12 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.

@binman, this is brilliant and exactly the kind of leadership we need to make this work. You've identified the key challenges (consensus, moderation complexity) while offering a practical solution that could actually deliver results.

Your point about free focus group feedback is spot on. The club would be mad to ignore well-considered input from a respected platform when they're likely spending six figures on consultants for inferior insights.

Starting with communication makes perfect sense. It's an area where there's already broad consensus improvement is needed, it's not strategically sensitive, and success there could build momentum for further feedback on aras of critical concern.

The self-moderation approach focused on constructive input rather than formal consensus is much more achievable. Consensus is the absence of leadership and we want Demonalnd to show leadership.

It would be brilliant if you start that thread. This could be the beginning of something genuinely valuable, for both for members who want their voices heard constructively, and for a club that desperately needs better connection with its supporter base.

1 hour ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

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

Im overseas for 6 weeks England, Scotland, Ireland, Wales, Venice, Florence, Rome, keep the fires going and hopefully I'll be able to post O'Seas

Cheers all

P.F

Edited yesterday at 03:141 day by picket fence

9 hours ago, Demonsone said:

There has been issues within the playing list since 22 with the May restaurant incident, followed by the Oliver, Smith which questioned the culture and the fall out with Trac as he bluntly said driving for higher standards, why did Hunter retire on 199 games & which player does that, connect the dots…. I believe there are fractures which has lead to selfish rather than selfless! Is culture setting allowing a player who missed preseason Oliver and still played senior footy vs others who busted their butts then miss out. These decision all lay under the footy dept/coaching

@Demonsone, you've connected some important dots there. The pattern you've identified - from the May incident through to the Oliver situation and Petracca's comments about standards - may suggest systemic cultural issues.

Your point about "fractures leading to selfish rather than selfless" really resonates. That shift from team-first to individual-first mentality may explain a lot.

Back to @binman's point about communication, would it have been appropriate for the club to be more open and transparent about these incidents and what the club was doing about it.

These are exactly the kinds of deeper cultural and accountability issues where the members are in the dark. The club needs to understand supporters see these patterns and are genuinely concerned about the direction of the culture, not just the win-loss record.

This is the sort of substantive insight that would make a collective response powerful. It's not just about performance, it's about the values and standards we expect from our club.

43 minutes ago, The Jackson FIX said:

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?

A candidate is asked to submit up to 500 words to support their candidacy for election to the board. Strict rules apply to the wording. It is then vetted by the MFC and included in the notification to members of an election. This is the only electioneering permitted.

Breach of this rule may result in your candidacy being withdrawn...as I understand it.

I have no knowledge of how other clubs run their elections.

7 hours ago, BDA said:

Thanks for trying to be constructive Kiltman

i'm as grumpy as hell all week so not really in the headspace for it.

We need the best people on the board and heading up the football department. Get the right people on the team and everything else will sort itself out.

i'm pretty low maintenance as a member. i don't care for marketing or comms or engagement. i just want a competent football team on the field that play with heart and courage.

i don't demand flags. they are very difficult to win. I just want the kids to want to come to along to games with me and not be embarrassed.

i think steven smith has the right credentials as president.

I really hope Paul Guerra can be a success. He has a massive job ahead of him. Peter Jackson is the benchmark, the only competent CEO we have had in decades.

First task it to purge the footy dept, top to bottom

Bring in the best up and comer as senior coach. bring in an experienced senior assistant (my preference is John Longmire) to mentor him. find the best assistant coaches.

We can't influence any of the above.

it in the hands of Steven Smith and Paul Guerra now. I hope they are up to the task. And i wish them the best of luck

@BDA, thanks for that honest perspective. I totally get the grumpiness after Sunday. Your point about the kids not being embarrassed really hits home - that's what this is ultimately about, isn't it? Building something that is really attractive to kids and they can be proud of wearing Dees colours.

I love seeing more MFC jerseys at Auskick now and the kids showing up to Dees games - it makes my heart skip a beat or two in joy.

To keep and attract these kids, we need to do what I recall Ron Barassi saying - we need to become a club "where their performances can be trusted". Barassi nailed it.

You're absolutely right that getting the right people in key positions is fundamental. Smith and Guerra have the credentials. Like you, I'm hoping they can deliver what Jackson did - competent, professional leadership - and not afraiod to be ruthless when called for.

You're right that we can't directly influence the football department decisions, but we can at least let the new leadership know what matters most to members like you - competence, heart, and performances our kids can be proud of. Sometimes the simplest messages are the most powerful.

1 hour ago, Cyclops said:

Board candidates are forbidden to engage in such activities.

Anyone else see a problem here ?

14 hours ago, binman said:

'They play well I buy in'.

The corrally is they play poorly you don't buy in.

Sounds more like the classic fair weather theatre going fan than supporter to me.

Sounds like a no true scotsman supporter to me.

5 hours ago, binman said:

Interesting read.

Almost reads as if the board drafted it for Gleeson.

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/1m-payout-won-t-stop-demons-making-tough-call-on-goodwin-if-necessary-20250729-p5min1.html

Same thought went through my mind when I read it. Perhaps the current Board is walking on eggshells until Steven Smith starts. We need the Board having the strength to communicate this directly rather than through a trusted journalist.

2 hours ago, Previously known as LITD. said:

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.

Let's stay focused on the road ahead of us, not the rear view mirror. There are other threads for the rear view mirror. The opportunity for us is influence the mindset of the incoming President and CEO. Let's grab that with both hands...🦾

25 minutes ago, Cyclops said:

A candidate is asked to submit up to 500 words to support their candidacy for election to the board. Strict rules apply to the wording. It is then vetted by the MFC and included in the notification to members of an election. This is the only electioneering permitted.

Breach of this rule may result in your candidacy being withdrawn...as I understand it.

I have no knowledge of how other clubs run their elections.

Great catch @Cyclops. For proper governance, I'd like to see the podie interview Board candidates. With what members have experienced, we need more than 500 words. We need to get to the authenticate person.

1 hour ago, Dee in a Kilt said:

@binman, this is brilliant and exactly the kind of leadership we need to make this work. You've identified the key challenges (consensus, moderation complexity) while offering a practical solution that could actually deliver results.

Your point about free focus group feedback is spot on. The club would be mad to ignore well-considered input from a respected platform when they're likely spending six figures on consultants for inferior insights.

Starting with communication makes perfect sense. It's an area where there's already broad consensus improvement is needed, it's not strategically sensitive, and success there could build momentum for further feedback on aras of critical concern.

The self-moderation approach focused on constructive input rather than formal consensus is much more achievable. Consensus is the absence of leadership and we want Demonalnd to show leadership.

It would be brilliant if you start that thread. This could be the beginning of something genuinely valuable, for both for members who want their voices heard constructively, and for a club that desperately needs better connection with its supporter base.

I'm flat our today but will create the thread, with relevant guidelines, goal, purpose, process, what it is, and perhaps most importantly what isnt (a place to unload) tomorrow.

Kudos for driving a process that is solution focused.

And respect fr putting yourself out there in a vulnerable space - ie one where it's easy to have pot shots at you for thinking outside the box.

2 hours ago, Previously known as LITD. said:

There is something seriously wrong

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.

wow just wow! Love the passion.

It was not lost only then, with CO, but to have your better players sitting on the pine. I like Spargo, if he tackles you you stay tackled. But he is not fast

Also a poor choice but there have been too many examples throughout this year and last of poor decisions like this.

Who ever makes these decisions needs a help or a push sideways. Gently of course.

3 hours ago, old dee said:

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

Why? It's arguable that being in Europe is a benefit. Someone outside of the psychic prison is the anecdote.

Edited yesterday at 04:141 day by Queanbeyan Demon

Now the administrators should be able to answer this.

How many individuals post or read demonland?

And how many are members of the MFC,

Let’s guess. 15,000 or is that too high

But if it is . That is 25% of the members (maybe) That’s a huge proportion of the membership and watching.

Now what just came in ?

The coach and media stuff

Edited yesterday at 04:151 day by 640MD

5 hours 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.

"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".

I challenge anyone to articulate in three coherent sentences, and find significant majority agreement on, what "WE on this forum want."

I am willing to volunteer to help the club design a KPI tree. To be used to give each level of the organisation and all the way down to each individual contributor what they need to focus and how they'll be measured against throughout the season.

30 minutes ago, 640MD said:

Now the administrators should be able to answer this.

How many individuals post or read demonland?

And how many are members of the MFC,

Let’s guess. 15,000 or is that too high

But if it is . That is 25% of the members (maybe) That’s a huge proportion of the membership and watching.

Now what just came in ?

The coach and media stuff

I would be astonished if:

1. the administrators have any real idea how many readers or posters are members of the club, and

2. the figure could be established, it is more than a couple of thousand.

On 30/07/2025 at 13:28, Dee in a Kilt said:

Last Sunday's devastating loss delivers us an opportunity, as does any bad event.

I've supported the Dees since the early 90's when my 6 year old son helped fly the huge cheer squad flags at a time when the squad comprising two men and a dog (today's cheer squad is brilliant!) My family has hosted draftees and a current player is godfather to one of my grandkids. But I've also had decades in executive roles in Australia, USA, Japan, China and now the UK (currently back in Melbourne during the European holiday period).

@binman's post this morning in the training session thread cut through the noise: We members ARE the club and we have power we are not using. The 57,000 of us MFC members feels like Dr Seus's "Horton Hears a Who!" Like Who-ville citizens, we members struggle to be heard.

Here's what I propose

Demonland becomes the voice. Not another venting forum, but a structured process to deliver member expectations to incoming President Steven Smith and CEO Paul Guerra by August 31st. As Smith and Guarra don't start until September, Demonalnd feedback can inform their onboarding process.

Critical areas for member agreement

First, Demonland agree on the critical areas to be addressed, for example:

• Communications strategy with members

• Transparency standards and accountability

• Complete governance review - obviously including the footy department

• Securing MFC's permanent member home

• Our message to AFL leadership (umpiring professionalism)

The Process

Constructive discussion only - enforced by moderators. I have deep empathy for member pain. Let's channel member frustration into positive action through Demonland as a unified voice.

Upon agreement on critical areas to address, then these topics become a separate Demonland thread. When broad agreement is reached on each thread, we then insert it into the official communication we send.

Andy has veto and edit powers, informed by Binman and George.

We do all this with respect to the Board and CEO.

A final point is that the word "ruthless" has been used of late. In my mind, the only time we have been ruthless was when Peter Jackson rebuilt the club.

And that ruthlessness delivered us the 2021 flag.

Since, members have spent the last 2 years as passive observers of governance failures with significant infighting at Board and CEO, resulting in Goodwin riding a two-legged horse.

Current circumstances hands us a blank slate and leaders who need to listen.

Can we channel our anger into constructive feedback the oldest AFL club deserves?

What do you think?

It's a waste of time. Half the posters think there was nothing wrong until now, and the other half could see that there was something wrong two years ago. Besides, I don't think it takes a rocket science expert for the club to realize that people are angry. However, now is not the time for the club to react to the media's timelines. I just hope they change things up regarding players for the last four games, but I won't hold my breath.

I actually (and sadly), honestly just don’t care. Wasn’t angry after the St Kilda loss, I actually had a bit of a laugh and turned the TV off. I am apathetic towards the club and their on-field performances. If we were ever going to get out of being a loser club, it was post-2021.

Edited yesterday at 05:141 day by Ethan Tremblay

Love to know what Darren Shand had to say about all this. He presented at the board this week but as usual we dont even get a sanitised version of his work.

4 hours ago, Dee in a Kilt said:

@Demonsone, you've connected some important dots there. The pattern you've identified - from the May incident through to the Oliver situation and Petracca's comments about standards - may suggest systemic cultural issues.

Your point about "fractures leading to selfish rather than selfless" really resonates. That shift from team-first to individual-first mentality may explain a lot.

Back to @binman's point about communication, would it have been appropriate for the club to be more open and transparent about these incidents and what the club was doing about it.

These are exactly the kinds of deeper cultural and accountability issues where the members are in the dark. The club needs to understand supporters see these patterns and are genuinely concerned about the direction of the culture, not just the win-loss record.

This is the sort of substantive insight that would make a collective response powerful. It's not just about performance, it's about the values and standards we expect from our club.

Unfortunately no club will ever reveal all of their reviews due to IP and personal privacy, the theme this season was around love, suggesting they were not showing enough care eg trac injury etc, this is poor and it falls on the footy dept & Goodwin as this is culture! The continue saying we look at the process rather than the scoreboard… sorry it’s a win loss industry, does this give players an out?? Seems off skew and somehow they feel they have to provide something to the footy world eg to he’ll and back in 2020… you don’t hear this from strong clubs cats, pies, it bs nonsense clutching at straws…keep this in house!

7 hours ago, Dee in a Kilt said:

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.

Why do you need to do this when members can email their thoughts directly themselves if they are concerned.

2 hours ago, Queanbeyan Demon said:

I would be astonished if:

1. the administrators have any real idea how many readers or posters are members of the club, and

2. the figure could be established, it is more than a couple of thousand.

Could you or someone arrange a Poll where you could only vote once.

Member or non member, how many years. At least then we as DEMONLAND Coterie might have a voice.

Not much money perhaps but a voice. Squeak up I want the cheeze

6 hours ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

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

I'm afraid this will be the case.

My recommendation is to blood the kids, give them a taste, something to take into pre season.

25 minutes ago, 640MD said:

Could you or someone arrange a Poll where you could only vote once.

Member or non member, how many years. At least then we as DEMONLAND Coterie might have a voice.

Not much money perhaps but a voice. Squeak up I want the cheeze

Running a poll on Demonland would be like holding an election in the DPRK — technically democratic, but really just a state-run ritual of suspended animation, where most of us are trapped in a feedback loop of PTSD, gaslighting, and the delusional hope that this will finally be the week Spargo gets dropped.