Email from Peter Lawrence

[Satyriconhome 10,339]

17 minutes ago, Farmer said:

Good heavens. You only have to read last week’s judgment to see how appallingly the Board has behaved .  I cite one example, following the ridiculously triumphant statement from the President. “ we will pursue Lawrence for our costs “. If they do, they will look even more stupid. . In fact I’m hoping they do so, in order to see what a truly independent person, Justice O’Callaghan has to say about the matter 

 

Sorry I thought it was a draw in the judgement and any successful litigant always pursues costs.

[YesitwasaWin4theAges 6,521]

4 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

I've heard more from Peter Lawrence in one day then I have from Kate Roffey in 12 months.

I like this guy.

I filled it out and voted for an independent review.

[dazzledavey36 52,682]

Just now, YesitwasaWin4theAges said:

I filled it out and voted for an independent review.

Me too.

[Cyclops 502]

5 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

Sorry, no surely elections are part of the review?

And a panel to identify if any, I thought. a lot of posters on here know what they are, they just can't say.

Your clutching at straws to make your point valid Saty. In old terms you are having a bob each way.

I never mentioned reviews or a review in conjunction with elections.

Actually after the court decision last week election issues are almost done with except for 1 issue.

[Satyriconhome 10,339]

5 minutes ago, Cyclops said:

Your clutching at straws to make your point valid Saty. In old terms you are having a bob each way.

I never mentioned reviews or a review in conjunction with elections.

Actually after the court decision last week election issues are almost done with except for 1 issue.

I haven't got a point I am asking what is going to be reviewed and why you are on this topic,  I thought you could enlighten me or do you think there shouldn't be a review, your thoughts?

[pewpewpew 738]

17 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

Easily pleased then, I heard from Kate Roffey a couple of weeks ago

Since then the club has imploded and we've heard nada you liniment sniffer.

[Satyriconhome 10,339]

12 minutes ago, YesitwasaWin4theAges said:

I filled it out and voted for an independent review.

Of what? if you voted for it, you must know what is wrong, care to elucidate?

Lack of membership?

Lack of sponsorship?

Massive debt?

Being taken to court by a so called supporter?

[The Stigga 1,060]

3 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

I haven't got a point I am asking what is going to be reviewed and why you are on this topic,  I thought you could enlighten me or do you think there shouldn't be a review, your thoughts?

Pickett and Tracc want to leave, thats a start...

[Satyriconhome 10,339]

1 minute ago, pewpewpew said:

Since then the club has imploded and we've heard nada you liniment sniffer.

Personal insult way to go.

Imploded in what way?.

Tracc has actually stated he wants out?

[Superunknown 4,052]

A lot of hyperbole about the email.

Cant fault his desire to bring the club into contemporary governance.

Full independent review now - the club looks like it is imploding.

 

[demon3165 2,564]

37 minutes ago, FreedFromDesire said:

Sorry, I'm really not sure at all what you're talking about here.

Another poster asked what an external review would address and I provided a starting list of issues.

Sorry I apologise I thought it was you saying again sorry.

[Satyriconhome 10,339]

4 minutes ago, The Stigga said:

Pickett and Tracc want to leave, thats a start...

Stated by both of them. Or just rumour/hearsay.

If I hear them say it and the reasons, then I will make call, no individual is bigger than the team.

Edited August 28 by Satyriconhome

[pewpewpew 738]

3 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

Personal insult way to go.

Imploded in what way?.

Tracc has actually stated he wants out?

[The Stigga 1,060]

1 minute ago, Satyriconhome said:

Stated by both of the. Or just rumour/hearsay.

If I hear them say it and the reasons, then I will make call, no individual is bigger than the team.

So what has occured in the past week hasn't concerned you at all?

[Fromgotowoewodin 1,495]

41 minutes ago, Farmer said:

You only have to read last week’s judgment to see how appallingly the Board has behaved .

Appalling is a stretch surely. Judge accepted their actions were reasonable and left it to the parties to sort out the costs.

As someone who pays membership fees I would expect the club look to push them onto Lawrence as he brought the case, I’d prefer my fees pay footballers and coaches than lawyers.

Doesn’t seem all that controversial to me. 

[Fritta and Turner 4,175]

I found the email in my spam folder. (Gmail)

Anyway as I have read the judgement the following statement from Mr Lawrence left me curious :

As he delivered the decision, Justice O’Callaghan indicated his “preliminary view” that it was “relatively clear” that each party should bear its own costs.

Can I just point out that the above is not in the published judgement so I assume Justice O'Callaghan made some remarks in court.

In terms of an independent review I am not sure how that can be achieved; if it is trully independent then neither of the current MFC or Deemocracy should be involved.

However a review of some description needs to be undertaken as this season turned to hell before round 1.

 

[YesitwasaWin4theAges 6,521]

12 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

Of what? if you voted for it, you must know what is wrong, care to elucidate?

Lack of membership?

Lack of sponsorship?

Massive debt?

Being taken to court by a so called supporter?

Your obviously happy with the way things are travelling? @Satyriconhome

[rjay 24,574]

4 hours ago, demon3165 said:

There will always be challengers and that's also a good thing, as for a review yes, but only for the football department and that's where it is needed.

You really think it's only the FD that needs to be reviewed?

The media are having pot shots at us...if Peter Jackson was still CEO would it be open season on Melbourne?

I think not.

The problems are much greater than just the FD.

 

[He de mon 869]

Rightly or wrongly, the stench of something rotten at our club will not go away. 

An independent review is the only way this can be addressed. Just get it done and hopefully we can move forward.

 

[DeeSpencer 24,679]

Having read the judgment and the election rules I now understand the case better. Ridiculous that it went all the way to court, from both sides I guess. 

That said, now sure how he feels he has the power to demand an independent review? By whom? In to what? 

The board should review the CEO, that’s their job. They shouldn’t need any help doing it.

The CEO should review the football program and bring in outside football expert help if needed. 

Richo and Goodwin should review their teams of staff and the players.

I’m struggling to see just where this review is needed or will be helpful.

The President needs to make a statement when the appropriate offseason reviews are done and changes made or arranged. Until then, unity is vital and stirring things up when you lose isn’t. 

Edited August 28 by DeeSpencer

[Cyclops 502]

19 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

I haven't got a point I am asking what is going to be reviewed and why you are on this topic,  I thought you could enlighten me or do you think there shouldn't be a review, your thoughts?

Yes Saty. In a previous post I said that given the current climate a review would be ideal.

This has been strengthened by the report tonight that Kozzie is also unhappy 

If the review turns up nothing then there a double win.

1 The club is seen to be addressing concerns 

2 Nothing to see here.

[Cyclops 502]

10 minutes ago, Fritta and Turner said:

I found the email in my spam folder. (Gmail)

Anyway as I have read the judgement the following statement from Mr Lawrence left me curious :

As he delivered the decision, Justice O’Callaghan indicated his “preliminary view” that it was “relatively clear” that each party should bear its own costs.

Can I just point out that the above is not in the published judgement so I assume Justice O'Callaghan made some remarks in court.

In terms of an independent review I am not sure how that can be achieved; if it is trully independent then neither of the current MFC or Deemocracy should be involved.

However a review of some description needs to be undertaken as this season turned to hell before round 1.

 

Your paragraph is correct. The judge said it in court.

 he delivered the decision, Justice O’Callaghan indicated his “preliminary view” that it was “relatively clear” that each party should bear its own costs.

Can I just point out that the above is not in the published judgement so I assume Justice O'Callaghan made some remarks in court.

In terms of an independent review I am not sure how that can be achieved; if it is trully independent then neither of the current MFC or Deemocracy should be involved.

[YesitwasaWin4theAges 6,521]

Our club has turned to 💩 and we are all turning on each other as a result of it.

Whilst Roffey and Pert sit in front of their log fires with a glass of red and look out of their balconies, over looking the sunset like nothing is wrong.

[demon3165 2,564]

23 minutes ago, rjay said:

You really think it's only the FD that needs to be reviewed?

The media are having pot shots at us...if Peter Jackson was still CEO would it be open season on Melbourne?

I think not.

The problems are much greater than just the FD.

 

Do you think I give a toss what the media says no, they get this reaction from people jumping from one thing to another.

[Cranky Franky 1,814]

Go Peter Lawrence