Harvey's hat in the ring

[markp]

Hope they handle his request better than they did Lyon's in April... do not want to alienate or upset a man who the term champion does not even begin to describe.

Didn't they negotiate with Lyon in April? The board is allowed to negotiate a contract, aren't they? Or do they just sign whatever RL wants?

Lyon agreed to put off negotiations until the end of the season. And they started negotiations with his designated intermediary.

Are you going to become the new b4e and work your unhappiness with the boards negotiations into every subject?

No of course I'm not.... I just think they may have made a rod for the own back in appointing him as interim coach, and now they have to let him down. Not a great outcome.

Surely (OK, I can already see your point!).... Surely they have defined the interim role - and he understands that all of the players are on holidays so he's not actually coaching anyone.

I have just assumed that he was going to do the 2011 season coaches summary speech at the B&F.

Again, I hope you're right.

Not saying I'm anti-board, but cant say I'm filled with confidence at the moment.

Are you happy with the way this Lyon saga played out?

Happy with our apparent perilous financial position, even after a period of sustained on-field success?

Happy sponsors are leaving... or that our major sponsor is a betting agency?

Happy with still being bent over with our stadium arrangement?

Happy with the make up of the new coach selection panel, even?

Happy our President is mr invisible?

Maybe like court jesters of old, B4E is sometimes speaking closer to the truth than is really comfortable, or most dare...... gee I hope not, but you gotta wonder.

[SainterK]

Happy with our apparent perilous financial position, even after a period of sustained on-field success?

Happy sponsors are leaving... or that our major sponsor is a betting agency?

Excuse me for selectively quoting you markp

However these points are all linked in some form surely?

Sustained on field success, yes.

However what sponsor in their right mind would of pledged their support to St Kilda football club in recent years? If I was a brand wanting to get some exposure, this would be the last club I'd choose.

I might be lucky to have one interview a week with the sponsors backdrop.

I'd also safely assume that players would continue to be hidden away and rarely available.

It would also be in the knowledge that the majority of the wider community of football fans switch off when this team plays, so ground signage and jumper sponsorship wouldn't be of any real value.

[spert]

There is no guarantee about what kind of coach will get a club a premiership - and premierships are what it's all about at AFL level. Harvs could suprise us all, or bomb out as a coach. Usually a premiership team has the right mix of players across most positions who can win individual contests as well as play team footy, a club with reasonable playing depth during the year, and a top chemistry between coach and players. If we get all those ingredients working, then we have a good chance of success.

[markp]

SainterK, wouldn't the main exposure for a sponsor be during a game broadcast?... we've had a pretty good run as far as ratings, friday night slots, etc go aint we?

[plugger66]

Happy with our apparent perilous financial position, even after a period of sustained on-field success?

Happy sponsors are leaving... or that our major sponsor is a betting agency?

Excuse me for selectively quoting you markp

However these points are all linked in some form surely?

Sustained on field success, yes.

However what sponsor in their right mind would of pledged their support to St Kilda football club in recent years? If I was a brand wanting to get some exposure, this would be the last club I'd choose.

I might be lucky to have one interview a week with the sponsors backdrop.

I'd also safely assume that players would continue to be hidden away and rarely available.

It would also be in the knowledge that the majority of the wider community of football fans switch off when this team plays, so ground signage and jumper sponsorship wouldn't be of any real value.

At least you dont drop off the coach quickly. How come you bring up all this negative stuff now when previously RL and the club could do no wrong. You have actually spent the whole year telling us they are playing differently and more exciting now all of sudden we played boring footy. Only one thing has changed in the last week.

[SainterK]

I haven't dropped off the coach.

He was very, very good.

However to accuse the board of not tapping into the onfield success of recent seasons, given the style we played, is strange to me.

If you read my post, I was pretending I was a potential sponsor, not a loyal St Kilda fan.

So because I like the coach, supported him, tried to encourage signs of a more attacking game plan (that let's be honest, eventually flopped) suddenly I am not allowed to discuss the marketability of the St Kilda football club?

[MCG-Unit]

However what sponsor in their right mind would have pledged their support to St Kilda football club in recent years? If I was a brand wanting to get some exposure, this would be the last club I'd choose.
I'd also safely assume that players would continue to be hidden away and rarely available.

It would also be in the knowledge that the majority of the wider community of football fans switch off when this team plays, so ground signage and jumper sponsorship wouldn't be of any real value.

Gee that's a strong reaction - were they That poor to watch? I didn't think they were too bad in most of the games I saw.
Sometimes teams need to play within their limitations - up to a point.

Also for those saying would Harvey stay if he is tipped out for the coaching job...

Sanderson just missed being Geelong's coach, he stayed on. Neeld has told Viney to remain on the coaching panel.

[plugger66]

I haven't dropped off the coach.

He was very, very good.

However to accuse the board of not tapping into the onfield success of recent seasons, given the style we played, is strange to me.

If you read my post, I was pretending I was a potential sponsor, not a loyal St Kilda fan.

So because I like the coach, supported him, tried to encourage signs of a more attacking game plan (that let's be honest, eventually flopped) suddenly I am not allowed to discuss the marketability of the St Kilda football club?

Alright a potential sponsor see we play nearly as much Friday night footy and the pies. We have played as many weeks as geelong have for the last few years. That is a bonus for the sponsor. We actually get good ratings and we have been one of the most watched clubs live considering the amount of games we get a the G. A sponser doesnt go they are boring but they do look at who is looking at their brand and a lot have been looking at ours for about 7 years now.

[Saints43]

Are you happy with the way this Lyon saga played out?

Happy with our apparent perilous financial position, even after a period of sustained on-field success?

Happy sponsors are leaving... or that our major sponsor is a betting agency?

Happy with still being bent over with our stadium arrangement?

Happy with the make up of the new coach selection panel, even?

Happy our President is mr invisible?

Maybe like court jesters of old, B4E is sometimes speaking closer to the truth than is really comfortable, or most dare...... gee I hope not, but you gotta wonder.

To be fair, the board can only negotiate with who they are told to negotiate. That RL had another party negotiating with Freo was a fairly extraordinary circumstance.

And, I am happy with the end result (no matter how it came about), I was hoping that Melb would make an offer he couldn't refuse and he would invoke his release clause.

I'm not morally happy with Centrebet but they are a legal business and probably not much bigger crooks than NAB or McDonalds.

The board has made attempts to address the stadium deal but the AFL have come out and stated that they wouldn't schedule us at the MCG anyway. Sort of makes it hard to play one off against the other.

I don't think the board is flawless but I also try to understand how difficult it is to play hardball and get results while being considered a smaller player by the governing body.

The club has made some big improvements over the course of the two boards since 2000. All they can do is keep plugging away as best they can. It's not like there's another ticket willing to take the job on.