3 hours ago, Dees_In_October said:

If you're going to do something like this, that is, uninvite someone whose absence will be noticed and will likely report or their un-invitation, you need to be upfront about why you're doing so. Otherwise, speculation just runs rife about each side and everyone comes out of it looking worse. Either make a stand or don't, but pick one.

Your right, where do i send my F@#k Off to??

Where is the evidence that Bartlett is an excellent president, @Lucifer's Hero?

I have heard from multiple people that the Pert decision was a captains call and that he didn’t talk to anyone at Coll and without the AFL on board...

That is damning whether or not Pert works out. 

I hope for the best but I have zero trust in him. I have more trust in Jackson and the AFL coz they have runs on the board. Bartlett has simply been around during our renaissance.

This specific issue sounds petty and self defeating but I have larger concerns.

7 minutes ago, rpfc said:

Where is the evidence that Bartlett is an excellent president, @Lucifer's Hero?

I have heard from multiple people that the Pert decision was a captains call and that he didn’t talk to anyone at Coll and without the AFL on board...

That is damning whether or not Pert works out. 

I hope for the best but I have zero trust in him. I have more trust in Jackson and the AFL coz they have runs on the board. Bartlett has simply been around during our renaissance.

This specific issue sounds petty and self defeating but I have larger concerns.

What if Pert has pulled the plug for a very specific reason? And i don't know what, but i would be willing to make a guess that a river in  Australia has got something to do with it.

6 hours ago, drysdale demon said:

All she is, is another member of the media sewer rat pack.

Along with Mike Sheahan, the original sewer rat.
Gutter journos the pair.

Edited September 26, 20186 yr by Fork 'em

29 minutes ago, rpfc said:

Where is the evidence that Bartlett is an excellent president, @Lucifer's Hero?

I have heard from multiple people that the Pert decision was a captains call and that he didn’t talk to anyone at Coll and without the AFL on board...

That is damning whether or not Pert works out. 

I hope for the best but I have zero trust in him. I have more trust in Jackson and the AFL coz they have runs on the board. Bartlett has simply been around during our renaissance.

This specific issue sounds petty and self defeating but I have larger concerns.

I don't have much evidence, rfpc.  But it seemed a reasonable thought at about 7.00 this morning when I was still on my first espresso ? .  

To take your question a bit more seriously - he has been 'good' in the sense he has stayed largely in the background (or some would say that is where Jackson has kept him) which has enabled Jackson and co to get on with their jobs. 

However, if Bartlett plans a higher public profile he needs to do a lot of work on his PR and media presence.  Curtailing his defensiveness will help and as much as some on here don't like it, to 'play the game with media' folk, especially influential ones.  As yet I haven't seen many signs that he has much media savvy. 

Whether he continues to stay in the background is yet to be seen and I'm prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt.  But yes, I share your broader concerns.

Edited September 26, 20186 yr by Lucifer's Hero

11 minutes ago, willmoy said:

What if Pert has pulled the plug for a very specific reason? And i don't know what, but i would be willing to make a guess that a river in  Australia has got something to do with it.

Please explain ?

Has anyone actually confirmed the reason, or are we all just calling Bartlett churlish based purely on speculation.

2 minutes ago, Nasher said:

Has anyone actually confirmed the reason, or are we all just calling Bartlett churlish based purely on speculation.

 From unnamed sorthes.
Straight out of Caros play book.

 

Edited September 26, 20186 yr by Fork 'em

3 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Not much evidence, rfpc.  But it seemed a reasonable thought at about 7.00 this morning when I was still on my first espresso ? .  

To take your question a bit more seriously - he has been 'good' in the sense he has stayed largely in the background (or some would say that is where Jackson has kept him) which has enabled Jackson and co to get on with their jobs. 

However, if Bartlett plans a higher public profile he needs to do a lot of work on his PR and media presence.  Curtailing his defensiveness will help and as much as some on here don't like to 'play the game with the media' foll, especially influential ones.  As yet I haven't seen many signs that he has much media savvy. 

Whether he continues to stay in the background is yet to be seen and I'm prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt.  But yes, I share your broader concerns.

Frankly, his media presence is the least of the concerns.

Goodwin needed to become more approachable and likeable and reveal more of his personality because his brilliance and ability to coach was evident - but he was robotic and stagnant in his media appearances.

Bartlett doesn't have the luxury of evident brilliance and capability - he needs to demonstrate that. At the moment his accomplishments are 'existing' at the same time that Peter Jackson was at the club, making a eye-widening decision to go it alone on the decision around Jackson's replacement, and showing pettiness toward a journalist who did nothing more than point that out.

Obviously this is just my opinion but Bartlett is nowhere right now. I don't know him, and I don't trust him.

5 minutes ago, Nasher said:

Has anyone actually confirmed the reason, or are we all just calling Bartlett churlish based purely on speculation.

Caro said on FC last night that our Marketing Manager, Ryan Larkin rang her and the reason he gave for the ban was her Saturday article.  I need to look at FC again but I'm pretty sure he referred to her comment on lack of due diligence on the Pert appointment.

No-one from the club has come out and said otherwise, which I would expect if anything she said was inaccurate.

Edited September 26, 20186 yr by Lucifer's Hero

21 hours ago, Wolfturdo said:

Dumb statement. He’s done nothing wrong.

If people are still holding him to the Neeld thing I suggest they get over it.

and the Dean Bailey appointment

47 minutes ago, rpfc said:

Where is the evidence that Bartlett is an excellent president, @Lucifer's Hero?

I have heard from multiple people that the Pert decision was a captains call and that he didn’t talk to anyone at Coll and without the AFL on board...

That is damning whether or not Pert works out. 

I hope for the best but I have zero trust in him. I have more trust in Jackson and the AFL coz they have runs on the board. Bartlett has simply been around during our renaissance.

This specific issue sounds petty and self defeating but I have larger concerns.

To me a good board is one that ensures the right people are in the right positions and then get the hell out of the way.  Boards are never the only people that make companies or clubs or anything successful but they sure as hell can f$&@ them up.  So by that measure our board have been very good over the last 5 years. This specific issue just seems petty and self defeating but I can’t think of too many missteps over the last 5 years.  

Is the Pert appointment really a captains call?  I wouldn’t know but usually a Chairman has the final day on appointing a CEO.  If there were differences of opinion then it is only right the Chairman makes the final call.  That’s how business and footy clubs work.  And it’s just hearsay similar to your sources but I heard Eddie gave a glowing reference, which considering they worked  together for 11 years and delivered a premiership you would expect. From where I sit Pert seems like a good candidate, having delivered Collingwood a fantastic new facility which is one of the things we need.

What I'm about to say might be unfair, but we've been burnt so many times by ordinary administrations that put their egos first that our distrust is natural. Bartlett hasn't earned our trust yet. He's been behind PJ the whole time. And this may be snobbery, but I've always found it a little odd that he only recently became a Melbourne supporter.

Whereas, PJ won me over with his hard work and restructuring of our football club. I would back him to the grave, but Bartlett's reign has been incidental, as @rpfc points out, so he needs to prove himself going forward.

Perhaps, with PJ retiring, Bartlett has a chance to do this. I hope he puts our uneasiness to bed very quickly.

 

Edited September 26, 20186 yr by A F

6 minutes ago, A F said:

What I'm about to say might be unfair, but we've been burnt so many times by ordinary administrations that put their egos first that our distrust is natural. Bartlett hasn't earned our trust yet. He's been behind PJ the whole time.

Whereas, PJ won me over and I would back him to the grave, but Bartlett's reign has been incidental as @rpfc points out, so he needs to prove himself going forward. Perhaps, with PJ retiring, Bartlett has a chance to do this. I hope he puts our uneasiness to bed very quickly.

 

I’d prefer him and the board to make the correct call on key people and then be low profile.  Let’s face it, the big call was on Pert, and the most important thing off field is to deliver a new facility so we become a true destination.

29 minutes ago, Demons1858 said:

and the Dean Bailey appointment

Not exactly fair considering he was just one member of a committee and Bailey wasn’t exactly a disaster. 

While we’re at it let’s go further back, want to blame him for his back and hamstring injuries too?

Gee there’s gonna be a fair bit of sweat riding on this appointment.

1 hour ago, Watson11 said:

To me a good board is one that ensures the right people are in the right positions and then get the hell out of the way.  Boards are never the only people that make companies or clubs or anything successful but they sure as hell can f$&@ them up.  So by that measure our board have been very good over the last 5 years. This specific issue just seems petty and self defeating but I can’t think of too many missteps over the last 5 years.  

Is the Pert appointment really a captains call?  I wouldn’t know but usually a Chairman has the final day on appointing a CEO.  If there were differences of opinion then it is only right the Chairman makes the final call.  That’s how business and footy clubs work.  And it’s just hearsay similar to your sources but I heard Eddie gave a glowing reference, which considering they worked  together for 11 years and delivered a premiership you would expect. From where I sit Pert seems like a good candidate, having delivered Collingwood a fantastic new facility which is one of the things we need.

I have heard from multiple people (I have no idea of how many sources) that this was not the case and;

1. Bartlett didn't adequately inform the AFL, nor would they have recommended Pert

2. That the board were bit players in this and Bartlett drove this decision

3. That the existing people within the club vying for the spot were blind sided

4. That Eddie was not asked about Pert and that due diligence was not done on the club he spent his time in footy administration

I am hardly a negative 'the sky is falling' poster and I don't want to be, I just hear this stuff from people around the club and it worries me that we are making similar mistakes that lead us into the wilderness and that as we find are way out, we will find ourselves slipping back in because of a board that has no practice in governance and have been inabsentia for half a decade now placed in charge of their own affairs by a league that has moved onto other problem children.

2 minutes ago, rpfc said:

I have heard from multiple people (I have no idea of how many sources) that this was not the case and;

1. Bartlett didn't adequately inform the AFL, nor would they have recommended Pert

2. That the board were bit players in this and Bartlett drove this decision

3. That the existing people within the club vying for the spot were blind sided

4. That Eddie was not asked about Pert and that due diligence was not done on the club he spent his time in footy administration

I am hardly a negative 'the sky is falling' poster and I don't want to be, I just hear this stuff from people around the club and it worries me that we are making similar mistakes that lead us into the wilderness and that as we find are way out, we will find ourselves slipping back in because of a board that has no practice in governance and have been inabsentia for half a decade now placed in charge of their own affairs by a league that has moved onto other problem children.

You and I have heard different stories, especially re due diligence and process.    We can probably agree that what would be good is for the club and board is to respond to the article if they believed it was inaccurate rather than banning Wilson if that was in fact the reason.

I don’t get why you say the board has been inabsentia for 5 years?  Did you prefer the board in the prior half decade.  I’d take our current board over say Kennett or Koch any day, who regularly say counterproductive things.  

Maybe someone can extend an invitation for Caro to be in a podcast on demonland, that's where the real action happens at the club!

1 hour ago, Wolfturdo said:

Not exactly fair considering he was just one member of a committee and Bailey wasn’t exactly a disaster. 

While we’re at it let’s go further back, want to blame him for his back and hamstring injuries too?

No, two terrible coaching appointments that set the club back years is more than enough. He's a know it all that actually doesnt know that much. Chanpion player and captain though.  And let's not mention the elephant in the room

I actually don't care that she's not welcome. She's a muckraker and the football world would be better without her and several other gutter journalists.

24 minutes ago, Pennant St Dee said:

I actually don't care that she's not welcome. She's a muckraker and the football world would be better without her and several other gutter journalists.

Couldn’t agree more. She makes stuff up. She hates MFC, Her horrible false teeth are disgusting.

I must admit that I was a little bemused as to why these two articles appeared on MFC website just an hour from Prelim game time on Saturday afternoon.

It now makes perfect sense that MFC had got wind of Caro's article and sought to reinforce that Bartlett is "1000 per cent Melbourne".

I mean why else would two articles be published seeking to reinforce the Red and Blue credentials of the Chairman...surely that goes without saying!? They clearly feel a need to reinforce this to members at the moment, especially as Caro's article makes clear as to how Bartlett came to be installed at MFC - a process I'll wager not too many MFC members would have been aware of until now...

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2018-09-22/bartlett-bleeds-red-and-blue 

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2018-09-22/bartlett-pays-tribute-to-bluey-truscott

If he grows to love the club that’s great, but Bartlett was exactly what we needed at the time (a breath of fresh air), someone who wasn’t part of the old boys club, who could make tough decisions without the weight of the history of the footy club on his shoulders. PJ was this also.

CEO runs the business (would still prefer for it to be Pj but he has announced his retirement), Goody in charge of the players and Mahoney in charge of the FD. President needs to take a backseat and oversee everything in the background.

We’d all love PJ to continue on, but he has made it clear that will not be the case. Who else would we want as CEO? Pert is as good as any imo, regardless of how he was appointed.

Edited September 26, 20186 yr by Demon Disciple

19 hours ago, Diamond_Jim said:

MFC need to get a lot better at their media management.

Not the greatest week for the club on so many fronts.

This week should all be about the journey to 50,000 members and we get this, not to mention Saturday's performance which cost us hell knows how many members.

We make a prelim for the first time in 18 years, and the finals for the first time in 12 years, without Hogan and Lever, and with Oliver struggling for two months with what's resulting in a double shoulder reconstruction, and we're going to lose a bunch of people..?

Hilarious.

Reminds me of talking to MFC members who swore never to buy a membership after Watts was traded. Wish I could call every one of them now and see how they're going.