Django.. Fair enough but this ain't funny anymore. The club I love is bashed up daily and I am sick to death of it.

I have suggested this before, come in and ring around the members, we had 29 re join again last night, not everybody believes what is written in the media, people still believe and have faith....why waver now

I am expecting a white knight to surface, someone will come in and unite the club. It could be a very highly regarded, and significantly wealthy businessman who recently sold his business and I am told is considering the challenge. Time will tell.

In the language of Japanese the same word is used for disaster as opportunity. "Kiken".

I certainly hope we do not take the" White Knight "option. It's time for us to stop relying on the generosity of wealthy individuals to survive as a club and to stand as our own entity.

I reckon the ultimate warrior could lift our fortunes. Would do alright on a half back flank, running through the square at the centre bounce taking out a couple...

Make it happen Jason Taylor.

I will try and be constructive on this topic not like a lot of buffoons who just post rubbish.

Firstly, it will be very difficult or any reasonable person to have confidence in Don Mclardy and the administration at this time. I challenge anyone who thinks Don and his team are in control of this whole saga, they are all drowning and seem incapable of convincing anyone of their ability to turn it around.

Don - I am a paid member and no longer believe you are the person to run this club. I do not trust those in charge and the media does not trust those in charge. The weight of opinion is against you Don.

I have faith in DM.

Alot of people are being narrow minded on their performance.

There have been a alot of positives and sure alot of negatives, but half of those negatives are just media rubbish:

1) We were found not guilty of tanking - but we still get trashed like we did (see CW's first article after the AFL presser "Dees guilty of tanking", cheeky article which went to say "Dees" as in DB and CC but didnt mention the club was found not guilty)

2) Affiliation with Dank - ABC stressed we had taken nothing illegal, just that we werent transparent with the AFL and juding from most DLer's posts that is a worry about reporting standards but nothing to cry about, again because day to day activities are not their concern.

I think they have done alot of good, and sure as I had a debate with Dr. Gonzo the other day - he is right - stuff like EnergyWatch could have been avoided and was their fault.

Please dont take it upon yourself to speak on behalf of all the supporters.

Edited April 23, 201312 yr by PJ_12345

Another one of these threads, even I'm getting bored of them and I'm a major contributor to them.

Here is my 2 cents:

Board hasn't had a good 12-18 months. The appointment of CS was a disaster (which admittedly is easy to see in hindsight, but none the less that fact remains).

I am not advocating at all for a board dismissal. I do think we should create an environment around the club that welcomes new ideas and people into the board because I don't think they should be pardoned for where we stand. Most of them have 5 years in their current positions.

I said this the other day to someone but I think it's relevant here. Out current board were put in place by the big fella with him as their leader. He had clear roles for them at the time and obviously what's happened since has literally left them without a skipper. I think Don has done his best but the fact remains that recent results speak for themselves.

I think the club should appoint a new President but Don should stay on so that the club has unity. Will the egos involved allow this to happen? Who knows. It's a tough one.

I do want those that are contemplating a run to know that they will have support should they put their hand up. I think that's at least a start.

Just a point on the Board, have a read of the Club website, the majority of the Board have not been in position for 5 years, another non fact, the Board has had at least one new member per year since 2008.

Again check your facts just don't follow

CS is no longer in the building. You also believe that the interim CEO was appointed by the AFL. If that's the case, do you believe that anyone will escape his critical review of the club?

Don't get me wrong, I'm an advocate of change, but I just don't understand what good would come of sacking the board at this stage.

some of the board may survive. Some won't.

What i am saying is the dynamic is wrong.

Don's speech from last sunday reeked of a desperate man on the slide.

I am not calling for change just for change sake.

I believe we need better equipped people to run our club.

some of the board may survive. Some won't.

What i am saying is the dynamic is wrong.

Don's speech from last sunday reeked of a desperate man on the slide.

I am not calling for change just for change sake.

I believe we need better equipped people to run our club.

One of your best WYL......you would know about desperation surely?

What dynamic?

Again..... who?

Just a point on the Board, have a read of the Club website, the majority of the Board have not been in position for 5 years, another non fact, the Board has had at least one new member per year since 2008.

Again check your facts just don't follow

Actually I based by research on the Financial Report of the club from 2012. It reads like this...

McLardy - 2008

Jalland - 2008

Spargo - 2008

Grimshaw - 2008

Hayes - 2006

Howcroft - 2008

Thurin - 2008

Trotter - 2010

Sugar Healy - 2012

and then Geoff Freeman was added recently (perhaps that should read ominously instead of recently).

I'd say 7 out of 10 would constitute 'most'.

I don't want to argue with you. I think you do great things for the footy club mate. I just think some more new blood would create a new energy and a little more belief from the members.

some of the board may survive. Some won't.

What i am saying is the dynamic is wrong.

Don's speech from last sunday reeked of a desperate man on the slide.

I am not calling for change just for change sake.

I believe we need better equipped people to run our club.

But surely this will come out during the review? What will we get out of any change before the review has been finished, let alone before the interim CEO has set a foot inside the building (Doesn't he start May 1st)?

But surely this will come out during the review? What will we get out of any change before the review has been finished, let alone before the interim CEO has set a foot inside the building (Doesn't he start May 1st)?

i am happy to have the review from an outside source. Bring it on.

Doesn't change how i feel about decisions made over the last 12-18 months.

If the board survive long term i would be amazed. But i do know i am only 1 voter.

One of your best WYL......you would know about desperation surely?

What dynamic?

Again..... who?

Keep up the Blind Faith Saty...you do a fine job.

Actually I based by research on the Financial Report of the club from 2012. It reads like this...

McLardy - 2008

Jalland - 2008

Spargo - 2008

Grimshaw - 2008

Hayes - 2006

Howcroft - 2008

Thurin - 2008

Trotter - 2010

Sugar Healy - 2012

and then Geoff Freeman was added recently (perhaps that should read ominously instead of recently).

I'd say 7 out of 10 would constitute 'most'.

I don't want to argue with you. I think you do great things for the footy club mate. I just think some more new blood would create a new energy and a little more belief from the members.

I depends on who is reading and who interprets, that is my point 'most' becomes 'all' which becomes unhelpful, as Jack Jack has said why are we having the review?.....because the Board who are supposedly protecting their positions feel it is warranted, again interpretation.........topic/thread/post which do nothing except perpetuating half truths/rumours/innuendo/hearsay and downright lies

I depends on who is reading and who interprets, that is my point 'most' becomes 'all' which becomes unhelpful, as Jack Jack has said why are we having the review?.....because the Board who are supposedly protecting their positions feel it is warranted, again interpretation.........topic/thread/post which do nothing except perpetuating half truths/rumours/innuendo/hearsay and downright lies

What??

Bert Chadwick??

Keep up the Blind Faith Saty...you do a fine job.

You really are a sad case aren't you WYL, I asked you specific questions and as per usual you didn't answer them.

You seem incapable of reading my posts correctly.

I do not have blind faith, the only thing I want put in front of me are facts.

Once I have facts I make my own decisions.

At the moment we do not have any facts, simple really

But sit behind your keyboard and keep banging on and on repeating the same tired old lines, that way we don't miss Rangey's insightful posts so much, did he leave you the script?

I don' want or particularly seek praise for the volunteering I do, I use it as a tool to show that we are speaking constantly to members/supportes and we are not Club staff, but supporters and we get to hear what supporters/members really think, and I hate to tell you this WYL but you are in the minority.

Most of them are the same, yes they want a few questions answered, but they are willing to wait to see what the result of the many investigations are before passling judgement

I'll give you a clear example, I didn't think the sacking of Cam Schwab was warranted, but it happened and I understood why, so I have moved on, simple really

Try it, you may find it a bit more rewarding than the negativity that seems to hang like a black cloud over you at the moment

This is just footy after all

I depends on who is reading and who interprets, that is my point 'most' becomes 'all' which becomes unhelpful, as Jack Jack has said why are we having the review?.....because the Board who are supposedly protecting their positions feel it is warranted, again interpretation.........topic/thread/post which do nothing except perpetuating half truths/rumours/innuendo/hearsay and downright lies

Youre clutching at straws with your definition of 'most' and 'all'.

Most: in the greatest quantity, amount, measure, degree, or number [7/10 board members is most]

All: the whole number of (used in referring to individuals or particulars, taken collectively) [he didnt say all, as in 10/10 board members]

Just because you interpret something one way doesnt mean youre right.

Edited April 23, 201312 yr by PJ_12345

Just because you interpret something one way doesnt mean youre right.

Evidently that's far too logical a point for this thread.

You really are a sad case aren't you WYL, I asked you specific questions and as per usual you didn't answer them.

You seem incapable of reading my posts correctly.

I do not have blind faith, the only thing I want put in front of me are facts.

Once I have facts I make my own decisions.

At the moment we do not have any facts, simple really

But sit behind your keyboard and keep banging on and on repeating the same tired old lines, that way we don't miss Rangey's insightful posts so much, did he leave you the script?

I don' want or particularly seek praise for the volunteering I do, I use it as a tool to show that we are speaking constantly to members/supportes and we are not Club staff, but supporters and we get to hear what supporters/members really think, and I hate to tell you this WYL but you are in the minority.

Most of them are the same, yes they want a few questions answered, but they are willing to wait to see what the result of the many investigations are before passling judgement

I'll give you a clear example, I didn't think the sacking of Cam Schwab was warranted, but it happened and I understood why, so I have moved on, simple really

Try it, you may find it a bit more rewarding than the negativity that seems to hang like a black cloud over you at the moment

This is just footy after all

i have clearly stated my reasons for losing faith in the board on numerous occasions.

Re hiring CS twice before he was removed is a good start.

But you just do not wish to listen.

If i am in the minority at this point so be it.

That is not a reason to change thoughts.

But you keep the happy face on..."Nothing to see here..."

Actually I based by research on the Financial Report of the club from 2012. It reads like this...

McLardy - 2008

Jalland - 2008

Spargo - 2008

Grimshaw - 2008

Hayes - 2006

Howcroft - 2008

Thurin - 2008

Trotter - 2010

Sugar Healy - 2012

and then Geoff Freeman was added recently (perhaps that should read ominously instead of recently).

I'd say 7 out of 10 would constitute 'most'.

I don't want to argue with you. I think you do great things for the footy club mate. I just think some more new blood would create a new energy and a little more belief from the members.

I'm an advocate for DM and the current board but I did a bit of research on what you said and found some interesting stuff regarding the length of CEO's and Presidents:

• Longest President: Blair (1929 - 1946) 18 years, during which 3 premerships were won
• Longest CEO: Cardwell (1951 - 1975) 25 years, during which 6 premerships were won
• Longest Coach: Smith (1952 - 1967) 16 years, during which 6 premerships were won

• No president or CEO has served longer than 5 years since the last premership in 1964
• Only coach to last more than 5 years since the last premership in 1964 was Daniher (1998 - 2007) 10 years

Edited April 23, 201312 yr by PJ_12345

I am expecting a white knight to surface, someone will come in and unite the club. It could be a very highly regarded, and significantly wealthy businessman who recently sold his business and I am told is considering the challenge. Time will tell.

In the language of Japanese the same word is used for disaster as opportunity. "Kiken".

Pedant alert:

危険 (kiken) in Japanese means danger. The word 機会 (kikai) means opportunity. 危機 (kiki) means crisis. It could be Mandarin you are thinking of. I have never heard kiken used in the context of a crisis/opportunity.

For the other part of your post, I won't dispute your mail.

<p>

I'm an advocate for DM and the current board but I did a bit of research on what you said and found some interesting stuff regarding the length of CEO's and Presidents:

• Longest President: Blair (1929 - 1946) 18 years, during which 3 premerships were won
• Longest CEO: Cardwell (1951 - 1975) 25 years, during which 3 premerships were won
• Longest Coach: Smith (1952 - 1967) 16 years, during which 6 premerships were won

• No president or CEO has served longer than 5 years since the last premership in 1964
• Only coach to last more than 5 years since the last premership in 1964 was Daniher (1998 - 2007) 10 years

Stability is the core yes, but only with the right people and dynamic.

If only Jim Cardwell was still with us.

I am expecting a white knight to surface, someone will come in and unite the club. It could be a very highly regarded, and significantly wealthy businessman who recently sold his business and I am told is considering the challenge. Time will tell.

In the language of Japanese the same word is used for disaster as opportunity. "Kiken".

I reckon it will happen also...

"Stability is the core yes"......so you want to make the Club unstable again by removing people, because in your opinion, and your opinion only, they are not the right people

I have not seen you espouse on what this 'dynamic' is, I read your posts carefully WYL, it helps me knock holes in them, only seen this today

On interpretation

My interpretations might be wrong, but I am not the only one who misinterprets, that is the point I am making, it doesn't matter what is said/written it can be interpreted a thousand ways..............that is why the modern 4th Estate is so successful at stirring [censored], a lot of what they write is full of ambiguity

Stability is the core yes, but only with the right people and dynamic.

If only Jim Cardwell was still with us.

Well said Yoda.

It was just an interesting observation - no president or CEO has lasted more than 5 years since our last premership. Interpret away you want!

Here is one for out of feild: Alot of people talk about organisational culture but fail to include the supporters, ie the stakeholders. You wonder what this high rate of executive turnover does to both organisational and supporter culture... particluarly the attitudes, norms and values of supporters.