Waldron and Balme SEN

[Leo.J]

I'm suprised that you would be so easily sucked in by the media spin on this JB.

This comment has been blown so out of proportion by RB and the media.

This is the Same as RB saying that he wouldn't discuss certain issues in the media, then he would go and do it.

RB - Lets talk about the real issues here wah wah I'm going to sue Westy, my feelings are hurt.

Rod is doing his best to make an issue of this because he's got nothing else. Its only a matter of time before we hear some truth on this issue, and Rod will wish he let it go through to the keeper.

BTW SFF have 2 months before the vote, if they are sensible the will take their time to set out their plan to make sure they get elected. Don't worry JB I'm sure you'll be alot more comfortable with voting for SFF within the next month.

One would assume that GW having built up an extremely successful transport company would be able to run the footy club, we trusted RB to do it, I can't see the problem. From where I stand we couldn't be doing much worse off-field than we are now.

And the footballers on the ticket which some people have issues with are exactly what the current board has lacked IMO; understanding of what it takes to run a modern footy dept combined with what it takes to run a successful business, and adding to that tha other legal, business and sporting professionals we have a good team in SFF.

Also for the people who are accusing Levin and Gdanski of being traitors, how else are they supposed to act if they aren't happy with the way things are being run at board level. If they stay on the board then they are able to call the EGM, that why its not within their best interest and that of the club to resign. Also nothing like a suprise attack to have your opposition reeling.

For me the issue that has made me the angriest, is RB attempting to eliminate our democratic right and allowing the AFL to decide who should run OUR CLUB, what a fricken nerve.

Thats like John Howard saying to Kevin 07 give you paln to George Bush and if he agrees it better than ours, then here's the keys to Kirribilli House

Or like George Bush Saying to Hillary Clinton give your plan to the World Bank to check it over.

What a Joke.

[killa_gram]

AT's father-in-law was not the chief exe of the ICC but rather the President of it and also a former Chairman of Cricket Australia as well as been the deputy chairman of the Bank of Melbourne at one stage. AT is close to him and I can only imagine he is giving him some wonderful advice about how boards work and corporate responsibility.

Again I make the point, AT freely admits he is on the ticket to help with the footy side of things, there are others there more expert on the business side. A good board of any company or organisation has a wide cross section of individuals with differing skills. That is what makes a board strong.

[Richter]

AT's father-in-law was not the chief exe of the ICC but rather the President of it and also a former Chairman of Cricket Australia as well as been the deputy chairman of the Bank of Melbourne at one stage. AT is close to him and I can only imagine he is giving him some wonderful advice about how boards work and corporate responsibility.

Very content to be corrected Kg....

[saintsRrising]

, AT freely admits he is on the ticket to help with the footy side of things, .

All well and good....BUT that is what the football department is meant to be there for.



Dunstall and Dermet meddling at Hawthorn when they were BOTH on the Board was a disaster...and they were told to but out of the football side of things.


I do not believe that they NEED two ex footballers....and in particular when BOTH NB and AT clearly do not have the business background and experience ro justifya Boar Place on that criteria.


Having an experienced Father in law asa mentor is not justification as the father-in-law will not be on the Board.


What FF needs is not TWO ex footballers....but 1...with another Director with strong Business Development and or marketing skills where the FF ticket is weak.

[joffaboy]

I'm suprised that you would be so easily sucked in by the media spin on this JB.

lol - the love in cheer squad head cheerleader.

Yup I have been sucked in by the media - lolo.

And you have all be convinced of the credibility of the FFs by their comprehensive and scrutinised financial and strategic plans

March down to the rally with the party faithfull, and make sure you brook no argument that may upset your world.

[Leo.J]

, AT freely admits he is on the ticket to help with the footy side of things, .

All well and good....BUT that is what the football department is meant to be there for.



Dunstall and Dermet meddling at Hawthorn when they were BOTH on the Board was a disaster...and they were told to but out of the football side of things.


I do not believe that they NEED two ex footballers....and in particular when BOTH NB and AT clearly do not have the business background and experience ro justifya Boar Place on that criteria.


Having an experienced Father in law asa mentor is not justification as the father-in-law will not be on the Board.


What FF needs is not TWO ex footballers....but 1...with another Director with strong Business Development and or marketing skills where the FF ticket is weak.

Isn't Piggy still involved at a board level now?

As for Dermie, Dermie does whats best for Dermie, his value as a board member was not suprising.

[Leo.J]

lol - the love in cheer squad head cheerleader.

I do scrub up pretty good in a pair of tights, I just can't nail the splits like I used too though.

[joffaboy]

lol - the love in cheer squad head cheerleader.

I do scrub up pretty good in a pair of tights, I just can't nail the splits like I used too though.

Stop it Leo.J, the visualisation is too much for me to bear

Now

Give me a W
Give me an E
Give me a S
Give me a T

............

Whats that spell?

Who knows but lets vote for him anyway

[saintsRrising]

Isn't Piggy still involved at a board level now?

As for Dermie, Dermie does whats best for Dermie, his value as a board member was not suprising.

Yes.


But he leaves the Football Department to Clarkson and Co.

Dermet is gone.......and Dermet is an example ofa guy who should not have been onaBaord in the first place.




Being a Board Member should be about whether the person has the qualifications for the role.....not their popularity.....nor their desires.




Are they the BEST person for the job??? That is what counts.

[Leo.J]

Are they the BEST person for the job??? That is what counts.

They may be the BEST person for the particular role they are fulfilling.

I assume there is more than 1 template for the structure of a board...business and or footy.

[mischa]

The media spin is just going to go Butterss/AFL way. Will ignore

[Joffa Burns]

The media spin is just going to go Butterss/AFL way. Will ignore

Hey mischa, how is that legal Action you are going to take against barks4eva panning out?

Must be coming to a head by now

[SENsei]

Ya gotta laugh. I love the banter that goes on in here. Sensaintsational indeed!

Everyone's gathering up a good head of steam and soon all will be coming in off the long run.

Should come to blows about 11pm Saturday night!! LOL

[mischa]

The media spin is just going to go Butterss/AFL way. Will ignore

Hey mischa, how is that legal Action you are going to take against barks4eva panning out?

Must be coming to a head by now

Our own regular Milton Boyle -you wish. What legal action It was up to the ppl or rather person being defamed (constantly) who should have taken it. Seem to recall that was my only point!

[The Peanut]

Are they the BEST person for the job??? That is what counts.

They may be the BEST person for the particular role they are fulfilling.

I assume there is more than 1 template for the structure of a board...business and or footy.

Yes there is probably about 20 million templates for a boardroom structure and it wouldn't matter if there was only one, you can still break the mould and develop a structure that works for the people involved. GW may not have covered every little nook and cranny before declaring his ticket but one thing that I am certain about after meeting him is that he has put a lot of thought into his boardroom set-up. His happy, humble and efficient direct staffers are a testiment of how he works. Burkie is just about jumping out of his skin to start working with him.

When the FSS say that Burkie and Thomo will be overseeing football it doesn't mean that they will be messing with peoples positions or responsibilities - I understand that it means that they will be watching the football department closely, reviewing what other clubs and sports are doing so that the can provide club appropriate direction. - and footy information, direction and developments to the board so that they can plan and budget accordingly. I would think that they will be working very closely with the Manager of the Football Dept - I wonder who that will be??

Do you need both Burkie and Thomo?
This is only my point of view but with AT's background and contacts, both on and off the field he will be able to keep Burkie up to speed with current politics in the footy department. Nevertheless the best thing about having Thomo on the board is that he is young and understands more how young people think - and after all is said and done in a boardroom the main reason why they are there is to oversee and manage the young people to win a flag. Another advantage of having someone so young on the board is he will be getting first hand education in the St Kilda boardroom and around the club so that we may he able to be a future President. One thing that board rooms usually lack is an understanding of the real world. The club at the moment know to relate to people at the corporate end of town and little else as they all come from a similar sub-cultural background.

Both Andrew and Burkie can attend club functions as speakers - work in the media to keep a St Kilda presence - the list goes on.

[saintsRrising]

understands more how young people think -

watch it Peanut...RB got in trouble for talking Generation Y

[saintsRrising]

One thing that board rooms usually lack is an understanding of the real world. The club at the moment know to relate to people at the corporate end of town and little else as they all come from a similar sub-cultural background.

.

Good point Peanut......but lets assume that AT was on $200,000 +.....and is now off to a Stockbroking job...

His father in law is obviously a wheeler and dealer from the big end of town.


So is he really that removed....from your other corporate "sub-cultural"????


He is certainly not on struggle street.....nor perhaps fully aware that for some of our members that a membership ticket is to thema MAJOR expense.

If they really want tastes of the "real' world perhaps at the next FF gathering you might want to suggest a "supporters" committee with say Saint66au....and saintbrat on it...in addition to those representing the Coiterie groups who by defintion are going to represent the more affluent supporters.


Then that would be a taste of the real world.



Please don't take that as a dig at FF....for the current Board can certainly not be said to be doing a great deal for the grass roots supporter.

[Teflon]

Waldron also mentioned of how one of RB's board members needed to put in $200k of his own money,when he was in one of his first meetings with the club back in the good old days just to cover player payments

They are all screaming about the money not being spent but WHY would you want to go back to this crap.

Its a fine balance between spending at the right time and spending at the wrong time and i will back RB's decisions anyday to spend the money when he see's fit and not just for the sake of spending in the HOPE it might make a difference.

Unless FF produce somthing very special other than glossy mail and pretty ties there is no way i'm taking the risk with my vote i'm pretty happy going to the footy at the moment and dont want to go back to the days of having to drag my sorry arse there.

Must say Im leaning the same way Mik - no Im not there fully yet and the SFF raise some good points BUT facts are the current Board has also done a lot right and we aint in to bad shape. That said we have some time........Ill take the next few weeks and see what comes out..

Those coming out declaring SFF are their choice already with NO plan at all to support the spend spend spend slant amaze me.

[satchmo]

A few points I'd like to make after reading this thread....

1. IF you have decided that the incumbent board members are not the group to take us forward, it does not necessarily follow that Football First ticket ARE the best option. ie: if we need to change, it does not mean that anyone will do.

2. If you rate Nixon's opinion so highly, ask him who he thinks should be coaching our club... I believe that a lot of you would disagree.

3. If NB was to believed on TFS last night, then the so called "gutter comments" were made once in response to a question about the inuendo directed at the incumbent board. Which is a bit different to accusing someone of drug abuse. ie: if the AFL has Robert Harvey drug tested, are they implying that the great man is on drugs ? (I think not !)

[Teflon]

A few points I'd like to make after reading this thread....

1. IF you have decided that the incumbent board members are not the group to take us forward, it does not necessarily follow that Football First ticket ARE the best option. ie: if we need to change, it does not mean that anyone will do.

2. If you rate Nixon's opinion so highly, ask him who he thinks should be coaching our club... I believe that a lot of you would disagree.

3. If NB was to believed on TFS last night, then the so called "gutter comments" were made once in response to a question about the inuendo directed at the incumbent board. Which is a bit different to accusing someone of drug abuse. ie: if the AFL has Robert Harvey drug tested, are they implying that the great man is on drugs ? (I think not !)

Point 3 is paper thin Satch......nicely put but thin....almost malnourished...the comments were made in a paragraph about the current Board and made mention of the innuendo/gossip directed at the current Board.........and then Westaway tried to position himself as "opposite" in this area to the current board - the inference supports the innuendo without any evidence and would surely see any court lean toward the obvious conclusion a reasonable person would draw.

Im starving.