Jump to content

  • Podcast: Jason Taylor   

  • Podcast: Jason Taylor   

Election of Directors MFC



Recommended Posts

On 1/14/2021 at 2:11 PM, deanox said:

Unless his inclusion is as a representative of a faction of disgruntled ex players agitating for change? In which case his inclusion is about securing off field stability.

I understand this is the case. Dates back to the Caro article mid last year I think.

Crux of it is lack of Footy understanding represented on the Board  -  and Footy is the core business of the club, and where we've not had the required success

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 127
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Ron for what it's worth I worked with Peter many years ago and have met him a few times since at the footy.  He's a quality person, far from disruptive, it's just not his style. I note he's the o

I read that email and my immediate thought was Vote 1 - Peter Lawrence I don't like being told who the incumbents have chosen to represent me in an open election process I think it was a poo

I know Peter. Very strong and keen supporter of our club (men’s and women’s teams), travels for nearly all interstate games; would bring a strong skill set to the board as indicated in his profile. Ve

13 hours ago, Canplay said:

As I said earlier, this is really odd -  members appoint board members, they are not appointed by the chairman or existing board members.   Glen has shown himself to be acutely sensitive to criticism - I wonder if “stability” is cover for I don’t want anyone to question or challenge our cozy little board that likes to play in the footy industry in its spare time.  

I read that email and my immediate thought was Vote 1 - Peter Lawrence

I don't like being told who the incumbents have chosen to represent me in an open election process

I think it was a poorly worded and certainly missed the intention at my end - wonder if this backfires for Bartlett?

  • Like 13
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Graeme Yeats' Mullet said:

I read that email and my immediate thought was Vote 1 - Peter Lawrence

I don't like being told who the incumbents have chosen to represent me in an open election process

I think it was a poorly worded and certainly missed the intention at my end - wonder if this backfires for Bartlett?

I read that if you were not headhunted to be on the board then don't bother. Members need not apply.

It also reads to me like the board of many is backing 4 more, two of which have been there for 2 months. It is actually 4 directors backing another 4, two new and two for re-election. One of these raised a little money and got free lunches.

With the Lawrence credentials it may be that Bartlett is a little concerned for his own position.

 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, bandicoot said:

Looks like Peter Lawrence is positioning for a coup if the wheels fall of mid season. I wonder who he has backing him? 

Donald Trump should be on stand by.  He would be good support for Peter Lawrence. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Pulp Fritschon said:

Stability is the key. I’ll be taking on board the advice given (if a voting form appears.....nothing yet). 

They’ve had stability for years and achieved squat.

  • Like 6
  • Love 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Has the challenger written/posted/talked about what he's intending to do in any forum other than the brochure that came with the voting forms? Interested to know more, otherwise no matter how good he might be I don't see a great leap forward from adding one guy to a board that don't want him. I'm sure they'd work amicably together but I wait to be convinced that it's worth the trouble.

P.S - Where were the challengers when we were in complete disarray? No, Melbourne Matters don't count.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, bandicoot said:

There is more happening in the background than we are being told. No doubt Peter has some backers and they are positioning themselves for a board overhaul if this year is a failure. Smart move imo..

speculation?  he claims he is running as an independent

do you have any pertinent information?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Supermercado said:

Has the challenger written/posted/talked about what he's intending to do in any forum other than the brochure that came with the voting forms? Interested to know more, otherwise no matter how good he might be I don't see a great leap forward from adding one guy to a board that don't want him. I'm sure they'd work amicably together but I wait to be convinced that it's worth the trouble.

P.S - Where were the challengers when we were in complete disarray? No, Melbourne Matters don't count.

When Jimmy was the President no-one wanted to be seen as standing against him...

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/16/2021 at 2:13 PM, Cyclops said:

I read that if you were not headhunted to be on the board then don't bother. Members need not apply.

It also reads to me like the board of many is backing 4 more, two of which have been there for 2 months. It is actually 4 directors backing another 4, two new and two for re-election. One of these raised a little money and got free lunches.

With the Lawrence credentials it may be that Bartlett is a little concerned for his own position.

 

It sounds like the Board went through a process to update its membership and skills including interviewing and reviewing various candidates. This process included using a board subcommittee which (according to Bartlett):
a) Considered applications from individuals who have expressed an interest in joining the Board at some time in the future;
b) Interviewed and conducted due diligence on potential candidates; and
c) Made recommendations to the Board regarding the alignment of candidates’ skills/experience that would assist us in achieving our strategic priorities.

This is very standard practice for "good governance". The subcommittee would review the strategic plan and the skill set of the current directors, and then identify what they need for incoming directors. This would be a constant process, regardless of vacancies; if a vacancy is upcoming then the right person should fill the spot, however ideal the subcommittee should also be recommending directors retire to ensure board renewal and skills alignment. David Thurrin officially retired "as part of the Club's Board succession programme".; David was part of the Stynes board and was there for 13 years, more than enough. Jane Martino had been with us since 2015 and retired earlier this year. She had a background in media, digital, comms.

So it's the 6 directors saying "these are the two very different replacements we'd like to join us":

  • Brad Green - ex player, connection to the club and football background (Football is our business)
  • David Rennick, a specialist in legal and property development (We are currently searching for a home base)

And also, the board saying that the other two, up for election, are doing a good job and contributing.

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Jumping Jack Clennett said:

If we vote Lawrence in, which candidate  should we vote out?

I have heard a number of people wondering which one they would leave out, given they wish to give a vote to a particular candidate.  The thing is, if you especially want one candidate to get on, you can maximise the effect of your vote by only voting for that one candidate. You don’t have to vote for 4, a valid vote is up to 4 votes. 

Edited by Tim
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

I threw out the MFC ballot and related documents yesterday, as I habitually do each time the MCC ballot papers are circulated.

Having read this loop, I have now removed the MFC ballot from my office waste paper bin. Fortunately the office cleaners appear not to be as diligent as they were pre-Christmas and the MFC ballot paper was still there. I will hold off complaining to Dexus on this occasion.

This new dude appears to be a legitimate supporter, which appeals to me. I also didn't enjoy the tone and content of Bartlett's email - seemed slightly inappropriate to me. Even though I understand his reasoning, I feel concerned about some closed coterie forming again - this is exactly what's held this club back since 1964.

I think it makes sense to have an ex-player, but the others are up for grabs in terms of my vote. I'll read the rest of this thread with interest over the coming days.

 

  • Like 10
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ron Burgundy said:

Having read this loop, I have now removed the MFC ballot from my office waste paper bin.

This new dude appears to be a legitimate supporter, which appeals to me. I also didn't enjoy the tone and content of Bartlett's email - seemed slightly inappropriate to me. Even though I understand his reasoning, I feel concerned about some closed coterie forming again - this is exactly what's held this club back since 1964.

 

Nice second effort, Ron - looks like you’re “training the house down” in the pre-season, administratively speaking!

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/20/2021 at 10:55 AM, Tim said:

I have heard a number of people wondering which one they would leave out, given they wish to give a vote to a particular candidate.  The thing is, if you especially want one candidate to get on, you can maximise the effect of your vote by only voting for that one candidate. You don’t have to vote for 4, a valid vote is up to 4 votes. 

That is correct. If you tick 4 boxes each candidate gets 25 percent of your vote.  Tick 1 box and your candidate gets 100%.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Cyclops said:

That is correct. If you tick 4 boxes each candidate gets 25 percent of your vote.  Tick 1 box and your candidate gets 100%.

that doesn't make sense

are you sure

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

that doesn't make sense

are you sure

If you cast 1 vote for candidate A then it is one vote more that B, C, D and E gets. If you vote for Candidates B, C, D, E then they have equal votes and only A misses out. Ticking 1 box is 4 times the value for your selected candidate. ,,

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/20/2021 at 1:38 AM, Cyclops said:

Sorry to disagree with you Deanox but the email explains quite plainly that the support for 4 of the nominations come from the 4 that are not for election or re-election, not 6.

While the email obviously must say "the four remaining directors support a, b, c and d" in reality:

There were 7 directors on the board when they went through a process to select Green and Rennick (Jane Martin left earlier this year). I cannot believe that 3 of those directors excused themselves from all conversations regarding the selection of Green and Rennick for the casual vacancies (a process that appeared to reject Lawrence). That means that all 6 would be endorsing them, not just 4.

I also cannot believe that Green and Rennick, who are current directors, would not be in support of the re-election of 2 of the directors who appointed them either. 

 

Think of it this way: Lawrence missed out on the process. If he didn't nominate, the eight directors were hoping to be reflected unopposed. They all endorse each other.

 

 

Edited by deanox
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/16/2021 at 9:17 AM, pitmaster said:

Usually in these situations the incumbent board can drum up enough votes from its own networks to ensure their chosen one is elected. From their perspective the favoured nominee has been vetted and will provide a good fit with the existing members.

The board can also rely on most members not bothering to vote either because they don't care or they feel they don't know enough to distinguish one candidate from another, so the board's networking gets the job done. Odds are that is what will happen here regardless of my vote (see above).

Not necessarily. I'm canvassing opinions from all Demonlanders before casting my vote(s) - including yours...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Match Previews, Reports & Articles

    A WALK IN THE PAST by Whispering Jack

    On Monday night, the Melbourne Football Club handed out four life memberships. Two of those awards went to men who are long gone. Charles ‘Chubby’ Forrester and James ‘Jas’ Byrne played for the club in the 1870s, even before the Victorian Football Association was formed. The other two are current skipper Max Gawn and swingman Tom McDonald, who almost left the club at the end of the pandemic-affected 2020 season. Some fans might have raised their eyebrows and wondered whether the emphasis on hist

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Reports

    SOUNDS OF SILENCE by Whispering Jack

    This was my first game for points involving the Demons in more than a year and a half and the long march to Carrara turned out to be worthwhile. The game was won in a single withering quarter that was dominated by Melbourne on the back of an outstanding display from Karen Paxman. The four-time All Australian picked up 13 touches for the stanza to set up a five goal to nothing second term after a lacklustre start in which the cleaner, sharper Gold Coast notched up the first two goals of the game

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Reports

    BRIDESMAIDS AGAIN by Whispering Jack

    Historians of the future will have little difficulty in finding words to define the year 2020. “Covid-19”, “pandemic” and “plague” come readily to mind. The Covid-19 pandemic dominated the year in every aspect of life and it certainly didn’t spare AFL football or the Melbourne Football Club. In the circumstances however, it didn’t treat it as badly as the Spanish Flu epidemic which raged a century earlier from February 1918, through 1919 and into 1920 when it finally petered out in April of

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Special Features

    THE TASMANIAN TIGER by Whispering Jack

    I first saw Ben Brown on a cold Tuesday night in May, 2013 playing for the Werribee Tigers against Queanbeyan in a televised Foxtel Cup game before a sparse crowd at Etihad Stadium. His teammate and former Demon Jordan Gysberts was the star of the side’s 85-point belting of the hapless ACT club but the then 20 year old, 200cm Brown was also a stand out.  Earlier that year, the athletic big man had left his native Tasmania in an effort to make the grade after being overlooked in three drafts

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Special Features

    THE TRADING CHRONICLES 2020 by The Oracle

    Part One: The Cure It could be coincidental but since the AFL Free Agency and Trade Period began, the State of Victoria has recorded eight consecutive days of no new active cases and no deaths from Covid19. It might be a little early to announce that a cure for this dreaded virus has been discovered but one thing can be said with some certainty after following the ins and outs of the free agency and trading process — mankind is still a long way off finding a cure for boredom. That stat

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Special Features 1

    CHANGES 2020 by The Oracle

    Part One: A very strange year Things might have been somewhat hairy when the 1919 football season opened up in the wake of the ending of a world war and in the middle of a pandemic that took millions of lives but it’s difficult to imagine a more unusual football season than the one that ended a week or so ago. For starters, the footy is supposed to finish on that one day in September on the MCG in mild spring weather; not deep into October at the Gabba amid warnings of tropical storms and h

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Special Features 1

    DEMONLAND 2020 A TO Z by George on the Outer

    A- Alice Springs. Happy hunting ground.     B- Backline. Finally found the non-leaking version.   C- Cairns & Covid. How a season was ruined.    D- Demonland. Mental Health facility run by the inmates.   E- The grade you get when you don’t make F- F- Finals. What are they? G- Goals. Lack of them. Need a forward who can kick them….lots! H- Hub. Where players got to live with people you can’t stand. I- Injuries. Miracle cure provided by Dr. Burgess.  

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Special Features

    WASH, RINSE, SPIN, REPEAT! by George On The Outer

    Although the Demons got over the line in their must win final round game against the hapless Bombers, they ensured it was Groundhog Day for their supporters who well remember what happened three years ago (although, this time they at least enjoyed the success of victory). Melbourne had its customary start dominating play and having plenty of chances in front of goal, only to find itself down on the scoreboard at the first change. Inaccurate kicking, particularly from set shots would have pu

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Reports

    THE LUCK OF THE DRAW by Whispering Jack

    The long awaited clash between Melbourne and Essendon is almost upon us. Thirty-seven rounds of AFL football have passed by since the two clubs met on a balmy early April night last year in a game that produced a high scoring shootout at the MCG with the Bombers prevailing by 18 points. It was their only meeting for 2019 and happened at a time when the pandemic was something on the far distant horizon. Several months later when the 2019 season ended, the AFL issued the first of its fixtures

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Previews

    THERE’S STILL A HEARTBEAT by George on the Outer

    When bottom side Adelaide scrapped together a win over the Giants last week, a tiny glimmer of hope opened up for the Demons’ finals chances. The patient was in intensive care but not quite finished — there was a faint pulse, a heart beating ever so slightly but was it enough when two more wins and other results were needed to fall their way? The first step was the resuscitation of a team that had lost its last two matches against sides then sitting fifteenth and sixteenth on the ladder. On

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Reports 1

    THE FINAL HUMILIATION by The Oracle

    On Sunday, the Melbourne Football Club that won three consecutive games by in excess of 50 points last month returns to the Gabba, the scene of the last of those victories which was a 56 point drubbing of Collingwood. The Demons got off to a good start and won every quarter with a ruthless and powerful brand of football. They kicked 16 goals that day, their accuracy in front of goal a tribute to the skills the put on display throughout the afternoon and evening. In the four matches playe

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Previews

    GIVEN THE OLD HEAVE HO’ by George on the Outer

    Fremantle gave Melbourne the old heave ho’ from playing finals in 2020, in conditions that the Demons yet again failed to handle.   With the whole season on the line and the need to win to stay in contention for finals, what the fans saw was much the same as they have been witnessing so many times before — a complete debacle and capitulation against a side that sat 15th on the ladder before the game.     Promises made after the loss to the 16th placed Sydney Swans were rendered h

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Match Reports


×
×
  • Create New...