Tricky

But you know Melbourne supporters we are very "Supersticious".

The writing's on the wall..

I don't normally do this....and I don't have it from Paul Roos directly.....but.....

I have it from a well connected source that it's done.

They are also saying announcement Thursday night.

Can someone post the full article its saying i have to register for the news or some crap like that.

It's called a paywall and if you have Chrome you can just copy and paste the last bit of the URL and search for the article on Google and get around it.

What rpfc said, or this should work too http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-premiership/the-afl-will-support-melbourne-snare-premiership-coach-paul-roos/story-e6frf39c-1226677378131#.Ud3p3PmLBlw

Roos would be mad not to take the job, we have an abundance of quality youth to work with.

High draft picks to come in next year.

Our board will be quality... Our talent is quality and if Roos can improve that talent, he will get all the plaudits that come with it.

That should be enough to satisfy his massive ego.

Seriously?

I admire your optimism, but....

Roos is a premiership coach - he has the plaudits you speak of already!

He's doing just fine within his current media role, and for all reports, happily married and the family well settled in Sydney.

If you are relying on some kind of outsiders perception of his ego then thank heavens you have nothing to do with the future decisions of this club.

If we can secure Roos to coach the MFC then it will be nothing short of a major coup orchestrated by PJ and the AFL. It won't be because the MFC of 2014 and beyond is some kind of pre-assured career and "ego" boosting certainty.

Reality check required by some.

I take it Frawley will be a restricted free agent next year as compared to an unrestricted free agent like Sylvia this year.

Is that right?

I believe that is correct Mr Burgundy.

Very nice 3rd Qtr.

6. Watts
5. Terlich
4. N.Jones
3. Dawes
2. Rodan
1. Frawley

Honourable mentions:

Fitzy, Gawn, Toumpas, Trenners, Howe.

I hope so Jack. Time he and his velvet jacket disappeared.

Happy for him to turn up after wins.

Bye.

I think she will go next.

Ding ding ding ding!

Another Cigar for Redleg

Negative.

I don't have a copy of the constitution. Can you confirm what it says about board appointments with regards to vacancies?

Many incorporated associations will have in their rules a clause that says if there is a vacancy and someone nominates they are elected unless there are more nominations than positrons in which case the is a vote.

If we have a board of 6 or 8 bit or constitution allows up to 12, can anyone stand and be automatically appointed without a vote?

Ok, I'll start with a disclaimer of sorts...

The Directors section (and items relevant to your questions) is longer and more complicated than the simple number of directors figure I offered; I don't want to seem "precious" but it's a legal document and I don't want to quote that section in isolation. (IE without definitions, related clauses/sections etc)

I'm not sure I feel comfortable posting it / linking to it in its entirety given the club doesn't have it publicly accessible anywhere (not sure if that is just incidental or specific policy).

I'd encourage anyone interested to request a copy of the document from the club.

That said, my understanding / interpretation (which may be totally incorrect!) and in my own words is that the board can appoint directors anytime except during a general meeting. Anyone appointed by the board automatically retires at the next meeting but is eligible for (re)election at that meeting.

A member can also be nominated by 2 voting members (them not being one of those 2) 30 days prior to a general meeting, provided the nominee has signed the directors consent form.

As you say, if the number of candidates is <= vacancies the candidates are automatically deemed (re)elected, otherwise a ballot is required.

I was particularly underwhelmed by Karen Hayes when she "presented" to the members after a game a while back.

Not sure what she does around the place - perhaps "strategic consulting" based on the profile, which strikes me as rather tokenistic. That may be completely unfair...

I would be in favour of a smaller board moving forward.

Incidentally, according to the constitution the number of directors must be >=6 and <=12

edit: typo

Here's my uneducated guess as to how things will play out.

Roos in discussions with the club at the moment. Keen to take it on. No need to announce for a couple of months Wants to extract as much as possible from the AFL in terms of support and draft concessions.

Mid August club announce Roos ha been appointed head coach and will come in at seasons end to oversee draft etc fro next season. In the mean time will meet with Craig and discuss how he would like the boys to play.

Craig will be announced as Football Manager, perfect for the role, has the team onside already (in the same way Balme does at Geelong) and will work hand in glove with Roos and PJ. A smooth transition takes place at seasons end.

After Roos is appointed he announces his assistants. Cameron Ling is one. Leigh Brown stays as does Rawlings. Royal goes and is replaced by Jnr, which goes a long way to healing some wounds.

No one could accuse you of being a pessimist binman.

Can anyone show me where AD is quoted saying we won't get a vote? No, because it never happened.

Exactly, in fact he has said exactly the opposite.

What we have is a conditional lifeline, a powerful one.

Those who would like to, can vote against the AFL appointed board when the time comes.

In the interim we are yet to understand the detail of any alternative that would rival what we are being offered.

It isn’t quite that simple. The AFL can't just appoint the board. They can influence so that their nomination is the successful nomination for a casual vacancy. For there to be a casual vacancy someone has to stand aside.

So we are in the hands of the board that was returned unopposed at the last General Meeting. If those members stand aside then others can fill the positions.

Bit of a mute point really as the AFL will get what they want.

My suggestion is we see what unfolds, and if we really don't like the board they put together we raise the correct number of member names on a petition to force an extraordinary general meeting. We would also need to find suitable alternates that could do a better job than the AFL puts up!

I'm no lawyer but I found no mention of scope to call these EGM's anywhere in the constitution...happy to have that explained to me.

The positions can be put to vote at the AGM, that is clear.

Also, we would need to be prepared to turn our back on the AFL's rescue fund, and have a replacement for Action Jackson,

GNF brings us insider info and then bam, you cut him down with one fowl swoop.

:D

Someone had to be the escape goat for all the tension around here lately

lol

Personally, I prefer my purposes to be mild.

The AFL is now controlling the appointment of the President (Chairman) and members of the Board as well as the appointment and hand picking of the coach.

As members I think we can forget about voting. It looks as though it has been taken out of our hands.

Is this what members really want? No say?

We do have rights HG, they are laid out in the constitution.

Personally, I think they (the AFL) are saving us from ourselves.

With the exception of the debt reduction under JS the MFC has lurched from one disaster to another continuously over the last decade.

In 2103 we find ourselves staring at another huge debt, the poorest team in the competition, no president and zero prospect for 2014.

We have clearly shown we cannot run a AFL club.

Under those circumstances I do not care if the AFL takes over.

IMO it is the only way we will survive.

If it takes five years to emerge from AFL control so be it.

I want a strong well run MFC.

Beyond that the rest are ideals we cannot afford as far as I am concerned.

Ditto OD. They are saving us from ourselves at the moment...

Who knows, one day perhaps they will watch us fly off into the wild again, ready to fend for ourselves.

Are you sure?

Just found him. Great job, tasteful.

whilst we're on Demonland predictions and the like, the ultimate kiss of death is for someone on DL to put "I believe in *insert name here*" in their signature.

Scully, Gonski

Neeld, Gonski

Please no one adopt the "I believe in Jesse Hogan" sig!

At least, not until we want them gone.

I think that was more about HOW jeff wanted to be president

He didn't want to go thru the AGM/EGM process to be prez

He wanted the AFL to directly appoint "commissioners" to run the board in much the same way as state gov takes over a local gov

The AFL rejected this "back door" approach - rightly too

He is still free as a member to nominate at the next agm/egm but i doubt the afl would approve and they are insisting on approval of board composition in return for financial support.

Apparently quite a few possible board members have emerged and talked to the mfc/afl according to dimwit on the radio this morning

maybe all jeff's posturing helped to stir the next and bring others forward?

Agree, and based on the calibre of some of the candidates apparently being dismissed, Vlad must be eyeing some sort of super heavyweight...

Whilst the Grimes looks right (and is a monty to be on there, anyway), and the Viney is a cert, am I the only one who thinks the 'Trengove' silhouette looks a little like Howe? Are we in for a surprise?

I thought the Viney silhouette looked a tad Dawes-like too

DL just wants a social club away from the

Northern stand...The football side of the operation is a distant after thought!

He should become a premium member and come hang in the Lindsay Hassett & Ryder Rooms in Sth Stand then...