Mr dial a quote, when will Acker have his say?

i think the AFL will act similar to what Kennett says. But what he doesn't mention is the flaky rules that would not stand up in court.

I don't like what our club did at all,& some must pay. But it was the AFL who dangled the Gold.

Gold that wasn't that great afterall.

Hard work is what should have been done.

Ok, let's pretend I am an ex-board member for a moment. What difference would that make? None. If anything, it would make things worse because you would have to assume that I know something of what I am talking about. I know everyone here thinks I am horribly biased - this is not exactly news. But it doesn't change the facts and it doesn't make me wrong.

Mods, you are supposed to keep conversations relevant to the thread. We have been through this tedious, irrelevant rubbish over and over again. I should not have to keep pointing this out to you just because my views are unpopular.

Let's not pretend let's take it as read you are an ex Board member and we can therefore assume that anything you say comes from a position of bias, I guess we could see that in your posting anyway.

Your posting is all about you and your attempts to belittle and demean the club and its current Board and Administration, it was also deceitful; you should have declared your position upfront.

I doubt that the Mods will see it as tedious and irevant, it is certainly relevant to the thread and it's important that other posters can see you for what you are.

i think the AFL will act similar to what Kennett says. But what he doesn't mention is the flaky rules that would not stand up in court.

I don't like what our club did at all,& some must pay. But it was the AFL who dangled the Gold.

Gold that wasn't that great afterall.

Hard work is what should have been done.

if we take the AFL to court and lose then whos responsible for the court costs?

There are numerous clubs that have been linked to tanking, but only one that is now fully under the blow torch, so I think it's reasonable to suggest we haven't been really good at this. It may be difficult to manipulate results in games of footy, but if evidence comes out that officials were told this was specifically the plan then they've been incompetent at worst and clumsy at best.

And, of course, those that hate the club, such as Hazy, start acting like flies with a Jam Boy in their midst.

Baby steps mate. You're getting there.

I am not pleased to see my club being put through the ringer but my view is with the way things have been going, something like this was always going to have to happen before things got better.

I will admit that I will be pleased if the current admin get thrown out as a result of this latest stuff up and I think this would be in the long term interests of the club.

In my view, the best chance we have of preventing our club from being completely crippled is for the guilty parties to go to the AFL, offer their resignations and try to figure out a way to contain the damage. Justice will need to have been seen to have been served and, even if it is only for symbolic reasons, heads will have to roll before our club will be able to move past this. Unfortunately, the egos involved make this unlikely in my estimation. Schwab has never been able to put the club's interests before his own and he is obsessed with his legacy. I have no doubt that his preference would be to waste club resources by becoming embroiled in legal action designed to preserve his personal reputation regardless of the cost to the club. The consequences of this would be dire.

I will also admit to a certain amount of guilty "I told you so" feelings. Maybe this makes me a bad person but if people like you had ever bothered to listen to my concerns about corporate governance and accountability at the club instead of personally attacking me out of your misplaced faith in our totally incompetent Board, maybe we wouldn't be in this situation.

Your priorities have always been:

1st. your online image

2nd. Stynes/Schwab

3rd. the MFC.

I am pretty much the opposite.

Wish we just won that damn game, we would have Dustin Martin tearing it up right now. Him and Viney would have had a field day every match in the center next year

Vineys not a demon yet, and its looking more doubtful by the day.

Wish we just won that damn game, we would have Dustin Martin tearing it up right now. Him and Viney would have had a field day every match in the center next year

Buggger all this rubbish about rolling over.. If Vlad and his cronies wont to impose retrospective morality....its grab your wigs time and they'll need to be prepared to get hit..and hard .

Dont know if anyone has read this but whoever suggested that if all the presidents came out and stuck up for the MFC as a whole we could get off easier can think again.

Kennet wants the AFL to come down hard

http://www.theage.co...1101-28lw5.html

I did and which club is Kennett President of?

Let's not pretend let's take it as read you are an ex Board member and we can therefore assume that anything you say comes from a position of bias, I guess we could see that in your posting anyway.

Your posting is all about you and your attempts to belittle and demean the club and its current Board and Administration, it was also deceitful; you should have declared your position upfront.

I doubt that the Mods will see it as tedious and irevant, it is certainly relevant to the thread and it's important that other posters can see you for what you are.

Boring. Changes nothing.

Club and Board/Admin are not the same thing.

Start you own thread.

To me the whole issue requires no more discussion than this:

The whole point of the draft system, including priority picks, was/is to give a boost to the clubs that are struggling the most. We won 10 games in 3 years and we received ONE priotiry pick. West Coast, Carlton, Richmond, St.Kilda, Collingwood, Bulldogs and Hawthorn have ALL spent time at the bottom over the last decade or so and as a result they all received 'draft assistance'. Between 2004 and 2007, 7 priority picks were given out, Carlton and Hawthorn receiving TWO each. How could anyone possibly pick Melbourne, out of this group of 8 clubs (most of whom have been far more successful than the MFC in recent years) as the 'odd-ones-out' and try to mount a case that they have received some sort of unfair advantage?

if we take the AFL to court and lose then whos responsible for the court costs?

we won't lose. Simple.

A loss would be the end of the road.

Dont know if anyone has read this but whoever suggested that if all the presidents came out and stuck up for the MFC as a whole we could get off easier can think again.

Kennet wants the AFL to come down hard

http://www.theage.co...1101-28lw5.html

BTW ask him how they got Buddy and Roughy in the same draft, with 1 being a Priority Pick. Do you know what they did? Wanna guess?

The AFL have already penalised us for the 2009 priority pick, they took it off us last year.

Case closed.

The Stynes/McLardy board has had some unfortunate lapses of judgement. Clearly there is also some very noisy opposition toward it.

Criticism is fine but not much of it has been constructive. At best it has been negative disingenuous spin & at worst it has been a disloyal white-anting campaign of political bastardry aimed at eliminating one so called "boys club" for the jollies of another. Ultimately loyal supporters & members of the club will be the real losers out of this.

Really if you feel you have something positive to contribute to the club you could offer your insight to the current board. If you feel said advice is being ignored or they are/have treated you badly; form a viable alternative ticket or back one (apparently the local Girl Guides chapter has outstanding corporate governance).

But let's also not whitewash history & have a look at some of the factors which lead to the ascension of the perceived boys club. In 2007 the then Gardner board involved Jim Stynes (in the initial stages) & Garry Lyon in the selection process to appoint a new coach. Chris Connolly was also interviewed for the position (funny how they're "revered club legends" when they're useful but a bunch of out of line "liniment sniffers" when they have the cheek to usurp others into a position of power).

After failing to land the head coaching gig Chris Connolly is parachuted into the position of Football Operations Manager (presumably as a consolation prize) - ignoring a separate panel's recommendation that former Hawthorn coach Peter Schwab assume the position.

On rolls 2008 & the Gardner board appoints Paul McNamee as CEO to replace Steve Harris. This strategic direction leads to alarm bells ringing at the AFL & sets in place a chain of events that leads to the ascension of the Stynes board, the sacking of McNamee & the AFL's backed hiring of Cameron Schwab as CEO.

So if the Stynes/McLardy board is the route of all of the club's evils what does that say about some of previous board's actions & decisions in 07/08 which lead to the AFL backed putsch?

Most of this criticism of the current board is overly negative bordering on destructive. Is clearly personal & AGENDA driven. It's all dirty political point scoring.

Describing a man whose board presided over the eradication of $5m worth of debt, increased sponsorship & revenue streams as well as vastly improved strategic relationships with the MCC & AFL as merely "a dying cult hero & his mates" is clearly political mudslinging. As is the baseless accusation that he knowingly accepted illegal payments as a player as is the other agenda driven bile, bias & [censored] slung on this thread.

Superbly put.

Your priorities have always been:

1st. your online image

2nd. Stynes/Schwab

3rd. the MFC.

I am pretty much the opposite.

Loose definition of 'pretty much'...

1. Defend the Gardner board at all cost over the last couple of years

2. ????

3. A (Gardner-led?) MFC

Of the 600 odd posts of yours I reckon 90% would surround the incompetence of this board or the defence of previous board from those that say it's incompetent.

That and how unfairly you are treated on the big, bad internet...

All this is just entrenching that to which you hate so much.

I said in another thread that for us to escape without penalty the absolution of those in charge will save the club from sanction.

Individuals don't get punished, clubs do.

For the MFC to escape so must CC, CS, and DM.

It has to be made quite simple to all and sundry...that to take us on for this.... is but to drink of the Poisoned Chalice !!

The situation was not of our making and we shall not be condemned for it.

We were accused of not standing for much, well we certainly ought not stand for this. This is BS with capitals !!

could I please request the mods move all tanking related threads to a separate sub-forum?

could I please request the mods move all tanking related threads to a separate sub-forum?

What they will do is delete dee-luded's 'scattergun' (thanks Barrett) approach to thread making.

Baby steps mate. You're getting there.

I am not pleased to see my club being put through the ringer but my view is with the way things have been going, something like this was always going to have to happen before things got better.

I will admit that I will be pleased if the current admin get thrown out as a result of this latest stuff up and I think this would be in the long term interests of the club.

In my view, the best chance we have of preventing our club from being completely crippled is for the guilty parties to go to the AFL, offer their resignations and try to figure out a way to contain the damage. Justice will need to have been seen to have been served and, even if it is only for symbolic reasons, heads will have to roll before our club will be able to move past this. Unfortunately, the egos involved make this unlikely in my estimation. Schwab has never been able to put the club's interests before his own and he is obsessed with his legacy. I have no doubt that his preference would be to waste club resources by becoming embroiled in legal action designed to preserve his personal reputation regardless of the cost to the club. The consequences of this would be dire.

I will also admit to a certain amount of guilty "I told you so" feelings. Maybe this makes me a bad person but if people like you had ever bothered to listen to my concerns about corporate governance and accountability at the club instead of personally attacking me out of your misplaced faith in our totally incompetent Board, maybe we wouldn't be in this situation.

Your priorities have always been:

1st. your online image

2nd. Stynes/Schwab

3rd. the MFC.

I am pretty much the opposite.

Bit like yourself.

How naïve are you, do you really think that they AFL will be happy with a couple of resignations?

Get your head out of your ass they will want blood and lots of it and we will be hit with monetary penalties, draft penalties and several of the club’s administrators/employees will have to go. Then there will be any outside action that may be taken by the State Government if they decide to step in and accuse us of flouting gambling laws.

If you think we are an unpopular place for prospective recruits just wait until this [censored] hits the wall. If we retain any sponsors we will be lucky but I guess we could get someone, maybe Paul McNamee to return and completely finish us off.

I did and which club is Kennett President of?

Hawthorn

Hawthorn

EPIC FAIL

The Club > The Board

Andrew Newbold - President

Andrew Newbold is a lawyer with over 20 years experience in practicing law.

He was a founding Director of a renewable energy business which he sold to Origin Energy at the beginning of 2009. Since that time, Newbold has been pursuing a variety of business interests.

Andrew has served on the Hawthorn Board since 2003. He was instrumental in negotiating the Club's move to Waverley Park and was elected as President in 2011, succeeding Jeff Kennett.

Hawthorn

Take another guess.

Hawthorn

He was. Ain't no more.

Attention starved big mouth now.

Hawthorn

Better check that.

could I please request the mods move all tanking related threads to a separate sub-forum?

No, we'll just have the bare minimum.

Ok, so how did the disgruntled get that information and who's fault is that?

It's pretty easy to get hold of made-up facts...