Rflowerwing

He made his decision two weeks ago, and advised MFC.

It's not Fox's fault that MFC came back and pestered him again after he had considered their proposal and rejected it. He wasn't "back in the race" again.

He didn't "drop out" again - he wasn't there!

Fox is being unfairly maligned for reaffirming to MFC that the answer really was no the first time you asked me!

There was a day a week or so back when Stynes rang Fox 5 times in a single day. It got so bad that Fox complained to Frank Costa who had to have a word with Jimma.

Sort of sad when you think about it.

So who leaked to Mike Sheahan that made McNamee's tenure untenable and forced the Board to play catch up?

Sheahan has said that whispers were around for the previous 3 weeks and it was all the talk at the Geelong v WB game at SS that he attended the previous Saturday 19 July. My betting would be Demetriou/Ian Anderson whom no doubt the naive Stynes took into his "confidence".

I have no problem with constructive criticism of our board but the people who put forward this discredited "mates" line are doing their club no favours. Moreover, it has all the hallmarks of someone tasting sour grapes by the bucketload.

And your post has all the hallmarks of a starstruck leg humping sycophant, MATE.

From the moment that McNamee (and the rest of us) read of his imminent demise in Mike Sheahan's item on the morning of July 22 this fiasco has become a world record duration Benny Hill sketch. Highlights have been:

- the 36 hour delay between Sheahan's piece and any response from the Club during which time McNamee's sacking had been reported in every print and electronic media outlet

- Stynes' bumbling and totally unconvincing explanation for his decision contrasting with McNamee's dignified and classy exit

- the petty and venal reason for Stynes' decision to sack McNamee which boiled down to nothing more than Stynes' unwillingness to share the spotlight with another MFC official who had his own media profile and who would distract the media from brand Stynes

- no contingency plan or succession plan in place before Stynes sacked McNamee

- the unnecessary and avoidable cost of the sacking and the recruitment of a successor

- the blatant nepotism behind the mates offering the gig to the mate Schwab only to be rebuffed (so far) - the knock back does not change the fact that the offer was sheer croneyism

- the on again off again daily revelations about Fox and Schwab as the one month anniversary of McNamee's sacking approaches - Jimma just can't seem to nail this one. The fact that they are spinning at a thousand miles an hour about Dillon doesn't change the fact that Dillon could not even make the short list of 3 back in March when McNamee got the job

- the interview in the Herald Sun on July 29 in which the executive search consultant engaged by the Club, Geoff Slade, openly talked about the assignment, naming candidates and providing detailed information on their previous assignment that led to McNamee's appointment. When was the last time you read in the Fin Review of the thoughts of the executive search group engaged by BHP Billiton as they embarked on their assignment to recruit a senior executive for a business like that? Outrageous.

- the ominous implications behind the decisions of Fox and Schwab to knock back the job. I have no doubt that this arises from their assessment of the Stynes version of how governance works - Stynes = Executive Chairman + "President" (there is no role of President in the Constitution of our Club) +CEO + media spokesperson on everything + marketing manager + list/recruitment manager + tea lady. If I was an aspiring CEO I would be appalled by the blurring of the roles between Chairman/Board and CEO/management and would run a mile.

- the abysmal timing of the sacking. Who knows what role this played at a crucial time in Primus' decision making about renewing their major sponsorship - a task of such significance at our end that it would have demanded the considerable attention of the CEO. Budgets and business plans for 2009 are now at a crucial stage of preparation and we don't have a full time CEO and we don't have a CFO.

Amateur hour.

Another nail in the coffin of dills like Charles Happell who came up with that conspiracy theory about the old mates from the 1990's all getting back together again.

If John Ralph is right (and who would know?) then why is Happell a dill and why does he have a nail in his coffin?

Happell wrote: "Now Stynes is looking at bestowing patronage of another "mate", Cameron Schwab, whom he has openly urged to apply for McNamee’s vacant position".

Ralph confirms Happell's article. It brings no credit to Jim Stynes and the mates that another "mate" had the good sense to reject Stynes' offer.

I'm tired of every hiccup being painted as the trap-door to damnation (mostly by the media). That is my major 'beef' with this whole story. Just when your trying to get back on your feet, to drum up some positive spin, there are the media to sink the boot in. I knew it would be portrayed as dire, and, low and behold, it has been. We even have an article in the Hun which insinuates that injuries to Davey and Johnson compound the matter!

Cheers.

Is the irony of this lost on you?

Barely a day went by in Gardner's last 6 months in the Chair when he did not wake up to the strident tones of a massed choir of naysayers, wrist wringers and undertakers portraying us as a club in crisis.

Leading the choir were Jim Stynes, Garry Lyon and Chris Connolly backed up by their mates in the media, prominent amongst whom were Caroline Wilson, Dwayne Russell, Gerard Healy etc. Vlad and his Kremlin Quartet were more than happy to lend their voices - Gardner had committed the cardinal sin of not toeing the line on Kremlin doctrine with drug policy etc.

We all know about honeymoons and Jim is entitled to one. But let's not be precious - if journos are saying we are in crisis, if leaks are destabilising Jim, if problems are seeing the light of day that Jim would rather not be disclosed to the public and if the reality of our situation is overwhelming Jim's spin and "charisma" let's not forget what happened on Gardner's watch. And let's not forget Jim's role in all that.

And a final thing - what would you have done if the Primus announcement had occurred in May rather than yesterday? There would have been a lynch mob lining up the entire length of St Kilda Rd leading to Gardner's door. Why the nonchalance when this disaster occurred on Jim's watch? And let there be no mistake, this is a disaster.

Spargo is our current CEO if memory serves me correctly.

Acting in the job while he continues to manage his own businesses.

No substitute for full time CEO chosen for suitability for position.

On the day following his election as Chairman Jim Stynes identified engaging existing and new sponsors as a cornerstone of his plans to restore the fortunes of the Club. If Jim is successful then he and the new Board will have passed the first big test of their incumbency.

Does anyone know the status of the Primus major sponsorship deal which expires at the end of this season? In the absence of a CEO has Jim been able to negotiate a renewal of this deal?

Are there any other major sponsorship opportunities available? Any suggestions?

Stop bitching. You old moles are sounding like the squabbling kids over on Demonology.

If you find the thread repetitive ignore it.

I've never shared the info on Murphy, Lonie or Wakelin on Demonland so there is something new here even in a topic done to death.

If you have a problem with the habits of another poster PM him - leave the rest of us out of it and allow the thread to remain on track, in this case, the 2000 draft.

It gets worse.

Totally overlooked in the 2000 National draft and slipping through to that year's rookie draft were Dean Cox, Dean Brogan, Stephen Milne, Shane Tuck, Michael Doughty, Robert Haddrill David Johnson and Casey Green.

We were banned from even trading into the second and third rounds of the 2000 Draft, as well as the first round of the 1999 Draft, in which we still managed to pick up Green, Whelan, Wheatley and Bruce.

We would have taken Robert Murphy with our first round pick in 1999 had we gone to the table without penalties. Mind you there would have been knock on effects had we gone with our original picks so we would not have got all of the others you mention.

Don't stress.

We lost our second round (pick 32) and third round (pick 48) selections in the 2000 draft. This is ironic given those who were involved in the salary cap rorts between 1995-1998 which led to the penalties being imposed.

Scott Thompson looks pretty good at 16 - very few taken ahead of him have done better. No fault of Craig Cameron that he did his best work for the Crows.

Had we gone to the draft table with our picks intact we would have taken Ryan Lonie at pick 32 and Shane Wakelin at 48.

No great loss in hindsight.

I read this article in today's age. I'm starting to think that MCC incorporation might be the only viable option for an ongoing MFC in Melbourne. I wonder if the new board are seriously considering it for when the tin rattle money runs out. They wouldn't get any arguement from me on this score.

Thoughts?

You're on the money here Hazy.

Let's look at it from the perspective of business fundamentals.

This year the MFC has budgeted revenues of $29.7 million and will incur a projected operating loss of $2 million ending the year with negative net assets of $5 million. In contrast last year Collingwood's revenues were $54.6 million. We have to compete with a competitor who earns nearly $500k a week more than us. The gap between the haves and the have nots widens each year.

MFC Football Dept expenditure this year will be in the order of $13.5 million. That is, if the MCC were to field a team resourced similarly to the current Melbourne Football Department (and did not have to support overheads like corporate, functions, membership, administration etc) it would cost the MCC $13.5 million. Revenue in the form of AFL Club dividends, gate, major sponsorship and "seasons ticket sales" (to former MFC members) should ensure a tidy profit to the MCC on its football operations.

Then we have the MCC itself. In the recent MCC annual report for 2007-08 the MCC booked total revenues of $115 million, profit of $11.2 million and has net assets of $211 million.

Sort of puts our financial woes into some sort of perspective, doesn't it? Our "crippling" debt of $5 million and operating loss of $2 million is tea money when compared with the financial health and scale of the MCC.

The fact is that if we can successfully "phone a friend" or as someone else said turn up back on the parents' doorstep and ask for our bedroom back, the MCC could run a profitable football franchise called the Melbourne Football Club whose viability would forever be ensured and which could be resourced at a level equivalent to the powerhouse clubs of the competition.

Connolly is our Grant Thomas. This will end in tears.

From poster "Hal" on Demonology - oh dear!

On 14 February a season opener function was held at the MCG to launch the new season.

Then CEO Steve Harris made a PP presentation. In his presentation he talked about the "4 pillars" on which the Club would build success.

The "pillars" were listed as:

1)Team strength - new coaching appointments, additional $500k invested in footy dept, youth policy in list management and new training facilities esp Casey

2) Brand strength - record membership target, 20k new supporters, 150 celebrations, new logo/livery, focus on Auskick/schools

3)Club strength - new performance management system to assess performance against hard wired KPI's for Directors, management and football department

4)Financial strength - debt reduction, revenue growth, profitable trading

Sounds like Jimma has found the password to Harris'/McNamee's computer.

The new board is doing what should've been done years ago, getting back on side with the MCG, This is our only long term chance of thriving in the AFL. WE should play all our games there and several of our away games as well. Train at Gosch's, do the rest at our HOME - THE MCG! Great decision

I'm not saying whether or not it is a good decision. I am asking if we have to find a million to pay these people back in addition to our debts and the MOPT break fee of $250k. Has the Club even considered the $1 million in making its decision - no corporate memory left there any more?

The Club has gathered $1 million in donations specifically earmarked to fund the fitout of the new home at the rectangular stadium.

The people who donated this money would have choked on their Wheeties to find out about the change of plan by reading the Age. Just like McNamee would have read about his fate in the Herald Sun on Tuesday.

Will these people want their money back? Who would blame them? Amateur hour!!

I prefer here over Demonology just to escape the fool whose name I dare not speak and his incessant ranting about Jolly etc.

For the record, Jolly was dropped in round 22 of season 2004 on form. Jamar who took Jolly's place was retained for the Essendon EF the following week. We ended the season with Jolly as our third ranked ruckman at that point in time.

Rather than fight for his place in the side Jolly wanted out. I bet Port Adelaide are glad that Brogan is made of sterner stuff. If we traded him there and then we could get something for him (Dunn as it turned out). If we held him to his contract he would have left 12 months later and we would have got nothing for him.

Even with the benefit of hindsight and given that Jolly stood as our number 3 ruckman at the time what should have the Club done? Unloaded the AA ruckman White because one day they would change the rules, his spring would go and time would catch up with him before it would the 4 year younger Jolly? And what would the Club tell Jamar who had passed Jolly in the eyes of the Match Committee and who was 2 years younger than Jolly?

If you think the Club should reward form and if you are critical of past examples of favouritism then what should they have told Jolly or done with him at season end that would have resulted in his staying?

Jolly is a one-dimensional sook and he has not done a single thing to make me regret seeing him off.

The Chief Financial Officer resigned last Friday.

Friday 4 July 3.30-5.30pm Fox Sports 1.

MelbourneFC directors don't benefit financially.

Ours don't but others' do - this is from this morning's Age:

Former Magpie executive Arocca said Collingwood usually sent at least six more staff on away trips than the Kangaroos. "They are quite capable of paying for six, seven or eight extra people. In some cases they will also send directors and send them business class."

The extra staff were usually strength and conditioning coaches, physiotherapists and massage therapists, he said.

Instead of sending club staff, poorer teams often go without services or source casual and volunteer physios and massage therapists in the city they are visiting.

There's something sick about the financial model of this "competition" when Clubs like ours need volunteer match day staff like Garry Marchant and Karen to pay their own fares to interstate games while Clubs like Collingwood fly Directors and partners - up the front thank you very much!!!

Absolutely fantastic. Similar to his run down against Sydney last year (or was it the year before) when he broke his collarbone. Gives his all - that's all you can ask for.

It was better than that.

He kicked the ball forward then - realising that it was in open space - chased down his own kick, arriving at the same moment as a Swan, dived on the loose ball = season ending shoulder injury.

Later, 50m penalty against Rivers for (cough cough) not throwing it straight back, Cameron Bruce match winning snap (again) = season back on track = finals appearance.

We were 0-3 going into that game. That entire 2006 season owes itself to PJ's glorious moment at the SCG that afternoon.

Couple that with his chase down on Sunday - cometh the hour cometh the man!!

That's a profit then. 29,000 members nearly signed. Go Dees!

They budgeted for 22,000 to attend yesterday's game.

They budgeted for 30k memberships.

Yeah a good effort, i'd be interested to know what the club budgeted for.

They budgeted for 22,000.

Spoken with all the authority of a [censored] who hid under the bed until he was 31 years of age, came to Melbourne in 1979 amidst great fanfare and played out a glorious 5 game career with North then coached a one team town to a 43/1/45 record.

There are other threads and posts on the changes in the Boardroom but I would like to draw attention to one particular aspect of the events of the last few weeks and ask the indulgence of the mods.

Since that black day back in 1965 when we sacked Norm Smith in a hail of controversy and bitterness we have demonstrated a chronic inability to manage major change. Our darkest hour was surely that terrible night at Dallas Brooks Centre back in 1996 - who could forget the scenes of the mob howling derision at one of the Holy Trinity of our Club, Ian Ridley, and Ridley screaming defiance back at them.

The bitter events of 2001 culminating in the Joe v Szondy election and the marginally less bitter election of 2003 where 13 candidates vied for 5 seats continued this ignoble tradition. Each and every one of these events diminished us, arguably permanently.

I saw something this last few weeks that I have never seen before and which gives me even more joy and confidence than the arrival in the Boardroom of Jimmy and his team with their new vision and energy. I saw for the first time in my life the Club demonstrate a capacity to manage change with maturity and style.

Congratulations to Paul Gardner and his Board for the thoughtful and selfless way they have conducted themselves while conscientiously discharging their duty to evaluate Jim's proposals against the single yardstick of "what is in the best interests of the Club and the members who have elected us?".

Congratulations to Jim Stynes and his group who have concentrated on promoting their vision, people and plans and who have resisted the temptation to slag off at the incumbent Board.

All in all - a class act!! One that few other Clubs would be capable of and which our Club has never been able to match in my lifetime.