New CEO - Gary Pert

[Wells 11 5,011]

well,  at the very least,  I think she galvanised us behind him. 

[rjay 24,206]

I don't see anything particularly wrong with the article. We can be a thin skinned mob at times.

I am however p....off that ex board members seem to want to open their mouths again. To me they are total non entities after what they stood by and watch happen.

There are misgivings about Pert from around the football community it seems and that's ok, as Caro says PJ didn't leave EFC with a clean skin.

I'm not so sure about whether this Murphy fellow is a good or bad endorsement of anyone. That enquiry seemed a bit of a put up job and there was only ever 1 real boss at Collingwood, he escaped any real criticism.

My personal feeling is that Bartlett has felt a bit left out in the rebuild and has been seen as a figurehead. There were rumblings about the relationship between him and PJ a few years back.

PJ liked to run the ship and he ran it well. To turn something around like he has with our club there really needs to be only one person in charge...it can't be done by committee.

Now, someone like Bartlett doesn't get to where he is in life without a substantial ego to go with it. Now was his chance, he couldn't move on PJ or whilst PJ was in the job as he had way too many credits in the bank.

I've never met Bartlett but watching from a far I can't say I'm a fan. He doesn't seem to engage with the supporter group from what I've seem, maybe I'm wrong here.

I just hope he doesn't let his ego get in the way and this appointment works well.

Pity it was time for PJ to retire, another few years would have been good for us but I have a feeling not so good for Bartlett and his board.

 

[daisycutter 28,730]

51 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Other journos have written the same stuff so not sure why folks here are gunning for Caro.  I'll reserve judgement on the content.  

At least we know the 5th candidate:  Sam Graham - the AFL's candidate it seems.  Looks to have a decent CV.

One thing in the article that makes me uneasy is if Bartlett is "...determined to take a more active and vocal role in running the club."   On my experience that sure ain't a President's nor a Board's job.  A Board's role is to set strategy and policies and to establish corporate governance processes to make sure strategies and policies happen and to know when they don't happen.  But if a Board has the right people in place it should trust them (CEO etc) to run the organisation; that is their job. 

The President and the Board getting overly involved in management and football matters is exactly what went wrong at Collingwood.  I really hope Caro has it wrong about Bartlett's intentions.

and that's the problem with many of caro's "expose" type articles

it's mostly impossible to separate facts from the opinions, falsehoods and innuendos

[MT64 1,130]

On 6/22/2018 at 6:38 PM, Sir Why You Little said:

I was outside and couldn’t get in. 

A Black Night was that one

I got in after watching the Dali Lama drive past. Busy night in old Melbourne town.

[Demon Disciple 11,246]

Caro is just trying to get us back on track and get us up for a win this weekend. We always come out and play a good game after someone/thing at the club has been criticised during the week.

 

[Roost It 1,434]

The article appears totally pointless. On one hand it praises him for helping the Pies winning a  Premiership. Then it cmans him for undisclosed  reasons inferring some conspiracy. It’s a really poor article in that it’s so scarce of facts. Tell us Caro, why exactly did he get removed. I’d say because after 11 years of running the biggest club in the land his time was done. Not unlike Maguires who just can’t se the writing on the wall. Whether it be the right decision or not Caro has little idea about any of Perts abilities to lead this club. I just can’t see the point Caro!

Edited June 29, 2018 by Roost It

[Gator 16,921]

Clearly, I think differently to other people.

I thought the article was well written and very informative.  It gave me a walk through what key personnel and stakeholders were thinking, as well as what they did and didn't do.

I like to be informed about my club, not kept in the dark, and I'm more aware for having read it.  

I also didn't feel there was any bias, just reporting of events, as well as inferences, which goes with the territory when you're tying together perspectives from all angles of those with competing interests.

This Board has runs on the board so I'll back the appointment, although it appears not all due diligence has been as thorough as one would have liked.  I also would have liked some input from Jackson whether that is considered de rigueur or not.

Edited June 29, 2018 by ProDee

[Dr. Gonzo 22,869]

I wish the ex-board members, coteries etc would support instead of undermine. A key reason we've been a shambles for 5 decades.

I have no issue with the pies getting rid of Pert, did anyone really think Eddie would commission a review that called for his removal? Something had to give and it wasn't Eddie or Bucks. Similarly with the Malthouse/Bucks succession did Pert mishandle it or was he given a poison chalice to manage by Eddie?

Not saying Pert hasn't had his flaws or even that he was the right choice but those two factors don't worry me.

Edited June 29, 2018 by Dr. Gonzo

[Satyriconhome 10,098]

2 hours ago, rjay said:

I don't see anything particularly wrong with the article. We can be a thin skinned mob at times.

I am however p....off that ex board members seem to want to open their mouths again. To me they are total non entities after what they stood by and watch happen.

There are misgivings about Pert from around the football community it seems and that's ok, as Caro says PJ didn't leave EFC with a clean skin.

I'm not so sure about whether this Murphy fellow is a good or bad endorsement of anyone. That enquiry seemed a bit of a put up job and there was only ever 1 real boss at Collingwood, he escaped any real criticism.

My personal feeling is that Bartlett has felt a bit left out in the rebuild and has been seen as a figurehead. There were rumblings about the relationship between him and PJ a few years back.

PJ liked to run the ship and he ran it well. To turn something around like he has with our club there really needs to be only one person in charge...it can't be done by committee.

Now, someone like Bartlett doesn't get to where he is in life without a substantial ego to go with it. Now was his chance, he couldn't move on PJ or whilst PJ was in the job as he had way too many credits in the bank.

I've never met Bartlett but watching from a far I can't say I'm a fan. He doesn't seem to engage with the supporter group from what I've seem, maybe I'm wrong here.

I just hope he doesn't let his ego get in the way and this appointment works well.

Pity it was time for PJ to retire, another few years would have been good for us but I have a feeling not so good for Bartlett and his board.

 

This is Caroline Wilson

I have, he is approachable at functions etc, it's just supporters don't approach, always seems to have the best intentions for the Club

[Moonshadow 16,673]

I thought it a good article, assuming what she writes is accurate. There's a lot in there that I wasn't aware of, some of it unfortunate.

What concerns me is the separation of PJ from the selection process. He has more knowledge of how to run an AFL club that the whole board put together. Also, the lack of contact with some of the key people during Pert's time at Collingwood seems to defy due diligence by the board.

And lol to posters playing the (wo)man rather than the ball.

Edited June 29, 2018 by Moonshadow

[daisycutter 28,730]

i was always taught to play the woman not the man, moonie

[beelzebub 22,800]

Something , i at least , always keep in mind with CW is she has deep family links across this game.She feels the 'wronging' that's supposedly been endured and whenever possible has a sly dig in retaliation.

Its a shame as she does often have an interesting insight. I just find myself often questioning her motive or cause celebre. 

 

[Satyriconhome 10,098]

14 minutes ago, Moonshadow said:

I thought it a good article, assuming what she writes is accurate. There's a lot in there that I wasn't aware of, some of it unfortunate.

What concerns me is the separation of PJ from the selection process. He has more knowledge of how to run an AFL club that the whole board put together. Also, the lack of contact with some of the key people during Pert's time at Collingwood seems to defy due diligence by the board.

And lol to posters playing the (wo)man rather than the ball.

This is Wilson, she has form, half of it is unsubstantiated rumour, as you can see, as per norm, she doesn't name names

Normal business doesn't get the outgoing CEO to tick off the incoming

[rjay 24,206]

51 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

it's just supporters don't approach,

Maybe he should approach them...interesting idea I know but I think it's his responsibility, not the other way around.

That's what made Ian Dicker such an important figure at Hawthorn, he galvanised the supporters.

[Binmans PA 26,874]

Nothing wrong with Wilson's article. 

But let's wait and see. She's in the business of breaking news and is trying to here. 

SWYL, you're happy to stick the boots in about our onfield performance, but then not open to the possibility that the Pert appointment is a bad decision.

I'm on the fence as I've no inside details and he hasn't even started at the club, so I'll reserve judgement a while longer yet.

Edited June 29, 2018 by A F

[Moonshadow 16,673]

29 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

This is Wilson, she has form, half of it is unsubstantiated rumour, as you can see, as per norm, she doesn't name names

Normal business doesn't get the outgoing CEO to tick off the incoming

As I said, lol posters playing the man. Wilson named plenty of people. If you read it for what is says without rose coloured, anti-Caro glasses, there are clearly some concerning issues in the appointment process.

Comparing an AFL club with a "normal business" is ridiculous. It's similar to posters comparing player payments with what they'd get in the 'real world'. Apples and oranges. Jackson being involved in the selection process, as opposed to "ticking off the incoming" CEO, makes perfect sense, unless of course, you don't respect or trust PJs opinion. I certainly do.

 

[bluey 931]

Poorly written article, with no factual information, as if the G man is still pulling strings behind the scenes at the MFC, second time in two weeks she has drawn that scenorio, (Ed has met with Billy G and they have agreed to share Queens birthday) must be more half wits around then I thought if that  make believe is journalism..

 

 

 

[Sir Why You Little 35,395]

46 minutes ago, A F said:

Nothing wrong with Wilson's article. 

But let's wait and see. She's in the business of breaking news and is trying to here. 

SWYL, you're happy to stick the boots in about our onfield performance, but then not open to the possibility that the Pert appointment is a bad decision. I'm on the fence as I've no inside details and he hasn't even started at the club, so I'll reserve judgement a while longer yet.

I have no idea if Pert’s appointment is the right one or not, neither does Wilson. 

But he certainly has an excellent CV. 

11 years running The Filth would not be easy at all. They won a flag, should have been back to back and Membership rose by 40,000+ in his time

Revenue would have gone up, hotels aside. 

So i just feel Wilson has gone early on someone who hasn’t said a word. 

Worked with journo’s like her 20 years ago. 

They go early and “create” pressure

Wilson always has an agenda. 

Edited June 29, 2018 by Sir Why You Little

[Binmans PA 26,874]

1 hour ago, Moonshadow said:

I thought it a good article, assuming what she writes is accurate. There's a lot in there that I wasn't aware of, some of it unfortunate.

What concerns me is the separation of PJ from the selection process. He has more knowledge of how to run an AFL club that the whole board put together. Also, the lack of contact with some of the key people during Pert's time at Collingwood seems to defy due diligence by the board.

And lol to posters playing the (wo)man rather than the ball.

I can see a legitimate reason for keeping PJ out of it though. One man is not a club. I would have consulted him, but I suspect there are many who wouldn't in that situation. If you want to forge a new direction ahead, a fresh slate in the selection process makes enough sense.

My one concern about the article is Barlett's ego. I'd much prefer him as a figurehead. But, as previously mentioned, I'll reserve judgement on Pert's appointment until a later date.

Edited June 29, 2018 by A F

[Moonshadow 16,673]

10 minutes ago, A F said:

I can see a legitimate reason for keeping PJ out of it though. One man is not a club. I would have consulted him, but I suspect there are many who wouldn't in that situation. If you want to forge a new direction ahead, a fresh slate in the selection process makes enough sense.

My one concern about the article is Barlett's ego. I'd much prefer him as a figurehead. But, as previously mentioned, I'll reserve judgement on Pert's appointment until a later date.

I too would've consulted PJ. The guy is an open book. I highly doubt he wouldn't put the club's interests first or let ego get in the way. 

Pert's appointment may be a master stroke, but to me it sounds like the process could've been handled better. That Bartlett read the landscape wrong is evidence of this.

[Demons1858 1,667]

Just perception but never felt Bartlett appreciated Peter Jackson talking about the old and new Melbourne boards when he arrived. From afar it seemed like Jackson (with the strong support of the afl) probably ran his own show which for the most part has been a success but has not totally been forgotten

[Satyriconhome 10,098]

3 hours ago, rjay said:

Maybe he should approach them...interesting idea I know but I think it's his responsibility, not the other way around.

That's what made Ian Dicker such an important figure at Hawthorn, he galvanised the supporters.

That was my first conversation, approached at training, rock and a hard place, says and does too much is then interfering 

[Satyriconhome 10,098]

3 hours ago, Moonshadow said:

As I said, lol posters playing the man. Wilson named plenty of people. If you read it for what is says without rose coloured, anti-Caro glasses, there are clearly some concerning issues in the appointment process.

Comparing an AFL club with a "normal business" is ridiculous. It's similar to posters comparing player payments with what they'd get in the 'real world'. Apples and oranges. Jackson being involved in the selection process, as opposed to "ticking off the incoming" CEO, makes perfect sense, unless of course, you don't respect or trust PJs opinion. I certainly do.

 

Sorry chap the administrative side is a buisness we have CEO, CFO and COO, not sure which bit confuses you

Wilson did not name the 'influential' Melbourne 'supporters' so rumour

I asked PJ would he be ticking off the appointment before it was announced and straight out 'to a supporter' he said no, a board decision, why I find the article a load of [censored]

[puntkick 325]

7 hours ago, rjay said:

Maybe he should approach them...interesting idea I know but I think it's his responsibility, not the other way around.

That's what made Ian Dicker such an important figure at Hawthorn, he galvanised the supporters.

Not only is Ian Dicker an important figure at Hawthorn he is an architect of Victorian Aussie Rules Football

As president of his club and all others he stood against the AFL to wipeout Waverley and got rewarded with a $1 ownership of the joint to shut him up

From there Hawthorn has prospered

Today he is the background of the Frankston Dolphins revival attempt

Ian Dicker deserves AFL LEGENDS status 

[Jack Russell 80]

13 hours ago, daisycutter said:

and that's the problem with many of caro's "expose" type articles

it's mostly impossible to separate facts from the opinions, falsehoods and innuendos

This article has no facts - its a terrible shame as it throws shade on good people who actually have done the work - not just been good at promoting their own brand - this article is designed to cause the  this type of noise