New CEO

[dee-luded 2,959]

then that would be a breach of faith and contract

My impression is he's working for the AFL, between the lines.

I think, the way I've interpreted things after Vlads public offer of help, is just that.

[dee-luded 2,959]

Glenn Lovett could hardly count as from "inside the club" these days. It's been a decade and a half since he played at the club and judging by his career progression post footy, I doubt he's spent much time mucking around at the club. He'd be coming in with fresh eyes.

That said, he's probably out of our league anyway.

Its Not 'these days', Nasher,,, because you don't realise the culture problem has been poor for decades.

This is why you keep thinking in terms of these days,,, & "Bailey". Because you want to believe the culture was good before this... so when you were cheering around 2005-6 you want to believe in those teams, still...

the truth is its been putrid for a long long time, except for getting better, 85 - 93ish...

Glenn grew up at the club back then & may not see the problems/weaknesses that were there in his time seeing them as the 'norm'... but maybe were negatives compared to other clubs.

right now we cannot take that risk as we are desperate for change, we should use this drive to make thorough change.

We desperately need an Top Experienced Hand, who is now mature enough & seen enough to Not be swayed by influential people who have been around the Club thru the 'wrong days'.

We need a Cook to brew up a HotPot of his own creativity.

[Guest]

its nothing to do with giving people blasts, whats that?

he just couldn't build a club or a list, & the culture went soft before or around his time. & didn't get better after he finished up.

I'm not getting into this argument with you again dee-luded. You know my opinion and I don't wish to reply to your Alan Killigrew style ranting.

The culture going soft bit is the raving of a paper tiger. Anyone can be a faux tough guy but when these blokes actually have to implement a so called tough culture, they are exposed.

Edited April 25, 2013 by Guest

[daisycutter 29,707]

My impression is he's working for the AFL, between the lines.

I think, the way I've interpreted things after Vlads public offer of help, is just that.

so you think we have a ceo employed by the mfc who will report something to the afl which he won't report to the mfc board (your words)\

fantastic

corporate ethics gone to the dogs

[dee-luded 2,959]

Glenn Lovett could hardly count as from "inside the club" these days. It's been a decade and a half since he played at the club and judging by his career progression post footy, I doubt he's spent much time mucking around at the club. He'd be coming in with fresh eyes.

That said, he's probably out of our league anyway.

your not hearing me... Glenn came thru the mid to late 80's... the culture was getting better, but not perfect by a long way.

He would be used to how things Were/Have been done, & most likely will not understand where the club is lacking as a "Football Club". These are the problems which grow our failure, to breed a successful Club,,,, & Team.

This is where an Outside AFL CEO, should hopefully understand the needs of what this Club requires, to become strong, on & off the field.

& I think we see differently, the type role Glenn could be eventually, @ MelbourneFC.

I do Not see Glenn as an AFL CEO at all, with his credentials.

[dee-luded 2,959]

so you think we have a ceo employed by the mfc who will report something to the afl which he won't report to the mfc board (your words)\

fantastic

corporate ethics gone to the dogs

How do you know he's employed by Melbourne, & not been suggested by the AFL that we allow him to be the man.

[Little Goffy 14,636]

The fundamentals of the MFC are good, in as much as the moment the club is well run and the performance begins to improve on field, everything will be just great!

The supporters are the fundamentals!

Plus, the rise of the phoenix is always a marketable product!

I'd love the job, I'd back myself to do the necessary, challenge those who need to be 'settled' and get some momentum.

[dee-luded 2,959]

so you think we have a ceo employed by the mfc who will report something to the afl which he won't report to the mfc board (your words)\

fantastic

corporate ethics gone to the dogs

do you think we employed a ceo for 6 months?

when we already had a stand in from within.

[dee-luded 2,959]

The fundamentals of the MFC are good, in as much as the moment the club is well run and the performance begins to improve on field, everything will be just great!

The supporters are the fundamentals!

Plus, the rise of the phoenix is always a marketable product!

I'd love the job, I'd back myself to do the necessary, challenge those who need to be 'settled' and get some momentum.

I know we're are on the right track now, but the supporter rumblings were concerning, & could have returned us to being inward again. & wrecked the chance to change.

[Slartibartfast 17,518]

Judging by what I'm reading here, I think you have a story to tell about this but you're not telling so why not fill us in on what you know?

I've read what was said to be Dean Bailey's version of what happened at the vault and it differs markedly from the one attributed to the welfare officers and the recruiting person who had all been sacked by the club before they gave their evidence. I suppose you're suggesting Bailey lied?

So you've read a couple of versions and concluded one is a gross exaggeration. You actually wouldn't have a clue unless you were there so you either were there or you have made an unsupportable statement.

We all know it was the latter.

[Nasher 33,617]

your not hearing me... Glenn came thru the mid to late 80's... the culture was getting better, but not perfect by a long way.

I do Not see Glenn as an AFL CEO at all, with his credentials.

You have replied to the same post twice as if I said it twice. Whatever it is you are smoking, I suggest you stop.

[dee-luded 2,959]

You have replied to the same post twice as if I said it twice. Whatever it is you are smoking, I suggest you stop.

No I knew it when I posted the second time as I had more to say about it.

sorry I not a secretary Nash, nor work in offices, nor have any interest in that sort of thing. so if your annoyed at my untidy way, & different ways of communicating, then you no doubt will totally miss the point of what I'm saying.

and this is a big part of the clubs problems, worrying about the small stuff, & worrying about sour grapes, like refusing to seriously consider Sheedy or Matthews as a coach years back... out of spite no doubt...

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

The only source you have come up with is media speculation from the likes of Brian Taylor.

Cough up rhino, admit you are speculating or shut up.

I have never mentioned Taylor at all. I gave the references to get you going Daisy. Seems you concluded Vlad reports to MFC now. Well he must be a naughty boy then and the Club should take action.

They are "faceless" but by no means nameless Rhino.

Their day will come.

Go ahead Jack. Name them. Lets get past the smear and innuendo. How about completing what you promised when the tanking was over?

[The Great Pretender 473]

So you've read a couple of versions and concluded one is a gross exaggeration. You actually wouldn't have a clue unless you were there so you either were there or you have made an unsupportable statement.

We all know it was the latter.

Bollocks.

We were told after the outcome of the tanking investigation was announced that the senior counsel representing both the AFL and the MFC had given advice to their respective clients that a charge of tanking could not be sustained if it was taken to the Supreme Court. Those views were formed after reading the evidence of all of the witnesses in the case including the stories put forward by the disgruntled ex-employees. The fact that they gave short shrift to their stories suggests that the evidence of Bailey, Connolly etc. was given more weight.

Now what's this about you being privy to what Wilson and the AFL knew and what were their sources?

Edited April 25, 2013 by The Great Pretender

[The Great Pretender 473]

Go ahead Jack. Name them. Lets get past the smear and innuendo. How about completing what you promised when the tanking was over?

Were you awake over the last five years?

[Dee Fan 3,247]

Bollocks.

We were told after the outcome of the tanking investigation was announced that the senior counsel representing both the AFL and the MFC had given advice to their respective clients that a charge of tanking could not be sustained if it was taken to the Supreme Court. Those views were formed after reading the evidence of all of the witnesses in the case including the stories put forward by the disgruntled ex-employees. The fact that they gave short shrift to their stories suggests that the evidence of Bailey, Connolly etc. was given more weight.

Now what's this about you being privy to what Wilson and the AFL knew and what were their sources?

Connolly suggested that there were some at the club who were out to get him; I'd like to know who they are and what information they fed to the investigators.

[Whispering_Jack 30,576]

I have never mentioned Taylor at all. I gave the references to get you going Daisy. Seems you concluded Vlad reports to MFC now. Well he must be a naughty boy then and the Club should take action.

Go ahead Jack. Name them. Lets get past the smear and innuendo. How about completing what you promised when the tanking was over?

I now you're challenged in many ways Rhino and that you're used to browbeating posters here by putting words into their mouths but I previously put you above having a dismally poor moral compass.

I've already told Bagdad that the only thing that's keeping me from actually naming names is that I'm keeping a confidence but you don't want to understand that.

I have elsewhere revealed what I said I would about the tanking controversy and its connection with Caroline Wilson. Now bugger off and if you're really curious then why not ask Bagdad what he knew at the end of October about the extent of Wilson's knowledge and the extent of the AFL's knowledge and where he got his information from?

As far as the faceless men are concerned, I did say "their day will come" but since I haven't named them where's the smear and innuendo? In any event, I stand by what I said.

I suspect you might read their names in the media one day rather than get it from me but I will happily pass on their names when the right time comes.

[Demonland 73,125]

It seems that nobody is prepared to stay on topic.

Therefore, the thread is closed.