Jump to content

Featured Replies

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

 
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

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? 

 
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?

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?


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?

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.

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