All good points but irrelevant - we are not judging him on what he did outside the MFC - we are shining the spotlight at what he did during his time as President and his recent comments as Ex President regarding the club. I dont think it is unfair to acknowledge that someone succeeded in most areas of his life but in another area he was found wanting.

Edit: I just read BH's post and tend to agree that whilst I am not privvy to all his work as President each time he opened his mouth ... ughh ... culminating in his spirited defense of his presidency in the papers late last year and distancing himself from any wrongdoing - these comments were apparently done according to some with the best interests of the club at heart.

If you had actually followed the thread, I responded to another poster who made an uninformed slur on Gardiner that he did the Oxfam walk to add a footnote to his CV and self aggrandisement. Given he was already Chairman of the Australian arm of global advertising agency (which he has recently retired from) he had no need to touch up the CV. And given he had been awarded an AM for his services to the community his Oxfam efforts were just one of a long line of service.

And I agree that you are not privy to all his work as President.

If you had actually followed the thread, I responded to another poster who made an uninformed slur on Gardiner that he did the Oxfam walk to add a footnote to his CV and self aggrandisement. Given he was already Chairman of the Australian arm of global advertising agency (which he has recently retired from) he had no need to touch up the CV. And given he had been awarded an AM for his services to the community his Oxfam efforts were just one of a long line of service.

And I agree that you are not privy to all his work as President.

You need to read more closely Rhino.

I said he took on the presidency for his own self aggrandisement.

Not good with details..?

You need to read more closely Rhino.

I said he took on the presidency for his own self aggrandisement.

Well its hardly earth shattering news uf that is the case. Given is a time consuming unpaid role he is in the same boat as any number of current and past AFL Presidents. Shock horror Stynes included. Its does not diminish the level of commitment required and applied to the role.

Well its hardly earth shattering news uf that is the case. Given is a time consuming unpaid role he is in the same boat as any number of current and past AFL Presidents. Shock horror Stynes included. Its does not diminish the level of commitment required and applied to the role.

Quite the contrary.

If I myself were to take one the presidency, self aggrandisement would not be a factor.

My sole desire would be for the club to find security, then following that to prosper as much as physically possible.

I think many others would feel the same, and JS did.

I don't think that was PG's motivation.

I don't think that was PG's motivation.

What makes you think you can attribute "motivation" to Paul Gardner? Have you discussed this with him or even met him?

What makes you think you can attribute "motivation" to Paul Gardner? Have you discussed this with him or even met him?

i spoke to Bev O'Connor about it at the time...she had a fair idea.

It's an easy thing to do. Attribute a motive to someone, without knowing their business and personal circumstances. We might not agree with their actions or strategies, but none of us have a right to question what lies in someone's heart and mind.

Criticism is one of the easiest pastimes to undertake. Constructive remedy is much harder. More importantly, a remedy which is achievable, under business and financial circumstances as they may apply at any given time, is even harder.

i spoke to Bev O'Connor about it at the time...she had a fair idea.

Meaning........?????

Meaning........?????

the motivations of PG & the Football Club.

His template was to turm Melbourne Football Club into a big business. A corporation of sorts.

It had some merit. But as with everything it needed balance.

Too much of the club was sucked away. The place went cold.

Bev had worked on 3 Boards, she was on the pulse.

What makes you think you can attribute "motivation" to Paul Gardner? Have you discussed this with him or even met him?

It's obviously just the impression I get from the man.

Hence I said I didn't think so.

I've not discussed it with him.

I have met him once, but can't even remember where it was now.

I just got the feeling he was pompous and doing it for, once again, his own self aggrandisement.

I'm a keyboard hero, what did you expect?

It's a tough gig, I admit.

I'm loathe to think what people would think of me, or who else could possibly be good for the role.

And it's not the worst accusation in the world - I'm sure Jeff Kennet did the same.

I would make an absolutely fantastic president

but i wouldn't have the time for it and demonland

It's obviously just the impression I get from the man.

Hence I said I didn't think so.

I've not discussed it with him.

I have met him once, but can't even remember where it was now.

I just got the feeling he was pompous and doing it for, once again, his own self aggrandisement.

I'm a keyboard hero, what did you expect?

It's a tough gig, I admit.

I'm loathe to think what people would think of me, or who else could possibly be good for the role.

And it's not the worst accusation in the world - I'm sure Jeff Kennet did the same.

I think it's a very harsh judgement. He was a no name director on the Szondy Board and put in a lot of time and effort (albeit Szondy's Board was the worst in my memory). He then picked up the pieces when Szondy did a runner and worked extraordinarily hard. I'm sure there were a number of things that influenced his decision to take the position but I think to claim it was for "his own self aggrandisement" is quite insulting really.

I think all Club Presidents enjoy some self aggrandisement. It is a seat of power that is in the news year round.

Nobody is saying PG did not work hard but by the time Jim Stynes took over the place was in freefall.

The change had to come.

I think it is very easy to sit in judgement of past and current boards......I am not a business man and do not possess the knowledge or desire to be so.......I believe that all people who run/are on boards have the desire to bring new ideas and processes for the club to be sucessful........They put in a lot of hours of hard work without pay and all for the betterment of the club..

Yes they make mistakes.....Who doesn't......but you can't condem them for having a go.......Can you?????

I think all Club Presidents enjoy some self aggrandisement. It is a seat of power that is in the news year round.

Nobody is saying PG did not work hard but by the time Jim Stynes took over the place was in freefall.

The change had to come.

Jim Stynes and self-aggrandisement is a contradiction in terms. Self deprecating maybe. Yes, thank goodness for Jimma. As the saying goes, cometh the hour, cometh the man. That was our Jimma.

the

Jim Stynes and self-aggrandisement is a contradiction in terms. Self deprecating maybe. Yes, thank goodness for Jimma. As the saying goes, cometh the hour, cometh the man. That was our Jimma.

Big Jimma did things differently to anyone else.

Jim bought emotion back into the MFC. How else could we have cleared that ballooning debt.

Which then allowed the club to leave the antique shop (The junction Oval)

Pity we did not take the Lexus Center Site, that was a jump we should have taken. Yes it would have cost a lot...but success aint ever cheap.

AAMI Park should tide us over till the Docklands site is sorted.

I think it is very easy to sit in judgement of past and current boards......I am not a business man and do not possess the knowledge or desire to be so.

Precisely.

It is easy but it's also necessary that boards are accountable to the members. Too often in the past, football club boards have avoided scrutiny by the members but in this modern age of computer technology, Internet, face book, twitter etc. it's becoming harder and harder to sweep things under the carpet. At the same time, it's so much easier for people to make broad statements about the conduct of such boards without providing the proof or hold different people to different standards.

I wonder whether we're better off as a result?