Jump to content

Featured Replies

1 minute ago, Adam The God said:

Disagree, but we'll leave it at that.

Who’s not at Fault?

 
2 hours ago, Sir Why You Little said:

What a shocking waste of Money…

You are happy that money was spent @drysdale demon? Basically to smack both parties on the wrist….

 
Just now, drysdale demon said:

What are you talking about, I agreed with your post.

With a Facepalm??


3 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Who’s not at Fault?

I don't think Peter Lawrence is at fault. He merely wanted better governance and has spent years passionately and financially supporting the club. Both AFL and AFLW programs.

By the end of the recent court proceedings, the board had accepted almost all of his requests.

The club did not need to waste time and money, and undermine our brand. All they needed to do was accept the better governance positions in the first place. And weirdly, they didn't.

1 minute ago, Adam The God said:

I don't think Peter Lawrence is at fault. He merely wanted better governance and has spent years passionately and financially supporting the club. Both AFL and AFLW programs.

By the end of the recent court proceedings, the board had accepted almost all of his requests.

The club did not need to waste time and money, and undermine our brand. All they needed to do was accept the better governance positions in the first place. And weirdly, they didn't.

This should have been sorted out well before it got to Court. Perfect opportunity for mediation.
I would like to hear an explanation as to why the Club, dug its heels in. If it was purely self preservation, then that is disgraceful, but even so it should never have cost us $500,000

Fault on both sides in my opinion 

The $500,000 referred to earlier in the thread was 2020-22. Who knows what was spent on this last case - it went for 4 days in the Federal Court - the lawyers on this site could perhaps hazard a guess.

 
39 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

This should have been sorted out well before it got to Court. Perfect opportunity for mediation.
I would like to hear an explanation as to why the Club, dug its heels in. If it was purely self preservation, then that is disgraceful, but even so it should never have cost us $500,000

Fault on both sides in my opinion 

Incompetent boards and executive tend to be hesitant to let people look too far into what they're doing. This is why they're also resistant to an independent review despite multiple former presidents and past players calling for it. 


13 minutes ago, Ted Lasso said:

Incompetent boards and executive tend to be hesitant to let people look too far into what they're doing. This is why they're also resistant to an independent review despite multiple former presidents and past players calling for it. 

Yes i am well aware of that. But Sporting Clubs have a lot more public scrutiny, plus if the team performance drops, the Boards have few places to hide, which is the way it should be

4 hours ago, Hawk the Demon said:

And this is how Mr Pert acts towards a member if you step out of line

Landing the club with $500K in unnecessary costs is a bit more than "stepping out of line".

2 minutes ago, bing181 said:

Landing the club with $500K in unnecessary costs is a bit more than "stepping out of line".

"Landing the club"? All they needed to do was accept the amendments Peter pushed and they would have saved those costs. Instead they weirdly dragged it through the courts and then accepted the majority of the changes, making the vast majority of the process redundant. 

Completely the board's fault.

7 minutes ago, bing181 said:

Landing the club with $500K in unnecessary costs is a bit more than "stepping out of line".

Just to repeat the earlier post.

The $500,000 referred to earlier in the thread was 2020-22. Who knows what was spent on this last case - it went for 4 days in the Federal Court - the lawyers on this site could perhaps hazard a guess.

The Club lost the case in 2022.

Channel 7 is reporting we are embarking on an external review 


1 minute ago, Jaded No More said:

Channel 7 is reporting we are embarking on an external review 

Hip hip hooray. 🎉

8 minutes ago, Jaded No More said:

Channel 7 is reporting we are embarking on an external review 

Open all doors and cupboards before the Shredders are ordered from Officeworks…

They say backflip as if the person who said we wouldn't do a review didn't just resign.

Well done to Brad Green for doing what he said he will just 48 hours after taking on a temporary presidential role


I think at this stage the external review is the only thing that might clear the slate for a fresh beginning. Hoping it gets done well and helps bring the club back together. 

3 minutes ago, Jaded No More said:

Well done to Brad Green for doing what he said he will just 48 hours after taking on a temporary presidential role

Having met Brad a number of times at my local, he absolutely loves The Demons, so i am really glad he has gone down this path, for maybe some short term pain??

The positive of this it’s someone from with extensive experience in success and culture of success well done Green 

 
19 minutes ago, Demonland said:

 


Was with the All blacks for 19 years, oversaw back to back world cup wins and a team that was rated No.1 for a decade.

Probably safe to say he's going to know a thing or two about professionalism and what's needed for a winning culture.
 

33 minutes ago, Demonland said:

 

Well that’s quick. Perceived pressure was enough to get an external review…


Join the conversation

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

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

Featured Content

  • CASEY: Collingwood

    It was freezing cold at Mission Whitten Stadium where only the brave came out in the rain to watch a game that turned out to be as miserable as the weather.
    The Casey Demons secured their third consecutive victory, earning the four premiership points and credit for defeating a highly regarded Collingwood side, but achieved little else. Apart perhaps from setting the scene for Monday’s big game at the MCG and the Ice Challenge that precedes it.
    Neither team showcased significant skill in the bleak and greasy conditions, at a location that was far from either’s home territory. Even the field umpires forgot where they were and experienced a challenging evening, but no further comment is necessary.

    • 4 replies
  • NON-MFC: Round 13

    Follow all the action from every Round 13 clash excluding the Dees as the 2025 AFL Premiership Season rolls on. With Melbourne playing in the final match of the round on King's Birthday, all eyes turn to the rest of the competition. Who are you tipping to win? And more importantly, which results best serve the Demons’ finals aspirations? Join the discussion and keep track of the matches that could shape the ladder and impact our run to September.

      • Clap
      • Like
    • 216 replies
  • PREVIEW: Collingwood

    Having convincingly defeated last year’s premier and decisively outplayed the runner-up with 8.2 in the final quarter, nothing epitomized the Melbourne Football Club’s performance more than its 1.12 final half, particularly the eight consecutive behinds in the last term, against a struggling St Kilda team in the midst of a dismal losing streak. Just when stability and consistency were anticipated within the Demon ranks, they delivered a quintessential performance marked by instability and ill-conceived decisions, with the most striking aspect being their inaccuracy in kicking for goal, which suggested a lack of preparation (instead of sleeping in their hotel in Alice, were they having a night on the turps) rather than a well-rested team. Let’s face it - this kicking disease that makes them look like raw amateurs is becoming a millstone around the team’s neck.

      • Like
    • 1 reply
  • CASEY: Sydney

    The Casey Demons were always expected to emerge victorious in their matchup against the lowly-ranked Sydney Swans at picturesque Tramway Oval, situated in the shadows of the SCG in Moore Park. They dominated the proceedings in the opening two and a half quarters of the game but had little to show for it. This was primarily due to their own sloppy errors in a low-standard game that produced a number of crowded mauls reminiscent of the rugby game popular in old Sydney Town. However, when the Swans tired, as teams often do when they turn games into ugly defensive contests, Casey lifted the standard of its own play and … it was off to the races. Not to nearby Randwick but to a different race with an objective of piling on goal after goal on the way to a mammoth victory. At the 25-minute mark of the third quarter, the Demons held a slender 14-point lead over the Swans, who are ahead on the ladder of only the previous week's opposition, the ailing Bullants. Forty minutes later, they had more than fully compensated for the sloppiness of their earlier play with a decisive 94-point victory, that culminated in a rousing finish which yielded thirteen unanswered goals. Kicks hit their targets, the ball found itself going through the middle and every player made a contribution.

      • Like
    • 1 reply
  • REPORT: St. Kilda

    Hands up if you thought, like me, at half-time in yesterday’s game at TIO Traeger Park, Alice Springs that Melbourne’s disposal around the ground and, in particular, its kicking inaccuracy in front of the goals couldn’t get any worse. Well, it did. And what’s even more damning for the Melbourne Football Club is that the game against St Kilda and its resurgence from the bottomless pit of its miserable start to the season wasn’t just lost through poor conversion for goal but rather in the 15 minutes when the entire team went into a slumber and was mugged by the out-of-form Saints. Their six goals two behinds (one goal less than the Demons managed for the whole game) weaved a path of destruction from which they were unable to recover. Ross Lyon’s astute use of pressure to contain the situation once they had asserted their grip on the game, and Melbourne’s self-destructive wastefulness, assured that outcome. The old adage about the insanity of repeatedly doing something and expecting a different result, was out there. Two years ago, the score line in Melbourne’s loss to the Giants at this same ground was 5 goals 15 behinds - a ratio of one goal per four scoring shots - was perfectly replicated with yesterday’s 7 goals 21 behinds. 
    This has been going on for a while and opens up a number of questions. I’ll put forward a few that come to mind from this performance. The obvious first question is whether the club can find a suitable coach to instruct players on proper kicking techniques or is this a skill that can no longer be developed at this stage of the development of our playing group? Another concern is the team's ability to counter an opponent's dominance during a run on as exemplified by the Saints in the first quarter. Did the Demons underestimate their opponents, considering St Kilda's goals during this period were scored by relatively unknown forwards? Furthermore, given the modest attendance of 6,721 at TIO Traeger Park and the team's poor past performances at this venue, is it prudent to prioritize financial gain over potentially sacrificing valuable premiership points by relinquishing home ground advantage, notwithstanding the cultural significance of the team's connection to the Red Centre? 

      • Like
    • 4 replies
  • PREGAME: Collingwood

    After a disappointing loss in Alice Springs the Demons return to the MCG to take on the Magpies in the annual King's Birthday Big Freeze for MND game. Who comes in and who goes out?

      • Like
    • 528 replies