Vote for the FUTURE of the Saints..not the past...

[saintsRrising]

Well it appears that wheels are in motion....and even if it does not mean a complete new Board with elections that there will be some changing of Chairs.


Howver if he does get to the stage of having two or alternate Boards to choose from I would hope that all members will Vote for the FUTURE..not the past....


What we need now is what is BEST for the Saints.

I know that some are aggrieved by GT being dispensed with and that is a valid opinion.


However the focus ow needs to be what is best for the club.

Is that still RB and the current Board?

Well at present we do not know as we are yet to see:
* who the alternate Board are
*and IMPORTANTLY what would their points of difference be & why they would likely to be able to deliver more success to St Kilda.



It may well be that an alternate Board will be able to show why they will likely to be able to delivera more successful St Kilda.

If so they will get my vote.



The spectre of Bedwell has arisen again....and my advice to any potential Board would not to include him. Bedwell is an opportunist and has no credibilty apart from grandstanding....having him on your ticket will undermine any strengths that you have.


If RB is voted out it should not to punishing him for removing GT( now yes some may say I am biased here as I suported Gts removal then and still suport it now). This is nota reason to makea change.

What we need to see are cpable people and a viosn of how we will be better and aplan on how this will be achieved.


RB has down many good things, but yes also has made some blunders and part of this has been poor media work of late. However he has been competent in many aspects and so for him to go what we need is a BETTER laternative.

I want my club to succeed....and will supporta BETTER Board just as I have supported a change to a better football structure and change in coach.



It is the same as match day selections.....if a better player comes along he will replace someone in your 22.



The questions we as "selectors" now need to do is if and when an alterante Board or Bordas emerge is....are they likely to to doa better job for the Saints going forward.


Just changing a to punish RB would be madness...ie imagine Bedwell as President , particulat with his manifesto as he earlier outline it of him swanning around as el-supremo with everyone else doing the work.


When I turned 18 and faced my first election my father game me some very sound advice. He said that when you vote that you should not vote for what is best for you, but vote for what you believe is best for the country.


So I would now give Saints fans the same advice...if it comes to a vote...vote for what is best for the St Kilda Football Club and not for any personal agenda or grudge. Look forward not backward.

[ausfatcat]

Before making a decision we need to know who is on the rival tickets?


Otherwise its a waste of time.

[Dan Warna]

so far haven't seen anyone announcing anythiing except a couple of reports.

as many as two different tickets may be up

frankly caro has done hatchet job after hatchet job on st kilda and goes the light touch on wallace's tank and richmonds servile craptitude of a decade.

now there may be a challenge and any ticket would be interesting and will be played out in due course or it may peter out.

if it does, you can just imagine:

one reality : folks have a chat, discuss the issues, dont challenge and continue supporting st kilda.
caro reports : bitter recriminations as Butters undermines democratic challenge to board.

and another alternative.

a bunch of folks get a ticket together, one group wins, they all shake hands afterwards nad go about running the club.
caro reports: Clenched fists at st kilda as losing party declares election rigged.

i bet the beyatch pooed her pants in excitement.

DIAF caro.

and richmond will be shyte for another decade maggot beyatch and we will continue to beat them even when we can't be assed because St Kilda > U COW.

[saintgus]

Make Nathan Burke the Presdient

[saintsRrising]

Before making a decision we need to know who is on the rival tickets?


Otherwise its a waste of time.

Exactly..



We need to know who they are...

We need to know what they could do..that the current Board cannot.

We need to know WHY their alternative will be better.




A BETTER Board would bea good thing...as it will mean a better Saints.

But what we do not want is a Bedwell ticket where the driver is his delusions of granduer.

[Joffa Burns]

I will be very keen to see the members of the new ticket(s).

I do not want to see Butterss go for the sake of change, however I believe for the best interests of the club if a suitable rival Board can be formed Rod should step aside immediately.

I would like to see Rod replaced as there has been way too much media brawling and way too much Rod Butterss coverage this season for my liking.

I wonder if Burkey is comfortable being the media face of a rival ticket and whether he had a choice or it is a media beat up?

[plugger66]

Make Nathan Burke the Presdient

Burkie could never be president. These days you need very successful business men as most seem to put in their own money as well as run the club.

[yipper]

I don't think wholesale changes are necessary on the board - by and large doing a very good job. Maybe it's time for RB to step aside - in the interests of club stability. And for what it's worth - they should try and get Jim Watts back into the club somehow. So, interesting times lay ahead...again!!

[The Fireman]

Make Nathan Burke the Presdient

Get him to pull the boots on.

[JeffDunne]

One thing that does amaze me in the debate about who should take us forward is the bleeding obvious "I'll only vote for a credible alternative" comment.

Who in their right mind would advocate voting for someone that wasn't credible?

Now before the usual suspects jump in and claim that's hypocritcal given my position on Rod and wanting him to be man enough to fall on his sword, my postion is based on avoiding an all out public brawl (which appears more likely than not). If the board is sound enough to carry the club forward then they should be more than able to handle the resignation of a president and the transition to a suitable replacement.

[Eastern]

And for what it's worth - they should try and get Jim Watts back into the club somehow.

Agreed 100% !!

[Mr Magic]

Now before the usual suspects jump in and claim that's hypocritcal given my position on Rod and wanting him to be man enough to fall on his sword, my postion is based on avoiding an all out public brawl (which appears more likely than not). If the board is sound enough to carry the club forward then they should be more than able to handle the resignation of a president and the transition to a suitable replacement.

I presume that is me?

Strange as it may seem I actually agree with you on this, with 1 rider.

IF RB needs to go then doesn't it follow that the Board should go as well. By standing behind RB isn't that tantamount to supporting him and his actions? If they disagreed enough with the way he was handling things they had the opportunity to remove themselves - not an uncommon action at Boards since time immemorial. The fact that htey haven't availed themselves of this action sounds to me that they either agree with him or are too weak to go against him. Either way, if RB's time has come so it would seem has theirs.

[benoc]

Time to invent a great ticket.

Lindsey Fox (money).
Burke (el Presidente).
Harvey (first club board memebr and player, I think).
Gherig (security and public relations).

Any other suggestions to put on my ticket.

[JeffDunne]

No MM, I wasn't talking about you specifically.

As for your question, boards must present a unified public view regardless of how they vote. I'm sure many decisions have been disagreed on, but if the majority votes that way then they must publicly support that view.

I also suspect part of Rod's problems may stem from him not running decisions past the board before making them public. Please note this only my opinion.

[joffaboy]

Time to invent a great ticket.

Lindsey Fox (money).
Burke (el Presidente).
Harvey (first club board memebr and player, I think).
Gherig (security and public relations).

Any other suggestions to put on my ticket.

cranny pete

Scott Dennison

[Shaggy]

Time to invent a great ticket.

Gherig (security and public relations).

Lol … I would vote for G-Train.

On a more serious note I cannot believe that following the detailed independent review performed last year we are still in the bottom quartile for spending on injury management and recruitment.

Spending $200,000 compared to the Wobbles $750,000 on recruitment is a disgrace. AF announcing an increase to $400,000 next year doesn’t do it for me given the large gap and WTF is JB asked to go away and frame a recruitment plan based on the budget. Surely JB’s needs and his recruitment plan should drive the budget not the other way around.

It doesn’t surprise me we are never mentioned when it comes to clubs exploring Irish recruits. It even doesn’t surprise me to read that the only club not to have spoken to Alex Rance (all Australian U/18 player this year) is StKilda.

I don’t think it is in the best interests of the club to be run by a bunch of cheap charlies when we have hopes of being a premiership contender. Any alternative should be better to give our football operations a fighting chance.

You can't expect to be in the top quarter if your spending is in the bottom quarter.

I don’t want to hear RL mentioning our tight spending next year (as he noted on more than one occasion this year).

[Otiman]

I'll be voting if (when) the time comes.

Making my judgements on the quality of the individuals involved, their interest in making the St. Kilda FC successful in both off and on field situations.

Right now, the only real thing of consequence that i have against the current administration is it's bending over and taking it up the arse from the AFL on quite a few occasions.

[Oh When the Saints]

One thing that does amaze me in the debate about who should take us forward is the bleeding obvious "I'll only vote for a credible alternative" comment.

Who in their right mind would advocate voting for someone that wasn't credible?

Some people who still can't get over the events of September last year, and are obsessed with revenge.

[Teflon]

One thing that does amaze me in the debate about who should take us forward is the bleeding obvious "I'll only vote for a credible alternative" comment.

Who in their right mind would advocate voting for someone that wasn't credible?

Some people who still can't get over the events of September last year, and are obsessed with revenge.

wells said OWTS - even if those same people dont even know theyre doing that....

pretty simple - see the names, see what they stand for, what $ they bring, what exposure they can bring, NO Bedbreath/Grant Thomas/Denis or guys called Jeff and Im listening.