Paul Gardner's response

[nutbean 8,837]

I mentioned yesterday that in my fury of Paul Gardner weighing unnecessarily that I emailed Grey Group. Lo and behold - Paul got back to me.

Unfortunately the first mail sent to him was web based so I dont have a copy of it but it was along the lines that a "true Melbourne person wouldnt have said what you said". It was short and sweet.

He responded and I have taken the opportunity to really spell out why I was unhappy with what he did.Start from the bottom up.

Hi Paul,

Thanks for your response but I think you have missed my point.

It is not what was said that made me contact you – there are many, in fact most that share that exact sentiment. My email was directed at a person who I strongly believe didn’t need to come out and air his views in the manner in which you did.

I have number of rhetorical questions to throw at you (or you may want to respond)

· Why exactly did you think you were called on to comment - because you an expert commentator ? because you are a media celebrity ? The reason you were called on, is because next to Dean Bailey you were the next closest Melbourne authority figure no longer working for club ( albeit you departed six months before the end of the season) that was likely to give the journo’s a headline. You were contacted because you are /were a Melbourne supporter, a Melbourne Football club President , a Melbourne person. Contrast what Paul Johnson said - he took care in his answers and let people draw their own conclusions. He actively decided not to whack the club. Compare the media reactions of Paul Johnson’s interview to yours – one approach was inflammatory - the other wasn’t.

· I understand your distaste for what transpired – however did you believe at the time that there wasn’t enough coverage of the story ? Did you believe that there wasn’t enough outrage and it was being buried ? (Brian Taylor suggested that the MFC be removed from the competition !). With someone with a purported love for club would not a more helpful approach for our club been to assess the situation and see that this story was already massive and didn’t need any more help. After Brock’s statements this was going to be addressed by AFL one way or the other. Do you believe you weighing in was going to open the “unopened eyes of the AFL. The tanking train had well and truly left the station – there was little need for a Melbourne President to chase the train jump on board and help fuel the fires.

· Let’s consider how other good Melbourne people have behaved when confronted with unpalatable situations

o Dean Bailey sacked as coach - did he take parting shots at the club which he had every right to do when he was marched out the door ? He handled his exit with class.

o Mark Neeld – “I will make you fitter harder and stronger”- Did he add because “because my predecessor left the list in a deplorable state” ?

o Could you imagine Jim Stynes standing up and saying “What a magnificent job the supporters have done in eradicating our debt” and then adding “ considering the precarious financial state previous administrations left us in”?

Your legacy is frequently debated on the supporters website and opinion is divided but there are many who rightly acknowledge many of the good things you did for our club. Go on the supporters board now and with few exceptions the question is being asked “Why did a Melbourne President find it necessary to whack his own club”. The club is going through a tough time onfield and has had much unwanted media attention this year and this is just one more. I’m sorry Paul – if you consider yourself a true Melbourne person you would understand that the input you delivered wasn’t necessary – authority figures from a club don’t publicly whack their own.

(I am an active member of the Demonland community and as a courtesy I am printing your response to me on our supporter boards as many supporters are disillusioned with your actions and want answers)

Regards

Jeff

From:

Sent: Wednesday, 1 August 2012 5:21 PM

To:

Subject: your note...

Thanks for your comments…I responded to what I think is a poor practice that should be stamped out by the AFL.

Regardless of my feelings for the club I support and worked pro-bono for nearly seven years, it is wrong to enter any game without the intention of winning.

If you think this is the kind of club or effort you want to support, that’s your opinion…and it’s sad. Hopefully other supporters don’t share disillusions that losing makes a club strong.

paul

[Range Rover 1,935]

Good effort to get a response Nutbean and nice follow up reply, but I'd say you're wasting your breath.

The bloke is obviously embittered and has set out to whack the club as retribution, using this opportunistic moment as pretence.

In short, he is no Melbourne supporter.

[Range Rover 1,935]

The one part I do disagree with in your follow up reply NB is this:

"Dean Bailey sacked as coach - did he take parting shots at the club which he had every right to do when he was marched out the door ? He handled his exit with class."

I think he most certainly did ... http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-premiership/dean-bailey-admits-to-coaching-for-draft-picks-in-his-first-two-seasons-as-melbourne-demons-coach/story-e6frf3e3-1226106261751

[nutbean 8,837]

The bloke is obviously embittered and has set out to whack the club as retribution, using this opportunistic moment as pretence.

In short, he is no Melbourne supporter.

And whether you are right or indeed his intentions were honorable, unfortunately for Paul Gardner, I think that 99% of supporters would share your view word for word.

[sue 8,475]

Sorry Paul. I'm not well disposed to someone who can't resist unnecessarily inserting in his response the fact that he worked 'pro-bono'. And who doesn't respond to the criticisms made, but just mocks his critic and implies NB is happy to put up with a crud team.

[beelzebub 22,282]

What a pompous sanctimonial hypocrite. He obviously had no idea of what he was doing or more importantly was supposed to do.

Well rid of

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

Should this be made public? It was a private email after all.

[nutbean 8,837]

Should this be made public? It was a private email after all.

on any emails I send out regarding football (and there have been a few!) I add something along the lines of this I am an active member of the Demonland community and as a courtesy I am printing your response to me on our supporter boards as many supporters are disillusioned with your actions and want answers

As an aside - Paul was quite happy to face the public and give his comments and now you believe that he shouldnt stand scrutiny because of a differing opinion ?I also have tried to get to Mike Sheahan and ask why he didnt follow up Brock McLean "integrity" reponse with " how did you feel then going to Carlton who have been accused of doing exactly the same thing as the club you have left". No response to date.

Edited August 1, 2012 by nutbean

[H_T 2,941]

I wonder how he felt back in 2003 when Daniher put a few out to pasture and played youngsters to net both Sylvia and McLean....was Gardener as supportive then ? Probably wouldn't have a clue...nothing has changed.

[diesel 420]

And whether you are right or indeed his intentions were honorable, unfortunately for Paul Gardner, I think that 99% of supporters would share your view word for word.

Personally if I were going to the trouble of contacting him I would have just said that I thought he was bitter and his intentions were to damage the club and that is the only logical outcome of his 'speaking out'. His perceptions in regard to the way we played are personal. He didn't like it? Then had the option of not watching, not being a member, registering his upset with the club, privately. I wasn't happy about our experimenting but at the time the reality was we were left with no choice. There were more members who would have been MORE peeved if we had have missed a priority pick 2 years running. These were not enviable choices. I would have liked to ask Mr Gardner what he would have done if he thought the FD was structuring up for picks? Would he have exposed them, sacked them, whilst simualtaneosuly revealing a 5 million dollar debt? They are hard calls even in hindsight.

To sum up, anyone who goes down media street in the way he has is bitter and a [censored].

Edited August 2, 2012 by diesel

[rpfc 27,633]

I am still rankled with him for claming we were tanking under him. We never did.

He just wanted to put himself into the story.

Well, the story is about to die, nothing will happen and those that think this is loosening up the clutches of the current admin are kidding themselves.

Clubs close ranks when they are being constantly attacked.

This year has been crisis riddled (most out of our control) and yet Schwab is looking more and more likely to stay on as CEO.

I argued with RF a few months back about how I could understand the club 'moving on' from Schwab but now I can see them 'sticking fat' in light of the fact that we are under attack and he is constantly being accused as the Rasputin of our little world here.

It is self-defeating to those that want to see the back of Schwab - if you attack him for everything that goes wrong, your lost credibility attaches to your relevant claims and just entrenches him further.

[Rolling Stone 107]

Shameful.

[Johnny Karate 559]

Nice get nb. I think you may've been wasting your time though. The guy is clearly a fwit with an axe to grind. If he felt so strongly about this 'poor practice' why didn't he come out with these feelings at the time rather than three years later? Did he write to the club at the time to express his concern at what he was seeing? If he was so anti-tanking when he was president why didnt he slam other clubs such as Hawthorn, Collingwood & Carlton for cheating & cry "the MFC will never, ever delibrately lose games of football"? Does he want to see the club he supports & thousands who support it punished & go through misery just because he didn't agree with an alleged past practices? He must have a mighty superiority complex if he believes the need to air his public opinion outweighs what is best for the entire MFC community.

Nutbean, your letter was tactful & considerate towards his opinion while questioning his course of action over the issue. His response was glib, smug & condescending. You are class, he is not.

Edited August 1, 2012 by Jimmi C

[Wells 11 4,855]

Amazing really. He loves the club enough to work "pro bono" for 7 years then, in our year from hell, he tries to kill us WTF! Clearly he liked the power of his position much more than he ever loved the club. As an ex president his line " if you think this is the kind of club you want to support" made me feel sick! Clearly an axe to grind.

We would have been considered light weights and "nice guys" had we won 5 games that year...lacking the ruthless edge of a Carlton or a Collingwood. Besides which we werent trying to lose......we were coached (with the medium long term in mind) .... to try to win the firkn FLAG like many before us. A place we havent been for a long time.

[Bay Riffin 1,426]

Paul Gardner, you will not be forgiven quickly for this.

when will the key figures in our history start putting Melbourne first.

I think what Paul did was disgraceful. After years of sugar coating our financial position which put us back further, he now after that fact, drops a media bomb.

Working Pro-bono for 7 years Paul? - can you imagine our hard earned dollars we put in to this club being used pay for this sort of treament?

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

on any emails I send out regarding football (and there have been a few!) I add something along the lines of this I am an active member of the Demonland community and as a courtesy I am printing your response to me on our supporter boards as many supporters are disillusioned with your actions and want answers

As an aside - Paul was quite happy to face the public and give his comments and now you believe that he shouldnt stand scrutiny because of a differing opinion ?I also have tried to get to Mike Sheahan and ask why he didnt follow up Brock McLean "integrity" reponse with " how did you feel then going to Carlton who have been accused of doing exactly the same thing as the club you have left". No response to date.

Fair enough.

[nutbean 8,837]

Fair enough.

Actually on rethought it is not fair enough- I should have got express permission from Paul to post and I didnt and for this I apologise to this forum and Paul.

There has been more correspondence between Paul and myself and he is disappointed that I posted it. (and before anyone asks, his tone was of disappointment- nothing more than that).

All I will say on the last response is our positions are not any closer aligned

[rpfc 27,633]

Actually on rethought it is not fair enough- I should have got express permission from Paul to post and I didnt and for this I apologise to this forum and Paul.

I am sure he doesn't want to be placed in the story and be reprinted or his words to be taken out of context...

FMD.

Was he disappointed with the journo he chatted to in the Sun?

Was he disappointed with himself when he went on SEN?

[McQueen 17,864]

Actually on rethought it is not fair enough- I should have got express permission from Paul to post and I didnt and for this I apologise to this forum and Paul.

There has been more correspondence between Paul and myself and he is disappointed that I posted it. (and before anyone asks, his tone was of disappointment- nothing more than that).

All I will say on the last response is our positions are not any closer aligned

Apology not necessary as far a I'm concerned.

As rpfc alluded to, if PG is a wee upset about his email being copied into a forum as opposed to be being mistaken in the national media, or beating his chest on the radio about something he knows SFA about, then he has seriously got his priorities up sh!t creek.

But we already know that.

[praha 10,329]

Should this be made public? It was a private email after all.

Yes. Email is classified as publishing and the OP is well within their right to publish it publicly, unless asked not to. This was "on record".

Anyway, not a fan of Gardiner, but...

"Regardless of my feelings for the club I support and worked pro-bono for nearly seven years, it is wrong to enter any game without the intention of winning."

I agree.

I mean, I get that we should support the club, but I just don't see how in any case losing is beneficial, even if draft picks are involved.

Edited August 2, 2012 by Cudi_420

[jnrmac 19,310]

Paul Gardner was/is President of a global advertising firm. He supposedly understands media and sponsorship.

I say two things:

1. the financial situation under him was deplorable and very nearly bankrupted our club. His expertise in getting us sponsors and marketing our team were essentially useless.

2. For him to come out now and make these comments publicly shows that he is out to destroy our club. He would have known the full effect of what he was saying and the forum by which he delivered it. He is either monumentally stupid OR he is seeking to damage the club in the most vicious way possible.

I dont give a toss that he worked 7 yrs pro-bono. Plenty of others have done more. Its what he did and has recently done that he will be judged on and in both cases he will be judged very harshly as a failed administrator and guardian of our club.

As far as I am concerned he is not welcome at our club. He is suffering from relevance deprivation syndrome and should F off.

[Guest bluey]

Very poor form, copying a private email into an internet forum.

Any way, Paul is telling the truth, have never met one real person who doesn't believe Melbourne set up to lose.

Only a fool would think otherwise.

And sure, others did it, a bit like murder I suppose, doesn't make it righteous.

[Brayshaws' Helmet 143]

Paul Gardner, you will not be forgiven quickly for this.

haha, what has he done since then? i mean really guys, this is just the same as Mcclean, he was asked a question and he answered. Although it could hurt MFC in the long run, i for one find it strangely refreshing that people are talking openly

[Swooper 251]

If you ask me, PG would have been fully aware that it would be posted - especially with the disclaimer attached. Now he's playing the moral high ground.

Sure what he said has merits, but he of all people should understand that there is a time and a place (often not the media) for comments on matters. Anyone who thinks that the world is owed one long stream of conscious is kidding themselves. What was he trying to achieve?

Whoever wrote above about he what action he took at the time to back his moralistic stance as other sides took similar courses of action was spot on.

As far as I am concerned Gardner should not be regarded as an MFC man and he knows it.

[Sir Why You Little 34,818]

haha, what has he done since then? i mean really guys, this is just the same as Mcclean, he was asked a question and he answered. Although it could hurt MFC in the long run, i for one find it strangely refreshing that people are talking openly

That is my take on this whole thing. Talk openly so we can move on.