On 28/08/2012 at 14:13, angrydee said:

Meh.

It is what it is. He's there for the next 3 years unless he REALLY stuffs up. Those of you who hate the FACT - stamp your feet, hit your head against a brick wall and throw a tantrum. Or even start another thread.

And when you wake up tomorrow nothing will have changed.

So if you want to continue pissing into the wind, be my guests.

Thank you for bringing this back on topic. I suppose I should be grateful that Cameron has more time to back back the $140,000 of supporters money that McLardy loaned him.

Hazy, at the risk of being accused of not answering another poster's questions, I'm not going to answer yours (sorry Bob) because, quite frankly, I don't really want to pander to your unhealthy obsession over this subject.

You claim to have provided evidence to support your arguments but in fact most of what you’ve given us is not concrete evidence but your own (negative) spin about the Board, Cameron Schwab as the CEO and their past record and achievements.

You believe that accountability is paramount and that the Board and CEO are neither accountable nor competent; that they somehow stumbled on the club's financial turnaround of $11m by stealth or accident rather than by design.

For my part, I acknowledge their achievements, recognise their flaws and don't deny there is a need for them to be accountable to the members. I simply don't see enough evidence to support your claims.

There are other fundamentals at play that need to be emphasised in this discussion.

The ultimate aim of the 18 clubs that make up the AFL is premiership success. To achieve that you need people who are not only accountable but they must also be united and loyal to the cause.

In all of the years I've followed the game, I can't recall a club having won the flag when there was disunity within the ranks and I won’t even start with the perfidious characters who run off to media telling tales out of school that are often distorted and damaging to the interests of the club.

Really, it's time to move on.

  On 28/08/2012 at 23:53, Hazyshadeofgrinter said:

Thank you for bringing this back on topic. I suppose I should be grateful that Cameron has more time to back back the $140,000 of supporters money that McLardy loaned him.

"There is no suggestion of financial impropriety."

QED

Maybe I see things a little too simplistically.

CS has presided over an administration that has removed our $5M debt - to get a true comparison- there are a few clubs that have tried the same "eradicate debt" campaigns and havent come close to what we accomplished. You can throw up how much of it was the Stynes factor but bottom line is CS was CEO during this time. We have re-aligned with the MCC and have new facilities and finally have spent money (wisely or unwisely remains to be seen) on a football department. We can put this down to sponsors, supporters, members, partly previous administrations but CS has presided over all this happening.

Reading the criticism's of CS I note that he has not been criticised for his performance in administration matters but interferring in pure football matters. Jimmy aludes to this in his book. Simply put - keep him out of pure football matters and is he not very effective ?

I'll have another go at the energy watch sponsorship. This witch-hunt reminds me of so many posts on here on drafting and retrospective naval gazing. People looking at this sponsorship after the company started to unravel not at the time we (and others) took the deal. Good thing Visy dont want to sponsor us as they have a checked corporate history.

Lastly -as mentioned by others - that we have any sponsors is a minor miracle. Taking off our Demons bias - at this point of time what do you think that Mr and Mrs Joe Public would take more notice of- Kaspersky on Buckley's shirt or Neelds shirt. We are not only trying to get sponsorship from companies who may not want to get into sports advertising, we are competing against other sporting clubs who in honesty are a lot more attractive than we are.

Sitting from the other side of the fence I can only conclude that he has done a good job.

Nutbean you are probably right

However the reality is that the Board thinks he has done a good job over the last year and have reappointed him.

They both sink or swim together

End of the story

Jack,

I directly countered each of your points. You have avoided addressing any of mine.

No-one thinks for a minute that this has anything to do for your concerns about my "unhealthy obsession".

I am satisfied with this result as I suspect it is the closest I'll ever come to having you admit that you have been misguided and that you have nothing to base your opinions on.

Having said that, I just can't let your last couple of lines go without further comment.

  On 29/08/2012 at 00:07, Whispering_Jack said:

The ultimate aim of the 18 clubs that make up the AFL is premiership success. To achieve that you need people who are not only accountable but they must also be united and loyal to the cause.

In all of the years I've followed the game, I can't recall a club having won the flag when there was disunity within the ranks.

I have been hesitant to raise the issue of on field success when discussing Schwab's performance, largely because this is really more the responsibility of the football department than the CEO. Having said that, I agree with you that disunity among a club's administration can have profound effects on on-field performance. The events of last year show that this has been especially true at Melbourne and the relationship between the Board and Schwab is such that Cam deserves to cop some of the blame for our footballing performance.

Here are some more facts for you:

Schwab's stints as CEO include Richmond (1988-1994), Melbourne (1997-1999), Fremantle (2002-2008) and Melbourne (2009-12).

You say the ultimate aim of a club is premiership success?

In his 21 years at the helm Schwab's Clubs have reached the finals on only 3 occasions and have achieved zero premierships.

You say football clubs require unity and stability to achieve on field success?

In his 21 seasons as CEO, Schwab has sacked 5 coaches (Bartlett, Jeans, Balme, Connolly, Bailey).

Judging by your own criteria of stability and premiership success, Schwab is an abject failure.

Bit of an own goal there Jack.

  On 29/08/2012 at 00:16, Apocalypse XXXI said:

"There is no suggestion of financial impropriety."

QED

Funny, I don't remember the funding of Schwab's property investments being mentioned in any of the Debt Demolition material.

I guess I am the only supporter who has concerns about donations to the club being used for this purpose.

I suppose people could have other concerns about the loan such as:

• It was granted by a mate
  
• Members did not find out about the loan for months
  
• It gives Cam greater leverage if we decide to part ways with him
  
• It has the potential to further poison our club culture
  
• Schwab has a history of involvement with dodgy deals at the club
  

But again, perhaps I'm the only one with these concerns.

  On 29/08/2012 at 00:36, nutbean said:

Maybe I see things a little too simplistically.

Ok, let us keep things simple.

The Board were about to sack Schwab last year.

• What has Schwab done since then that could possibly justify giving him a three year contract now?
  

• Given his patchy record, how does it benefit the club to give Schwab a three year contract instead of a standard ongoing employment contract with a notice period?
  

Nothing more to add to HSSOG. We are now truly shoved backs up the briny hole.

  On 28/08/2012 at 23:53, Hazyshadeofgrinter said:

Thank you for bringing this back on topic. I suppose I should be grateful that Cameron has more time to back back the $140,000 of supporters money that McLardy loaned him.

Makes absolutely no sense to me why he would borrow that money from the club and not a bank...?

Is it to get better interest rates or something?

The guy slaves behind an outdated desk for this club and you knock him for borrowing a measly 140 grand .

Shame on you all .

  On 29/08/2012 at 07:52, Hazyshadeofgrinter said:

Jack,

I directly countered each of your points. You have avoided addressing any of mine.

No-one thinks for a minute that this has anything to do for your concerns about my "unhealthy obsession".

I am satisfied with this result as I suspect it is the closest I'll ever come to having you admit that you have been misguided and that you have nothing to base your opinions on.

Having said that, I just can't let your last couple of lines go without further comment.

I have been hesitant to raise the issue of on field success when discussing Schwab's performance, largely because this is really more the responsibility of the football department than the CEO. Having said that, I agree with you that disunity among a club's administration can have profound effects on on-field performance. The events of last year show that this has been especially true at Melbourne and the relationship between the Board and Schwab is such that Cam deserves to cop some of the blame for our footballing performance.

Here are some more facts for you:

Schwab's stints as CEO include Richmond (1988-1994), Melbourne (1997-1999), Fremantle (2002-2008) and Melbourne (2009-12).

You say the ultimate aim of a club is premiership success?

In his 21 years at the helm Schwab's Clubs have reached the finals on only 3 occasions and have achieved zero premierships.

You say football clubs require unity and stability to achieve on field success?

In his 21 seasons as CEO, Schwab has sacked 5 coaches (Bartlett, Jeans, Balme, Connolly, Bailey).

Judging by your own criteria of stability and premiership success, Schwab is an abject failure.

Bit of an own goal there Jack.

and I always thought that coaches were sacked by a board decision (not CEO)...............silly me

  On 29/08/2012 at 09:11, daisycutter said:

and I always thought that coaches were sacked by a board decision (not CEO)...............silly me

I thought the same until last year.

  On 29/08/2012 at 09:13, Hazyshadeofgrinter said:

I thought the same until last year.

So tell me again how many coaches naughty cam sacked Hazy. I'm not computing very well tonight?

  On 29/08/2012 at 09:13, Hazyshadeofgrinter said:

I thought the same until last year.

Didn't you guys know this? Schwabby gave himself an extension and sacked Bailey the same day! The desk got a real workout!

  On 29/08/2012 at 09:13, Hazyshadeofgrinter said:

I thought the same until last year.

Talk about (fact) not crap because it was stynes and the board who moved on Bailey.

You think getting our AAMI park training center was not a great job by Cam Swabb?.

30 year deal with Casey?

5 Million debt under his Watch as CEO?

Working on a Training Camp in China?

Getting one Jack Viney?

Your agenda is clear and funny.

Run for the job if you like Mr perfect.

  On 29/08/2012 at 09:41, daisycutter said:

So tell me again how many coaches naughty cam sacked Hazy. I'm not computing very well tonight?

  On 29/08/2012 at 09:44, stuie said:

Didn't you guys know this? Schwabby gave himself an extension and sacked Bailey the same day! The desk got a real workout!

So after everything I have written, this is all you've got?

My point about Schwab's poor record in terms of club stability still stands. Conspicuously, no-one has attempted to deny this.

Good game guys.

  On 29/08/2012 at 09:13, Hazyshadeofgrinter said:

I thought the same until last year.

You should write a book about it... Call it 50shadesofgrudge...

  On 29/08/2012 at 09:51, BIG JIM said:

Talk about (fact) not crap because it was stynes and the board who moved on Bailey.

Ok, if you want to talk facts it was Garry who moved on Bailey - the Board were moving on Schwab.

Are you seriously suggesting that Schwab's divisiveness, his interference in the football department and his nepotistic relationships had nothing to do with Bailey's sacking?

  On 29/08/2012 at 09:51, BIG JIM said:

You think getting our AAMI park training center was not a great job by Cam Swabb?.

Correct. As I have pointed out previously, this was not Schwab's work, it was his inheritance.

  On 29/08/2012 at 09:51, BIG JIM said:

30 year deal with Casey?

Correct. As I have pointed out previously, this was not Schwab's work, it was his inheritance.

  On 29/08/2012 at 09:51, BIG JIM said:

5 Million debt under his Watch as CEO?

An unsustainable measure that has mined the finite goodwill of supporters for one off financial gain. What credit there is for the tin rattle goes to the club's supporters .

In financial matters that Cameron has had control over the club has fared poorly. This has not been disputed by anyone.

  On 29/08/2012 at 09:51, BIG JIM said:

Working on a Training Camp in China?

Really? That's it? Was that junket even worth it? Other than the vomiting stories, I didn't pay much attention.

  On 29/08/2012 at 09:51, BIG JIM said:

Getting one Jack Viney?

First of all, it remains to be seen whether Jack Viney will play for the club, what pick will be used on him and if he will be any good.

More importantly, appointing his dad as recruitment manager this year is a demonstration of Schwab's terrible judgement and an expression of the "boys club" culture that saved Cameron's neck last year.

Will you now answer some questions for me?

  On 29/08/2012 at 10:06, s-t-i-n-g-a said:

You should write a book about it... Call it 50shadesofgrudge...

Sounds like you think I'm Dean Bailey.

  On 29/08/2012 at 09:52, Hazyshadeofgrinter said:

start your own thread

Hazy-you are not Eugene Arocca looking for a job are you?

  On 29/08/2012 at 10:13, Biffen said:

Hazy-you are not Eugene Arocca looking for a job are you?

\\

No, he's Greg Denham.

Hazy, shouldn't posts like yours be written at 3AM on a Sunday after your girlfriend has left you?

  On 29/08/2012 at 09:52, Hazyshadeofgrinter said:

So after everything I have written, this is all you've got?

My point about Schwab's poor record in terms of club stability still stands. Conspicuously, no-one has attempted to deny this.

Good game guys.

It's not all i've got hazey but when you tell such porkies as on this item then it casts doubts on your other 'facts' and your ability to be truly objective and even handed

Love to faults is always blind, always is to joy inclined. Lawless, winged, and unconfined, and breaks all chains from every mind.

William Shakespeare

  On 29/08/2012 at 10:29, daisycutter said:

It's not all i've got hazey but when you tell such porkies as on this item then it casts doubts on your other 'facts' and your ability to be truly objective and even handed

Well it's all I'm reading.

As I've said, my point still stands.

If you are willing to make such a big deal of such a small matter, I can only assume that you have no objections to anything else I have written over the last few pages.

Love your quotes by the way, they really ramp up the melodrama.

  On 29/08/2012 at 10:26, Ted Fidge said:

\\

No, he's Greg Denham.

Hazy, shouldn't posts like yours be written at 3AM on a Sunday after your girlfriend has left you?

  On 29/08/2012 at 10:36, Hazyshadeofgrinter said:

no, you are