Are the profits enough?

[Mr Magic]

I suppose it all comes down to whether he was asked to give an opinion or not on the 'defense'? If he wasn't you may well be correct in him having his 'nose out of joint'. IF he was they may have disregarded his advice and that may also be a reason for angst on his part. At the very least I would think they would ask his opinion on who they should instruct in this matter?
He certainly was involved last year when we lost the 'unloseable sirengate' case.

Maybe they asked Gdanski instead who is also a solicitor? That might also put Levin's 'nose out of joint'

[The Peanut]

Yeah well, whatever the situation really is re Bakes defence, and however board members would perform in tribunal issues is not for me to say with the limited information I have. The Bakes issue certainly apeeared to create some sparks around the place and at least one spot fire.

Some might argue that the AFL have got it in for us anyway or that we are not a powerful enough club for us to apply any real pressure on them just to get a fair deal. That is why I want the club to develop as quickly as possible - so we get a fair deal in this AFL world of money.

[meher baba]

Some might argue that the AFL have got it in for us anyway or that we are not a powerful enough club for us to apply any real pressure on them just to get a fair deal. That is why I want the club to develop as quickly as possible - so we get a fair deal in this AFL world of money.

Exactly, which is why I preferred the club's pre-September 2006 strategy of looking for 10 years of sustained success (measured in the main by the number of finals appearances) to its new concept of going to the "higher level" which is apparently to be able to compete with the Weagles, Crows and Swans (although, in 2007, it was more like the Dockers and the Lions).

The reason that Essendon and Carlton and Collingwood continue to get favoured treatment is because of their many decades of consistently making the finals, appearing in the most highly-rated games on television, and securing the most members: including many rich and powerful people in Melbourne.

How many premierships they have won in recent times is far less relevant. After all, Collingwood has only won one in the past 49 years, and Carlton has only won one since 1987. Essendon has snared 4 under Sheedy, but was without one for a long time before he arrived on the scene. But they have been in the top half of the table in a lot more seasons than we have, and have thereby built up a much larger following of loyal fans.

The right strategy for a traditionally lowly club like ours is always going to be a long-term push towards a culture of total professionalism and sustained success. This requires enormous patience and an approach based on incremental change, not the sudden imposition of a scorched earth policy every 7 or so years.

[Oh When the Saints]

I think the issue was that Ross Levin had run the tribunal side of things for the club for the last couple of years, and had a reasonable record in that area ...

Sheldon then decided to reform that area of the club, and the lack of success this year in using a new/external QC has been evident ... quite rightly Ross Levin feels somewhat peeved ...


There are a couple of issues with RB, one of which is widely alleged in football circles (and probably known to most on here) that can't be revealed.

Allegedly Butterss hasn't brought any new sponsors to the club in the past 2-3 seasons, and has failed dismally to assist the club in this area (one of the main jobs of a President).
The source of this is a current board member ...


BTW meher baba, TS40 rocked up overweight and unfit for the first training session under Lyon, at a time when his pen was wavering over a couple of names on the list.
He duly put a line through Schwarta's name .... when you rock up and come dead last (behind rookies) in the time trial under a new coach, you are asking for it.

The chaos at the club has extended well into the non-football side of operations, with sponsors walking away, with an embarrassingly public and seemingly unproductive stoush with Kingston Council, and with the even more embarrassing personal feud between RB and GT.

IMO they are the main issues that have caused others to act ... rather than on-field performance (as disappointing as that has been).

But the buck stops with the Board. I'm not sure that a clean sweep of the entire Board isn't warranted. They set themselves up for this: not because they sacked GT, but because they couldn't provide a convincing story as to why there had to be such a total upheaval of football operations. If they had simply sacked GT and promoted Rendell: the strategy that two clubs now playing in the finals - Sydney and Adelaide - adopted, then they wouldn't be in this situation. But instead they had to go for a scorched earth policy backed up by a load of drivel about "best of breed" and "benchmarking" and "personality testing" and "generation Y".

I won't address your comments on the coach/playing style MB, because we have clearly differing opinions.

But this point is a good one.

The buck DOES stop with the board.

IMO strong leadership always provides a central message or clear line of reasoning, a focus to which people can turn.

The Saints had this between 2002 and 2005 ... we were "writing our own history" and were a vibrant, forward-thinking and dynamic organisation, particularly off-field, set up for a "decade of sustained success".

The past two years this message has become confused and finally disappeared.

We have a President who is an absolute disgrace in the media.

We have a CEO who seems to act rashly and is contradicted by other board members.

We have lost our "edge" and made no progress in KEY areas of the club, particuarly the location of a training base, the signing of major sponsors and investment in the football department.

The club is stagnant in terms of innovating and being proactive. Half the time of the President seems to be spent sitting with women 20 years his junior and waging a puerile public spat with a former friend through the media.

The club needs a fresh approach, it needs accountability and it needs a clear message from the board.

Currently we are receiving none of this, and it is our right as members to consider an alternative.

Please feel free to correct me if I am wrong, but hasn't the Board publicly stated since we started reporting profits, that it's primary financial focus was to clear the accumulated debt of the Club?

And hasn't that now almost been done?

All debts were paid off by the end of 2004 IIRC.


So where has the profit gone? What tangible benefits do we see?

[evertonfc]

OWTS, super post.

Mr Magic - you'd die in a ditch for the current admin (putting it mildly ) - but we need something concrete from your corner if your group has any chance of staying in its current position of dominance over the club.

If the current board is fair dinkum, it must ask itself why it has lost so much support from the members.

I'm scared they'll condescend to the members and say a 'small minority' of people have been 'temporarily upset' by some 'stong decisions made in the best interests of this football club and process it seeks to undertake'.

Yeesh. Let's hope they don't resort to such rot. Well, I just hope there's something better and more real up your sleeve, MM.

[plugger66]

All depts were paid off this year not 2004. I have been told by someone I rate as reliable that they are going to spend an extra $750,000 on the footy department next year. I am not sure whether the board should stay or go but I would think they should have one more year.

[The Peanut]

. . . where has the profit gone? What tangible benefits do we see?

Ye - back in the good old days when we thought we still had a chance of making the finals RB and AF were in the papers and on the radio talking up our future as a strong AFL club and world best practice facilities. Well, RL seems to have sorted the players and game-plan out a bit and although the onfield issues will still give him a headache or two over the off-season - there are some signs of something better next year. But everything else down at the club seems to have dissappeared into the sunset.

As members, sometimes we need to review the off-field stuff as well as the onfield - things don't just happen (unless you are on some pretty good drugs as some players will tell you). The recent press reports don't help our image but the info is not totally manufactured and most of us knew that the pot would be stirred at seasons end.

Maybe I have been out in the back paddock for too long - but it amazes me how many staff members it seems to take to run a footy club thses days. I often wonder how many of these jobs could be undertaked by a competant supporter who would be happy to carry out for 'peanuts'.

It will be interesting to compare the staff expenditure from this year to a couple of years ago and then compare this years list with all of the other clubs - it will at least give us an idea of the difference between the rich and the poor and provide a measuring stick for future planning.

Has everyone seen the staff list lately -
http://westofmoorabbin.com/staff.html

[Oh When the Saints]

I often wonder how many of these jobs could be undertaked by a competant supporter who would be happy to carry out for 'peanuts'.

Like running the St Kilda website for example ...

Not so much for peanuts ... but by Peanut.

[linz]

As a Social Club Member (for nearly 30 years) I am gratefull for all the results our Board Members have achieved. Million dollar profits are one thing but results on the field are another. (Look at North and let's compare ourselves to North for the time-being)

Our current Board appear to have the opinion that if our bottom line is healthy; then everything else will look after itself. It's a good theory untill EGO's get in the way:
Differences to North Melbourne:
1) We sack Thomas. (Not for performance issues but for personal issues between coach and president). This gets played out in the media too much

2) Follow what MB said for all the other reasons but the above issue should be the reason why Butterrs has to go himself. Rightfully or wrongfully; he has let a personal issue affect HIS (not anyone elses, including 30,000 members) decision. Thomas was sacked because of a personal spat. Gawd, leave both your personal loans, girlfriends/wife issues aside.

Well, his decision may have cost us a shot at the flag this year and it's not good enough.

I still believe however that Lyon is and will be the better coach than Thomas over the Long-Term under a NEW LESS EGO DRIVEN ADMINISTRATION.