On 02/09/2024 at 20:09, Fritta and Turner said:

Caro never misses an opportunity to put the boot into Kate.

To the contrary. After Roffey took over Wilson attended a pre match lunch and raved about the change under Roffey

The club doesn’t leak on somethings it appears.

Roffey has stepped aside for Green ... well done without issues it seems ... ready for Smith in 12mths

I think the ducks are lining up for Steven Smith to take over when he returns from his extended break overseas. I reckon he'll be in situ by rd one next year

Very interested to see how the review rates the CEO's performance. I don't think Kate Roffey should be the only one to fall on their sword.

19 hours ago, Demons11 said:

 

13 minutes ago, Demons1858 said:

Roffey has stepped aside for Green ... well done without issues it seems ... ready for Smith in 12mths

1 down 

22 hours ago, bing181 said:

You're confusing correlation with causation.

The only facts are that a few players have gone off the rails/had incidents. That's it. 

No, that’s just not correct! I appreciate that reading judgments by Supreme Court Judges is not what people on this site prefer to do, but in this instance the recent judgment in the Peter Lawrence case tells us so much . Can you imagine a well run club having to make 8 amended sets of Rules , several of which were made under fire during the hearing?. The MFC was in litigious disarray as it tried to avoid making the changes that any decent member would support. This is the second time in 2 years . In an earlier case the club lost hands down in resisting making email addresses available to a candidate for membership . In organisations everywhere  if a member or shareholder chooses to receive club communications by email, it is inevitable that candidates for office will be entitled to canvas support by email. In the earlier case the MFC was ordered to pay costs. In the most recent case it is most unlikely it will recover even a portion of its costs . Many hundreds of thousands of dollars have been wasted , in an attempt to prevent challenges to the Board . I am NOT referring to the other case to which we may make no comment 

4 minutes ago, BDA said:

I think the ducks are lining up for Steven Smith to take over when he returns from his extended break overseas. I reckon he'll be in situ by rd one next year

Very interested to see how the review rates the CEO's performance. I don't think Kate Roffey should be the only one to fall on their sword.

The Board statement said:  Green said he would lead a review of the Board aimed at resetting and refreshing its performance.

Doesn't seem to include Pert or the organisation.

iirc, Roffey said Pert is leading an internal reiview, which sounds like the usual EOS review.  Could be wrong.

14 minutes ago, Demons1858 said:

Roffey has stepped aside for Green ... well done without issues it seems ... ready for Smith in 12mths

1 down 

8 minutes ago, BDA said:

 

Very interested to see how the review rates the CEO's performance. I don't think Kate Roffey should be the only one to fall on their sword.

I wholeheartedly agree, however contracts and the soft cap means that we can't just get rid of everyone.

It will be Richo or Pert IMO, not both. Gus feel says Richo goes.

7 minutes ago, BDA said:

I think the ducks are lining up for Steven Smith to take over when he returns from his extended break overseas. I reckon he'll be in situ by rd one next year

Very interested to see how the review rates the CEO's performance. I don't think Kate Roffey should be the only one to fall on their sword.

Perts KPI's

membership growth - tick

Financial stability- tick

On-field growth and performance- Flag and 3 top 4 finishes.

he should go because??

He can't get out and kick the ball for the team.

Look at his role objectively.

Maybe Josh M comes back

4 minutes ago, Demon17 said:

Perts KPI's

membership growth - tick

Financial stability- tick

On-field growth and performance- Flag and 3 top 4 finishes.

he should go because??

He can't get out and kick the ball for the team.

Look at his role objectively.

The other one is employee and player satisfaction and that C word culture and lets not forget the training base... a review should answer all those issues

Edited September 6, 20241 yr by Demons1858

5 minutes ago, Jaded No More said:

I wholeheartedly agree, however contracts and the soft cap means that we can't just get rid of everyone.

It will be Richo or Pert IMO, not both. Gus feel says Richo goes.

See post below.  Green is leading a Board review not an organisational review of CEO etc.

7 minutes ago, Lucifers Hero said:

The Board statement said:  Green said he would lead a review of the Board aimed at resetting and refreshing its performance.

Doesn't seem to include Pert or the organisation.

iirc, Roffey said Pert is leading an internal reiview, which sounds like the usual EOS review.  Could be wrong.

 

3 minutes ago, Lucifers Hero said:

See post below.  Green is leading a Board review not an organisational review of CEO etc.

 

Yeah I just re-read that, but it's kind of confusing, because what does the board need to review?

We have members up for re-election and members who need to step down as they have run their full terms.

My biggest hope is that the few remaining board members who are part of the lawsuit, step down. We cannot afford this endless litigation with he who shall not be mentioned, ruin another pre-season for this club. 

Edited September 6, 20241 yr by Jaded No More

1 minute ago, Jaded No More said:

Yeah I just re-read that, but it's kind of confusing, because what does the board need to review?

We have members up for re-election and members who need to step down as they have run their full terms.

 

Good question.

Maybe how they handled the court cases but who knows.

imv its difficult to review themselves and say it is independent and objective.  Also Board reviews are quite specialised so hopefully Green has a qualified external advisor.

12 minutes ago, Demon17 said:

Perts KPI's

membership growth - tick

Financial stability- tick

On-field growth and performance- Flag and 3 top 4 finishes.

he should go because??

He can't get out and kick the ball for the team.

Look at his role objectively.

Peter Jackson laid the foundations for our flag. Pert rode on the coattails of his work. Memberships and sponsorships have flowed from PJ’s stellar work rather than Pert’s. and the financial stability is a result of selling assets. assets which were acquired before his time.

Pert oversaw the FD review that delivered Yze and a shake-up to the coaching team post 2020. Thats to his credit.

Not much that has happened since that I can point to that he has done well

He’s as much tied to the failed home base situation as Kate Roffey

He has blathered on about culture more than anyone.

There’s the legal case pending that he’s up to his neck in. I think the decks are being cleared as a result of whats coming down the track in this regard as much as anything else.

2 presidents have left under a cloud during his tenure. I reckon he’s in strife D17.

16 minutes ago, Demons11 said:

1 down 

Good, thank you for your service.. NEXT??

23 minutes ago, Lucifers Hero said:

The Board statement said:  Green said he would lead a review of the Board aimed at resetting and refreshing its performance.

Doesn't seem to include Pert or the organisation.

iirc, Roffey said Pert is leading an internal reiview, which sounds like the usual EOS review.  Could be wrong.

This would be a disaster if Green reviews the board and Pert reviews the FD and escapes scrutiny himself...

Wondering if its designed to leave room for Smith to make an assessment of what he needs as Prez.

Perhaps also shows the current boards willingness to do what is right for the club and move on if that's what is needed

22 minutes ago, Demon17 said:

Perts KPI's

membership growth - tick

Financial stability- tick

On-field growth and performance- Flag and 3 top 4 finishes.

he should go because??

He can't get out and kick the ball for the team.

Look at his role objectively.

Pert is responsible for setting the culture of the club. 

Not only do we leak like sieve, we have clear discontent within the FD and playing group.

Under PJ we did not leak.

Surely, you can see the commercial impacts of continued leaks.

2 minutes ago, Adam The God said:

This would be a disaster if Green reviews the board and Pert reviews the FD and escapes scrutiny himself...

How did you read the Roffey/Green statement?

4 minutes ago, Lucifers Hero said:

How did you read the Roffey/Green statement?

I've only read the statements on the club website, but it's pretty clear that you're spot on. Green will review the board and Pert will review the FD. So who reviews Pert?

Get PJ in to do FFS. Let's be serious about this.

7 minutes ago, Adam The God said:

I've only read the statements on the club website, but it's pretty clear that you're spot on. Green will review the board and Pert will review the FD. So who reviews Pert?

Get PJ in to do FFS. Let's be serious about this.

🤷‍♀️

43 minutes ago, Demon17 said:

Perts KPI's

membership growth - tick

Financial stability- tick

On-field growth and performance- Flag and 3 top 4 finishes.

he should go because??

He can't get out and kick the ball for the team.

Look at his role objectively.

Core business: Do we have a head of football and list manager making proactive decisions to improve the playing list, coaching and otherwise pursuing excellence?

Other business: The tigers just promoted to the head of their leisure businesses to CEO. Having sold out pokies do the Dees even have any other business interests? Is our money just sitting in the bank?

Brand: We’ve been kicked non stop in the media and are massively behind other clubs in connecting with fans and members.

“Twin reviews”?