Tonight's AGM

[The Peanut]

... I accept the correction ...

Please don't view my post as a correction - I may not be an excellent wordsmith, however I believe I understand the reasoning why the club is taking the path of going along with the AFL's 18 team push, but just because I understand their reasoniong doesn't mean I agree with it.

I am probably armed with much less information about the whole scenario that our CEO has, and perhaps you, but supporters and especially members have the right to question the board's decisions without being called "bozo's".

As has been demonstrated in this thread there are plenty of reasons to consider this issue with caution and supporters have a right to discuss it and ask whatever questions they think are relevant.

St Kilda may have moved into a clearing but we are not completely out of the woods and as last years figures have demonstrated, there is a fine line between posting a million dollar profit and a loss. ... and we are still one of the vulnerable teams in the league.

EDIT: 'saints08' you are welcome to reply to my post but rest assured this will be the last post from me on this issue. I have no intention of further highjacking this AGM Report thread.

[bigcarl]

AFL commision decsions can only be overturned by the agreement of a 2/3 majority

is that right?

the herald sun must have mis-reported it then, because i distinctly remember reading that two thirds of the teams must agree to the new teams coming in.

i'm seeking further clarification on this

ice wolf it appears that what you say is correct. two thirds of the clubs must disagree with the decision to expand to 18 teams if it is to be overturned.

i reckon if it was taken to the members of the 16 clubs then two thirds would disagree.

imo, there is nothing wrong with the club taking a principled stand on this and saying to the AFL, well we put it to our members and they don't want it.

that would also absolve the board from "rocking the boat" with the afl.