Pert and Roffey - The Review Thread

[george_on_the_outer 7,696]

Please keep the conversation on topic.

If personal information is sought, then DM the individual. 

[Ollie fan 3,468]

21 minutes ago, george_on_the_outer said:

Please keep the conversation on topic.

If personal information is sought, then DM the individual. 

Skuit is not seeking personal information but is trying to identify bias/motive

[Harvey Wallbanger 1,029]

Pretty clear that Skuit has a high opinion of the Board and the CEO and I, a simple supporter, do not. Hopefully the members will get their chance to express their opinion in respect of the former soon. I wonder what the "external" review of the Board of itself/by itself will conclude?

[Ollie fan 3,468]

9 minutes ago, Hawk the Demon said:

Pretty clear that Skuit has a high opinion of the Board and the CEO and I, a simple supporter, do not. Hopefully the members will get their chance to express their opinion in respect of the former soon. I wonder what the "external" review of the Board of itself/by itself will conclude?

I knew you would not answer his questions. And Hawk, don't take us for fools: you are not a "simple supporter". You are clearly involved with Lawrence; the question is, how deeply?

[Ollie fan 3,468]

14 minutes ago, Hawk the Demon said:

Pretty clear that Skuit has a high opinion of the Board and the CEO and I, a simple supporter, do not. Hopefully the members will get their chance to express their opinion in respect of the former soon. I wonder what the "external" review of the Board of itself/by itself will conclude?

That disingenuous statement, a" simple supporter ", really does undermine everything you say.

[waynewussell 6,237]

It never ceases to send me into hysterical laughter when I notice that posters like Hawk actually think they are flying under the radar!

[Superunknown 4,223]

This is all getting a bit tedious now chaps, what!

[daisycutter 29,737]

7 minutes ago, Superunknown said:

This is all getting a bit tedious now chaps, what!

well i've gotta say i don't like lawrence's chances of a board position if hawk the demon is his propaganda minister

[Sir Why You Little 37,125]

49 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

well i've gotta say i don't like lawrence's chances of a board position if hawk the demon is his propaganda minister

Yes. He is doing a very poor job, as far as PR is concerned 

[layzie 33,991]

The only thing we have to fear is fear itself. 

[daisycutter 29,737]

11 minutes ago, layzie said:

The only thing we have to fear is fear itself. 

thanks fdr 👍

[drysdale demon 4,837]

2 hours ago, Hawk the Demon said:

Pretty clear that Skuit has a high opinion of the Board and the CEO and I, a simple supporter, do not. Hopefully the members will get their chance to express their opinion in respect of the former soon. I wonder what the "external" review of the Board of itself/by itself will conclude?

That less than 15% of members can be bothered voting shows that there just isn't a lot of interest in the make up of the board.

[mo64 5,881]

17 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

thanks fdr 👍

Ich bin ein Demonlander.

[Harvey Wallbanger 1,029]

16 minutes ago, drysdale demon said:

That less than 15% of members can be bothered voting shows that there just isn't a lot of interest in the make up of the board.

Hopefully a few more may be interested this year DD. The rule changes emerging from the Federal Court case mean all voting members will get a direct notice before the Call for Nominations is made and will also be provided with a timetable of events through to the AGM.

[Ollie fan 3,468]

4 minutes ago, Hawk the Demon said:

Hopefully a few more may be interested this year DD. The rule changes emerging from the Federal Court case mean all voting members will get a direct notice before the Call for Nominations is made and will also be provided with a timetable of events through to the AGM.

Interesting to see that you are clearly following this thread, but choosing not to reply to the issues that have been raised about you, a "simple supporter".

[WERRIDEE 5,503]

8 hours ago, djr said:

What controversies should Goodwin take responsibility for?

All of them.

[layzie 33,991]

55 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

thanks fdr 👍

I've just been posting feel good lines in this thread the last two days, the way it's been tracking it can't get worse. 

[daisycutter 29,737]

23 minutes ago, layzie said:

I've just been posting feel good lines in this thread the last two days, the way it's been tracking it can't get worse. 

keep it up layz

demonland has turned into wrist-slitting central

[Clintosaurus 7,861]

24 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

keep it up layz

demonland has turned into wrist-slitting central

It's quite hilarious really. 11 wins is end of the world it seems.

[drysdale demon 4,837]

1 hour ago, Hawk the Demon said:

Hopefully a few more may be interested this year DD. The rule changes emerging from the Federal Court case mean all voting members will get a direct notice before the Call for Nominations is made and will also be provided with a timetable of events through to the AGM.

Wouldnt think so, that figure of less than 15% has been the benchmark for decades and most previous boards have been  worse than the current one.

[Skuit 10,031]

5 hours ago, Hawk the Demon said:

Pretty clear that Skuit has a high opinion of the Board and the CEO and I, a simple supporter, do not. Hopefully the members will get their chance to express their opinion in respect of the former soon. 

I have a high opinion of transparency and truthfulness, and a much lesser one of politics, personal agendas and the deceitful twisting of facts. I really couldn't care less about the board, so long as the club is financially stable, they work together, and mostly keep their nose out of football department stuff. 

[rpfc 28,769]

On 16/09/2024 at 18:59, Hawk the Demon said:

Gee you don't think much of our poor old voting members do you? That elitist approach you have just outlined has led to how many Court cases recently? - just finished one (how much did that cost?) to make changes to election processes that were obvious, continued  just to stop Board candidates being interviewed by Gerard Whateley. And three cases on the go at the moment - one against 4 Board members, a second against 7 Board members and a single one against the current Vice President. Not to mention the worst facilities in the AFL. A Board that has jettisoned two Presidents in three years. I can see the AFL looking over proceedings at Melbourne and saying "everything's just fine!".

I am comfortable with my opinion of ‘low information group’ that some are trying to entrust with electing a balanced and capable corporate board, and I have a lower opinion of those that would utilise for their own ends the incidence of dubious court cases against certain individuals.

I would not crow about the AFL’s opinion of the club leadership, any intervention from here will dramatically decrease the likelihood of your mate Lawrence getting on the board.

You may continue your crusade.

[Harvey Wallbanger 1,029]

A balanced and capable Board? This is a Board that spent $650,000 "winning" a case which adopted pretty much all of the sensible changes to election rules and processes that were proposed in October last year. And in their triumph, they told members - don't worry we'll chase the bloke to recover costs. What did they get? Zero. Don't think there will be any flashy announcements about that development.

[daisycutter 29,737]

1 hour ago, Hawk the Demon said:

A balanced and capable Board? This is a Board that spent $650,000 "winning" a case which adopted pretty much all of the sensible changes to election rules and processes that were proposed in October last year. And in their triumph, they told members - don't worry we'll chase the bloke to recover costs. What did they get? Zero. Don't think there will be any flashy announcements about that development.

you're certainly winning our hearts and minds, hawk, with your gentle persuasions

[Ollie fan 3,468]

1 hour ago, Hawk the Demon said:

A balanced and capable Board? This is a Board that spent $650,000 "winning" a case which adopted pretty much all of the sensible changes to election rules and processes that were proposed in October last year. And in their triumph, they told members - don't worry we'll chase the bloke to recover costs. What did they get? Zero. Don't think there will be any flashy announcements about that development.

Hawk, first of all, why don't you answer some of the questions about your direct involvement in this matter? Your failure to do so is absolutely telling.
 

Secondly, you seem to forget that whilst concessions were made along the way in the trial, ultimately Lawrence continued to pursue the case in the eventually fruitless pursuit of the opportunity to drag Melbourne through a public circus every time there is an election. He lost on that point. As far as most members are concerned, I think we are particularly glad that he did because there is enough bad media about the football club in any event. In defending this position, MFC  incurred costs; yes, they didn't recover them from Lawrence, but he didn't recover his costs from them either. He appears to be a rich man determined to spend whatever it takes to pursue his personal ambitions. Do most of us find that appealing? No.

 

Anyway, with the somewhat good news about a home, I expect all of this Lawrence rubbish will get forgotten, and not a moment too soon.

 

Edited September 18 by Ollie fan