33 minutes ago, The Jackson FIX said:

You don’t come on here much, do you kilt?

Serious-pants on now;

Ultimately as members in a public, unlisted company we have a say - it is our vote.

Not too long ago we (as a collective membership) chose to reject change in favour of the incumbent.

I wasn’t a fan of that change at the time (still not) but WE chose that.

I love the podcast and the discussion/debate/dissection it brings but the role of ‘voice of the fan base’ isn’t Andy’s, it is our vote’s.

Finally, I firmly disagree that the C-Suite nor board don’t hear us. I believe they are just making the strategic decisions/ trade-offs that THEY think is the best course of action, like I am sure you would do in your role as an exec in global business kilt. If WE don’t like those decisions then we can have a say with our vote.

If I was to do anything political with Demonland I’d advise we find the board member/s that best reflect what WE on this forum want and put D’land’s media power behind them - Andy could be the next Joe Rogan!

But I’m also not sure we on this forum would ever reach alignment on much meaningful, to be honest, aside perhaps for the need to overhaul club communication practices.

2 hours ago, picket fence said:

It sunk in to me, I was wrapped! My rationale being, surely after that performance the coach will be replaced! This SURELY MUST HAPPEN for the club to move forward and wait with interest what will unfold in the next 4 games. Im expecting 6 changes this week but there will probably be close to zero!

Imagine is side was chosen without fear or favour.

13 hours ago, praha said:

Okay so what is the "action"? What are you asking of people? To be more "constructive"? Genuine question.

Thanks for the question @praha

The action I'm proposing is for Demonland to draft a collective letter to the incoming President and CEO, outlining specific areas members want addressed. Given Demonland represents a significant and engaged portion of the MFC membership base, such a letter would carry genuine weight and demonstrate that these concerns come from a substantial, organized group of supporters rather than just individual complaints.

I've seen this dynamic before in my work with the Australian abalone and rock lobster industries. Government officers told me they found it frustrating when they only received correspondence from individuals - often emotive and not coordinated. They couldn't be sure these individual voices truly represented broader industry sentiment. They needed a sophisticated, unified voice to take concerns seriously and act on them.

I believe the same dynamic applies here. The MFC likely receives plenty of individual feedback, but a coordinated response from an established, respected supporter community like Demonland would would demonstrate genuine collective concern.

3 hours ago, Queanbeyan Demon said:

I suggest you get yourself on the board @Dee in a Kilt .

I agree QD but that is fairly difficult when he is living in Europe.

10 hours ago, binman said:

I think a stripped down version is feasible, one that doesn't involve moderation per se (just a commitment for posters contributing to a thread to focus on constructive criticism and positive ideas not raging at the club).

The reason I say that is consensus would be all but impossible given the disperate views and the risk would be it wouldn't actually be representative.

And the moderation would simply be too time consuming amd complex

I'm thinking something less focused on creating a platform so to speak, more on a space to contribute ideas on specific topics/areas that the club could tap into.

In that sense there is an opportunity for the club to get free of charge the sort of direct feedback and input from consumers big organisations spend huge sums on in the form of focus groups, research, surveys etc etc.

Would the MFC be interested in such feedback (and I don't mean the sort they have been copping)?

They would be absolutely crazy not to.

If done well the info they would get back woyld be miles better than the joke member surveys they do every year that likely cost a 150k or more.

Business doesn't seek input from consumers for [censored] and giggles. The drive for such processes is usually profit, to sell more products, the bottom line.

No different for AFL clubs that increasingly rely on membership sales to survive, let alone thrive.

It would be plain stupid to ignore FREE well considered feedback, input and ideas from passionate supporters of the club, the majority of whom are paid up members - in business speak the key stakeholders.

The trick might be to have some communication with the club to let them know the feedback exists and what its intended purpose is.

I suggest we start with one topic area, see if we can self moderate, see if we do in fact come up with some agreed good ideas and consensus and go from there.

Because it's a hobby horse of mine, is an area where there is actually pretty good consensus already (ie that it's poor) and is not that loaded, I reckon we could start with a thread on how the club could improve communication (all aspects - ie engagement, social media, crisis management, injury reporting, website, content etc etc)

When I'm at a computer tommorow I'll happy to start a thread to get the ball rolling if there is support for it.

You have my vote.

1 hour ago, The Jackson FIX said:

Serious-pants on now;

Ultimately as members in a public, unlisted company we have a say - it is our vote.

Not too long ago we (as a collective membership) chose to reject change in favour of the incumbent.

I wasn’t a fan of that change at the time (still not) but WE chose that.

I love the podcast and the discussion/debate/dissection it brings but the role of ‘voice of the fan base’ isn’t Andy’s, it is our vote’s.

Finally, I firmly disagree that the C-Suite nor board don’t hear us. I believe they are just making the strategic decisions/ trade-offs that THEY think is the best course of action, like I am sure you would do in your role as an exec in global business kilt. If WE don’t like those decisions then we can have a say with our vote.

If I was to do anything political with Demonland I’d advise we find the board member/s that best reflect what WE on this forum want and put D’land’s media power behind them - Andy could be the next Joe Rogan!

But I’m also not sure we on this forum would ever reach alignment on much meaningful, to be honest, aside perhaps for the need to overhaul club communication practices.

Thanks @The Jackson FIX. You raise important points about member voting rights and I agree that's our ultimate democratic tool. You're absolutely right that we chose the current direction, and that carries weight.

On that note, @binman's post in the Monday training thread resonates - I look at Peter Lawrence efforts to improve MFC governance through a different lense now. With hindsight, I'd seriously consider voting for PL.

Where I'd respectfully differ is on timing and approach. While we can vote for change at the next AGM, that's months away whereas we have a special opportunity to inform Smith and Guerra at an impressionable time - their onboarding.

In the meantime, there's value in constructive engagement - not to override the board's authority, but to ensure they have clear feedback on specific issues affecting their members.

It would be good for the Board and CEO to hear an additional voice to the coterie, who can be just as emotive as we see here on Demonland.

You make a fair point about alignment challenges. However, I'm enough of an optimist to believe we will find common ground - otherwise nothing gets done, right? If we don't have common ground on an issue, we can report the different perspectives.

I like your idea about supporting aligned board candidates when the time comes - that's definitely the more powerful long-term play. I for one would be very interested to hear Andy, George and Binman interview Board candidates on their podie. That's good governance. I too love the podie TJF. I really, really like your idea of Andy 'Joe Rogan' idea.

But I see constructive interim feedback as complementary to that democratic process, not competing with it. I made a point with a response to @praha that my experience is those representing the interests of a very large membership need to hear from a coordinated, sophisticated representation.

19 hours ago, GawnOfTheDead said:

I prefer having a whinge.

Fair enough @GawnOfTheDead! Sometimes a good whinge is exactly what we need - it's cathartic and honestly, some of the best solutions have started with someone having a proper vent about what's not working - and we've had plenty of that on this site.

The beauty is we can do both - have our whinge AND channel that frustration into something that might actually create change. Your whinge no doubt identifies real problems others share, so why not let it fuel some action too?

Plus, imagine how satisfying it would be to whinge about something, help fix it, and then have new things to whinge about! 😉

19 hours ago, Trident22 said:

I love your sentiments, but the MFC Board have ignored the supporters and members for years, why would they agree to listen now?

Great point @Trident22 - and you're right, past experience suggests they haven't been particularly receptive to member feedback. But that's exactly why the approach matters.

Individual voices have been easy to dismiss as "just the emotive vocal few." I'm suggesting we put our voices to be at least equal to the coterie. What MFC Board and exec haven't faced is a coordinated, professional response from an organised, respected community like Demonland representing serious, engaged members. That's much harder to ignore or write off.

Sometimes it takes a change in how we present our concerns to get a different response. The incoming President and CEO are starting fresh - they might be more open to genuine dialogue than we've seen previously. And if they're not? Well, at least that informs the next election of Board members and we get Andy "Joe Rogan" into his raging best!

I just can't see a coordinated, sophisticated, respectful response being ignored. The best case? We actually get heard and see some positive changes. We'll in a better position than just hoping things improve on their own.

19 hours ago, Billy said:

Nup I’m still to angry

That's fine @Billy. But what I'm asking is to get mad as hell and tell the world you're not going to take it anymore!

2 hours ago, 640MD said:

I will read all this again. ( with glasses on)

If I can contribute any positive ideas I will

Any negatives I will try to be nice!

I've tried.

Im struggling to get past Olivers kick where a measly point would have sealed it.

But no he couldn't manage that.

He does the strangest things.

He was in tonnes of space and running when he decides to handball it to Spargo who has a saints playing sitting on him.

Then by only sheer luck, Oliver gets the ball back and completely fluffs his kick on goal despite being only 20 m out.

For a gun mid....C O hardly ever contributes to our goal tally.

He averages only 0.2 goals a game or four a year. Yikes.

But he disposal for the last two years has been woeful.

He has gone into see ball get ball which he has always done very well to now just getting rid of ball ASAP regardless of where it goes.....ergo Spargo.

Also who do we pin the six six six infringement upon.

It never happens. So it especially should have happened in a game like this and when it did.

I fear all the players felt this game slipping away from them like the Carlton final a few years ago.

Ok the stakes were not as high but deep down I think they all felt that a massive result in huge comeback was brewing and they all started to panic.

Why didn't they slow things down?

Why did we up the tempo and fall into saints trap?

Why are we still kicking at goal so poorly?

The only positive will be a change of coach.

There is something seriously wrong with this club and it's hard to pinpoint it.

I'm afraid the worse thing that seems to stand out is that we are mentally soft.

Hence our panicking.

At our best we can beat the lions and almost the pies.

At our best we can start like we did v the saints.

That game showed both sides of us.

At our worse we give up a 50 point lead in the last

But seeing Melksham and KP on the bench in the last few minutes certainly was poor coaching and getting rid of Goody ist least a start.

1 hour ago, 48 Year Now said:

Imagine is side was chosen without fear or favour.

Imagine if a side was picked with the best chance of winning the game in mind...

19 hours ago, Go Ds said:

Fingers crossed But like fanmail it would very easy for such a letter to not get proper consideration.

@Go Ds , you're right, letters can get buried. But that's where the power of a platform like Demonland comes in. This wouldn't be quiet fanmail that disappears into someone's inbox or a "copy/paste" response. It would be a public, transparent process where the community shapes the message, and the response (or lack thereof) is visible to everyone.

The brilliant thing about organised supporter communities is that we don't have to rely on hope or crossing fingers anymore. When the many engaged members speak with one coordinated voice, it becomes impossible to ignore or dismiss.

You with us?

39 minutes ago, Dee in a Kilt said:

I for one would be very interested to hear Andy, George and Binman interview Board candidates on their podie.

That is actually a bloody good idea.

9 minutes ago, rjay said:

Imagine if a side was picked with the best chance of winning the game in mind...

Is that so important when you are not going to make finals and need to look at youth for the future?

No one go to this weeks game, that will send a message.

20 hours ago, Previously known as LITD. said:

If Goody's tenure is still intact after that disgraceful record than I'm not sure any change is possible.

And this is as constructive as it gets.

Surely it starts with a new coach.

Then we sort out our list.

Then our style of footy.

We establish a decent ground for training and more social opportunities for.members.

More games outside of the constant Sundays.

More pushback to the AFL.

Less games at Kardinia.

No more NT games where nobody supports us anyway.

No more tolerance of umpiring like the pies games.

Fighting back on inconsistent bans on players.

Sacking everyone remotely involved in our goal kicking coaching.

More drive and incentives to lure more members.

As the club named after the city we should be first choice for new supporters coming to the city and or sport.

More family friendly environments at the ground.

I'm sick of abusive and dodgy cwood supporters intimidating people.

One should find footy a safe place to be. Alas , . this is drifting of course but it's still relevant.

Finally, letters like the one posted here from Brad Green should be questioned.

It wasn't a genuine letter expressing concern about performance.

It appeared to be a veiled reprimand and warning about inappropriate comments towards the Coach.

And while of course no threats are appropriate, they are a totally separate issue.

By all means call them out but not in the same letter about the clubs super poor efforts.

Thank you Mr Green for chastising the psycho making threats but where's the letter solely about the worst game of footy for decades?

Until that comes, I doubt the club is really bothered.

And that's been an issue for a while now.

No wonder it's been so long between flags.

If you want constructive criticism....you've come to wrong club brother.

Its been given for three years and ignored.

No ....now is the time to vote with our wallets before we are staring down another fifty years death of success.

@Previously known as LITD., I can hear the frustration, and you've identified some real issues many members share. The challenge is how we channel that into something the club has to take seriously rather than dismiss. That's where coordinated, sophisticated feedback could make the difference individual complaints haven't.

We have an opportunity to shape the mindset of an incoming President and CEO. That's worth a shot.

There are some gems in your list... and some anger. Let me pick up your gems...

15 hours ago, BKKBooga said:

As a member of 40 years I have seen it all until last week. What happened in that last quarter was nothing short of complete capitulation by the players on the field. The coaching has been talked to death and frankly I don't care who coaches our club, it is players mindset in that last quarter the likes I have never seen from experienced players. The club itself has never really addressed communications with members other than the odd meeting or three. Coterie groups run the place and are treated on a different level to everybody else. Let's see what Smith and Guerra do...I just want us to be off the laughing stock list and become really relevant for the right reasons.

@BKKBooga, thank you for such a thoughtful perspective. Your 40 years of membership gives real weight to your observations. You've identified something crucial that often gets overlooked in all the coaching debates. I listened to a podcast recently about high performing sports teams over a long time period. The study found that on-field leadership is crucial for achieving superior team performance. For long-term sustained success, the study found on-field leadership was more important than the coaching. This leadership goes beyond formal captaincy and can involve any player who steps up to guide, motivate or coordinate teammates.

The governance and communication issues you've raised are spot on. You're absolutely right the coterie groups operate on a different information level. While their financial contribution is significant, proper governance principles require transparency across the entire membership base. In corporate settings, material communications to major stakeholders by law must be simultaneously disclosed to all shareholders - the same principle should apply here.

The fact that you've never seen that kind of player capitulation in four decades tells us this goes deeper than tactical issues. It suggests deeper issues needing to be addressed.

Your point about wanting relevance "for the right reasons" resonates. A professional, organised response from the membership on governance and communication standards could be exactly what Smith and Guerra need to hear as they establish their approach. These are foundational issues that affect everything else.

This is precisely the kind of substantive, experience-based insight that would carry real weight in a collective letter.

26 minutes ago, 48 Year Now said:

Is that so important when you are not going to make finals and need to look at youth for the future?

Not so much now but I'm sure if we went all youth approach most would be complaining if we lost.

I don't agree with some of the selections but you can guarantee it's always been done in good faith.

32 minutes ago, The Jackson FIX said:

That is actually a bloody good idea.

Board candidates are forbidden to engage in such activities.

2 minutes ago, rjay said:

Not so much now but I'm sure if we went all youth approach most would be complaining if we lost.

I don't agree with some of the selections but you can guarantee it's always been done in good faith.

No one has ever suggested we go all youth.

In good faith? Please explain what that means and when it became a club objective to selection.

Tge evidence just does not support what you are saying.

15 hours ago, Little Goffy said:

Lol.

"I'm an executive and made a list therefore my anger is called action."

I'm just an ordinary dude from Bondi Beach Public School" who wants to make a difference

23 minutes ago, Cyclops said:

Board candidates are forbidden to engage in such activities.

I didn’t know that… Why is that? And how is it any different than a candidate spamming the entire club database with their agenda?

15 hours ago, 48 Year Now said:

I wonder if the last quarter has really sunk in to our supporters. Particularly to the younger ones. To put in perspective Ive watched games since 67, decades of lean years with even leaner talent. Some barely Modern VFL standard and yet that is our worst last quarter effort ive seen. Wow.

@48 Year Now, that's exactly the perspective we need to hear. When someone with your depth of experience says that was the worst capitulation they've seen across decades of lean years, it puts everything in context.

That kind of insight from long-term members like yourself is precisely why a coordinated response could carry real weight. The club needs to understand this isn't just typical post-loss frustration - this is unprecedented concern from people who've seen it all.

12 hours ago, PaulRB said:

Well put and timely.

When i saw the title I asked myself what would I like from the MFC?

My immediate answer is active and engaged transparency (with embargos on inter-club competetive issues of footy) and communications by the club about the thoughts, theories, plans and ambitions of the MFC leaders (Board, Football Department, and Team) and their evaluation of our current state and how WE can fix it.

So I was happy when I saw both "transparency" and "communication" in Dks agenda.

Constructive, intelligent discussion of a problem and its immediate resolution... what could go wrong?

😉

Go Dees.

@PaulRB, exactly! You've nailed what so many of us are feeling. "Active and engaged transparency" is a perfect way to put it. We're not asking for trade secrets or tactical plans, just honest communication about where the club thinks we are and where we're heading on an ongoing basis.

Your point about embargos on competitive issues shows this can be done professionally without compromising the club's strategic position. It's about respect for the membership and basic governance principles.

The fact you immediately thought of transparency and communication when asked "what would I like from the MFC" suggests these aren't fringe concerns. They're fundamental needs that many members share.

This is exactly the kind of thoughtful input that would make a collective letter powerful. You've articulated the "what" and the "how" beautifully.

Indeed, Go Dees!

Thanks, i just think fans will tolerate lots of tbings including lack of ability, frees against, poor kicking and big losses and still stay invested, but Sunday was something else again. Like the perfect storm to expose our cracks.

Remember the famous , John Kennedy line, just do something. All i saw at the end was Max rise and tap down Olivers thoat only for him to fumble.