the mess.

I'm not sure why it was necessary for Lyon to have stepped up. He was invited when it hit the fan and, for reasons of his own (to which he was quite entitled) he was initially reluctant, but when pressed he came to the party. That's good enough for me.

In the end, he's done the job and done it well - surely, that's what we're assessing here?

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Why bring Religion into your paragraphs Rhino...? We all know you want Jimmy pushed quietly sideways (for the good of the club of course)....You cold heartless Human....Jim Stynes will continue at the MFC even in a small capacity if need be.

I didnt bring it in at all. I made a tongue in cheek reference to those who have been labelled "believers" and "detractors". I have already outlined in my previous post what i would like to see and why. Your effort at asserting agendas on others to somehow pump your tyres is pathetic to say the least. And also stop the melodramatic "cold heartless human" pretence.

And its even remarkable that you then suggest that Jim will continue at MFC in a small capacity. I already canvassed that in post # 102. But I forget you cant follow discussions only bring them down to a LCD level where you regularly hide.

Without him & the Board this club would be dead.

But Jimmy will be around as long as he can....Longer than you give him credit.

Hopefully, the Board had given due consideration of life without Jim. Stynes has publicly said he has had a reprieve. I have already suggested given the near term experience that he might want to spend his limited energies with his family. How long he will be around no one knows. But its pity you have use someone's else ill health to make a cheap shot. Just another tacky lack of judgment from you.

The problems between club Admin and the FD were telegraphed long before this when Jim felt forced to step in as Director in charge of football matters despite the parlous state of his health. These problems clearly spiralled out of control to 186 on Jim's watch - but I'm not going to blame him. Where was his great mate Garry when this was happening? I would have a lot more regard for Garry if he's stepped up at start rather than cleaned up the mess.

Agreed.

But let's be clear that a lot of the improvements in training and resources, and the decision to develop into AAMI park, pre-date the current board.

The credit should be applied where it is due and not wholly attributed to the messiah.

Absolutely.

The same goes for the Bentleigh which was initiated under Gutnick's rule and was carried through Szondy and Gardiner to Stynes.

The Previous Board do get some kudos from me, but when Gardiner & Co stepped down they were spent of ideas...the interest payments were strangling any progress.

The issue is not the problems with the previous Board. Its the issue of providing credit for current initiatives. While a number of excellet initiatives have been undertaken by the Stynes admin. there have been a number of other initiatives that have pre dated this group but the current admin has been wrongly given sole credit.

If CS and DB were in a war as suggested, they are responsible for their actions. The Boards role is to fix the problem, not Jim alone. Its an aspect of this boards reign that was not handled that well, not exactly reflective of its overall performance.

Ive been in management for a while and sackings are always ugly. Being informed of your role being terminated over the phone is poor form. But no one is aware of the circumstances that lead to this.

CS and DB should be held responsible for the actions. And the so called "war" was in the FD where Jim Stynes had personal control. From the past 12 months there are issues with the Boards performance and its the President who should be ensuring that the Board members fulfil their obligations.

The sacking by phone was appalling but its in the past. And the details leading up to the sacking are in the public space.

We do know that Leoncelli leaving left a hole that Jim attmepted to fill but couldn't.

The board knew very little of the grievances of the FD/players which led to a naive McLardy asking a pre-pubescent Green of his thoughts, and in his role as the tail in this approaching metaphor, attempted to wag the dog.

Jim should never have agreed to step in for Leoncelli, the Football Director is the conduit between the board and reality.

And reality is important to realise.

McLardy should not have had to go directly to the players either.

In the end, he's done the job and done it well - surely, that's what we're assessing here?

So what happens next WJ?

[Guest Jackie]

Under Jimmy's tenure we got one big monkey off our back(the debt). Now still under his tenure there is work in progress to get rid of the gorilla on our back(our lowly status on the field). This now seems on the right track and all happening with Jimmy enduring a severe personal crisis. Does any one doubt we are on the wrong track now? Being reborn from year zero was never going to be easy and missteps and mistakes were always going to be made. IMO there are those here who are already pre judging his legacy too early.