Kate Roffey Steps Down

[Kent 2,914]

1 hour ago, KozzyCan said:

Personally I think that the clubs actions are doing the opposite of controlling the narrative. The media has told the story the whole way through. Take the review. We first hear Pert saying he'll be doing a review in the SEN interview, and he does one every year so its nothing remarkable. When Roffey goes Green says he's reviewing the board. Then a few days later we get a report that the club has 'backflipped' and we are actually doing an external review helmed by Darren Shand, then we find out that Green and Pert will also be on the panel of the review.

All of that confusion could have been avoided if the club announced the review when it was called for explaining who would be conducting it and what it's parameters are or if Green had given us a mission statement when he took over.

Exactly Kozzy

Club is a shambles with clearly zero strategic leadership well said

[Kent 2,914]

2 hours ago, drysdale demon said:

A bit impatient.

Well is he the new president or not

Is he acting president or not

The problems continue because a lack of transparency and leadership allowing the space to be filled by journalists

[Smokey 4,389]

On 06/09/2024 at 21:37, SFebes said:

Well many on here wanted her gone so you’ve got your wish. A female premiership president is how she’ll depart. Her exit doesn’t solve our on field issues and cultural problems. All the best KR. 

Why is gender an issue at all here? Would you say male president if that were the case? 

[Fritta and Turner 4,522]

1 hour ago, Hawk the Demon said:

. And after 1 October the Board cannot insert their preferred candidates onto the Board giving them an incumbency advantage going into the election.

Can the board, insert a candidate before 1 October?

[Harvey Wallbanger 1,029]

3 hours ago, Fritta and Turner said:

Can the board, insert a candidate before 1 October?

They can. But when I listened in on the case I heard our Vice President give evidence that appointing casual vacancies immediately before elections wasn't looked upon favourably by members - it was perceived by members to give those appointees an unfair advantage. That is why the rule was changed. Having said all that, there is still nothing I can see on our website which shows what election rules are effective right now?

[BoBo 2,941]

6 hours ago, KozzyCan said:

Personally I think that the clubs actions are doing the opposite of controlling the narrative. The media has told the story the whole way through. Take the review. We first hear Pert saying he'll be doing a review in the SEN interview, and he does one every year so its nothing remarkable. When Roffey goes Green says he's reviewing the board. Then a few days later we get a report that the club has 'backflipped' and we are actually doing an external review helmed by Darren Shand, then we find out that Green and Pert will also be on the panel of the review.

All of that confusion could have been avoided if the club announced the review when it was called for explaining who would be conducting it and what it's parameters are or if Green had given us a mission statement when he took over.

They need time to set up how the review is going to work though don’t they? Is Green in the position to give a mission statement considering he’s an interim President?

[jnrmac 20,185]

6 hours ago, 58er said:

You are absolutely sure Kate stood on the Board on a ticket in 2013 on an invitation to spearhead the Training and Administration base. 

You do understand that in 2013 we had finished 5 years in the bottom of the ladder, were penniless and in debt plus Jim Stynes  had started the rescue act of recovery. 

Then the base was not a priority as our survival as a Club on the field and our underwhelming on field performances also of major concern. 

So although you say 11 years That’s  not really the full time we started the base seriously as each opportunity within a stones throw to the MCG was discarded by location, green groups and lack of vacant land available.

You would be aware of the reasons and circumstances of where we are today with Caulfield. 

Again the major reason  for the delay is the Caulfield intricacies location and State Govt involvement in this area. 

Do Melb fans want it built without due process and hasty overactive decisions? 

The State Govt are the chief stakeholder with the MRC and We can’t automatically overrule their processes towards the land usage at the Racecourse. 

So you know this but like many others are sheeting full blame on our Board for the delay. 

Kate has been Chair  while we have had an extraordinary 3 years of results and building our Club. 
Yes some of the gloss has started to override our success this year but we still well ahead of 2013 in our situation.

Thats what needs attending to in the next 6 mths so 2025 can be a restoration of our on field and off brand. 

. 

You can read the PR announcement of her appointment here. https://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/114175/roffey-joins-melbourne-board

 

You can read her credentials on her VU page:

Kate was previously the Director of Deals, Investment and Major Projects at Wyndham City, where she has played a critical role in securing a new A League team for Melbourne’s West and developing the Public-Private-Partnership deal that will see Australia’s first privately-owned sports stadium built in Wyndham.

Kate has extensive experience in developing major sports facilities and previously held an executive position at Tennis Australia leading the billion-dollar Melbourne Park Redevelopment upgrading of facilities for the Australian Open Tennis Championship.

Kate has also been a strong advocate for creating visionary cities of the future and was the CEO of the Committee for Melbourne where she successfully led initiatives that ensured Melbourne continued to grow as a prosperous globally connected city.