One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: mightytiges on November 28, 2004, 02:34:18 AM
-
Tigers' heroes of old join boardroom battle
By Caroline Wilson
The Age
November 28, 2004
When perhaps the most beloved living Tiger of all takes a side in the coming Richmond board election, you know you have a battle on your hands.
People who know Francis Bourke have been staggered to learn of his strength of feeling regarding the need for change at Punt Road Oval and that the five-time premiership player has gone as far as putting his support for Charles Macek's ticket in writing.
Bourke, for a relatively brief time in his glorious career, was part of football's famous centreline - Bourke, Bill Barrott and Dick Clay - with Clay also providing written support in a bid to oust Clinton Casey.
In fact, Bourke and Clay are two of eight former players to have put their names to Macek's campaign document to be released over the next few days.
The more recently retired Brendon Gale, soon to take over as chief executive of the AFL Players Association, and Paul Broderick are also said to have taken a stand against Casey in the yet-to-be-released literature.
While Barrott has not put his name to the Macek campaign document, both he and Royce Hart have told the challengers they will happily speak out on behalf of the challengers.
Meanwhile, the Casey camp continues to run an impressive campaign. Although the Richmond president's ticket is not yet completed, he has over the past week hosted a feel-good barbecue at his Hawthorn home to welcome the Tigers' hot new draft picks, to which a widespread section of the media was also invited.
From all reports it was a function reminiscent of those that took place many years ago in a back garden not so many suburbs away where the club once celebrated premierships.
You would have to say that the AFL's equalisation philosophy certainly works when the two clubs that finished 15th and 16th on the AFL ladder are celebrating in November while Port Adelaide and the Brisbane Lions cannot.
And yet, interestingly, the Casey barbecue provided a subtle demonstration of how divided the Richmond Football Club has become. While some club corporate supporters and coterie groups were invited to welcome the Tigers' new players - and they are impressive - others were not.
The President's Club, which boasted 63 members when Casey became president five years ago but now has only 29, each contribute at least $9000 a year to Tigerland but were not included at the function. The more recently formed Tiger Executive - a coterie group contributing $5000 a head - was well represented.
It is understood that some 80 per cent of the President's Club plans to vote against Casey and he knows it. Rob Slade, a prominent member, turned on the president publicly several months ago.
This is an election campaign, all right, and Casey, while admitting to having been naive in a football sense when he took on the job at the end of 1999, is an astute politician.
He has barely spoken to The Age since this column suggested his time had come following his handling of former chief executive Ian Campbell's disastrous tenure (Casey largely blamed the AFL for recommending him), the projected $2 million-plus loss, the on-field performance, the handling of Danny Frawley and the board instability.
Against that, of course, is that four of the opposing ticket have been there before - although none as president - and that the club does appear to be moving forward in a positive financial direction following yet another external strategic plan put together by the AFL-recommended Crowe-Lovett team.
However, it is known that Casey is still pushing, as he has all year, to unearth a former player for his ticket following the Rex Hunt debacle before final nominations close next week.
Footballers past and present make popular campaign partners, as besieged veteran Essendon director Alec Epis learnt last week when Matthew Lloyd took the extraordinary step of supporting him in the coming board battle at Windy Hill.
As it stands, Casey has lost another director in Motorola boss Alan Niklos, who quit three days ago for business reasons, while Rob Turner, who opposed Frawley's contract extension and has been at odds with Casey at the board table, has been subtly tapped on the shoulder and was last night considering his future.
Clearly, though, names such as Bourke and Clay make formidable opponents and it seems dreadful to imagine great players lining up against each other in the name of boardroom politics. He was not named Saint Francis lightly.
http://www.realfooty.theage.com.au/realfooty/articles/2004/11/27/1101495457238.html
-
Barrot enters fray in Tigers' battle
28 November 2004
Sunday Herald Sun
"BUSTLING" Billy Barrot, a linchpin in Richmond's famous centreline of the 1960s, has yet to decide where he stands in the club's power struggle.
But Barrot disclosed yesterday he would meet people involved in the board election tomorrow to look at their plan for the future.
Barrot admitted he has been talking to people because he was interested in the club's welfare. "Apart from that, I cannot comment until I hear the full story," he said.
Speculation is mounting at Punt Rd several former Richmond greats from their glory years will be asked to add their name and support to the Charles Macek-led group challenging for the December 20 poll.
While speculation mounts that Francis Bourke wants a change at Punt Rd, perhaps the Tigers' greatest player, Royce Hart, dismissed rumours he had been approached to join either the board led by Clinton Casey or the opposition group.
Hart, who lives in Hobart, said yesterday: "I am too detached from it -- I have been away from it too long. They would have to send me messages by carrier pigeon."
But the former captain, best and fairest and star centre half-forward said he would have preferred Richmond to look at more key-position players in last weekend's national draft.
Hart said he was fearful that if Matthew Richardson, Greg Stafford or Troy Simmonds fell over, the Tigers could be in trouble.
Barrot, who was at Punt Rd on Friday, would not discuss who he might meet saying, "it could be three people, it could be 10 -- I'm telling you the truth -- I will know more next week."
He, too, had heard that Richmond was looking for support from the centreline of himself, Bourke and Dick Clay which helped Richmond win the 1967 and '69 premierships.
In June Clay, vice-president of the Tigers' past players association, told the Herald Sun: "I have received no approach at all by anybody. I've got no interest at all."
http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/footy/common/story_page/0,8033,11517132%255E20322,00.html
-
While Barrott has not put his name to the Macek campaign document, both he and Royce Hart have told the challengers they will happily speak out on behalf of the challengers.
Well someone is telling fibs. The Hun has Royce saying he is too far away from the action to get involved and Barrot meeting both sides this week.
The President's Club... each contribute at least $9000 a year to Tigerland... The more recently formed Tiger Executive - a coterie group contributing $5000 a head
I believe the President's Club is for two tickets not one. So they are roughly equal. Is that correct?
As it stands, Casey has lost another director in Motorola boss Alan Niklos, who quit three days ago for business reasons, while Rob Turner, who opposed Frawley's contract extension and has been at odds with Casey at the board table, has been subtly tapped on the shoulder and was last night considering his future.
Turner's been "considering his future" for a while now. Not surprised Frawley's contract extension is in some part behind the angst. If certain board members and challengers believe sacking the coach mid-contract is still an answer to our woes then good riddens. That's how we ended up with Spud in the first place. No one else wanted to go near us.
It'll be interesting who all the nominees for the election are. Only this week to go.
-
Is Bill related to Trevor Barrot?
If he is it could explain why Caro assumes he is backing the alternative.
If they are related then I'm even more impressed that Bill is going to talk to both camps before deciding if he''ll back either.
For someone who is "close" to Richmond and whose stories usually have a sound basis for that reason, Caro seems to manage to convey a fair amount of misinformation.
-
Cousins i think Fish
And Caro - it's Barrot NOT Barrott :rollin
-
....For someone who is "close" to Richmond and whose stories usually have a sound basis for that reason, Caro seems to manage to convey a fair amount of misinformation.
Sadly people take as fact what they read in newspapers. If this turns out to be rubbish, can you see Caro printing a retraction?
The trouble is that there is a lot of testosterone flying about in this boardroom battle and there is no doubt that Schwab (owing to family history) has a lot of mates. I feel this is becoming more and more a kick Clinton out....because after all he's not a REAL Richmond man.....than what is really best for the club.
-
Agree bg25. It's unreal how the only time this group ever seem to bob up is when they can put the boots into Casey. Why is that? Never do they say anything about what they will do for the Club. I just wonder how such narrow minded and reactionary people can bring success to RFC now when they couldn't in the past? Casey might not be a true Richmond person in the eyes of some but, despite those views, to me, he seems to have done more to change the real areas holding RFC back than anybody else before him. Why didn't or couldn't anyone before him have enough initiative or motivation to do that? After all, weren't they more "Richmond" than he will ever be?
The tack that this group has taken just highlights the credibility and validity of their campaign. And such is the depth of mind within this group that Wood goes on KB's radio programme and says that Casey told him that he wouldn't cross the road to have coffee with half his Board. I think that comment was supposed to be a killer blow to Casey and/or his ego. Well, to people of such mentality, it could seem that way to them I suppose, but to me it just reinforces Casey's resilience. Because, if we believe everything we read and hear, then all's not tickety boo within the Richmond boardroom. Not good news I guess. But, despite that, if any or all of it is true, RFC has still managed to create momentum and instill enthusiasm and hope amongst supporters, and we're still a long way from the next footy season. Things even seem to be heading in the right direction, on and off the field. Apparently while the RFC board is at loggerheads.
Interestingly enough though, Schwab cleared out because he couldn't work within the Boardoom environment and conditions at the time. However, this sort of environment doesn't seem to stop Casey from continuing to make things happen. He seems able to get on with things, regardless of the prevailing working environment and seems to have that ability to just push on unhindered, whatever comes his way. I would rather someone who can roll with the punches being in charge of the future and direction of Richmond, rather than those who would simply roll over and play dead at the first sign of resistance. And it would seem that Schwab and co. would need a nurse-maid and an endless supply of tissues to work within the environment Casey seems to have had to deal with in recent times.
It's fair to say that RFC has been a laughing stock for years. Any embarrassment or negativity that comes along nowadays is simply water off a duck's back. Just push on and get on with things. What else can you do? And that's what Casey seems able to do. Through initiative, he has started the ball rolling on changing the mediocrity within the Club and done what no one before him could or would do. For his efforts, he gets kicked in the guts, instead of getting credit for being proactive enough to attempt to change things.
Who knows how things will turn out, but there's more chance of positive change happening now than ever before. Because it's been my belief that real success could never be possible until the culture of mediocrity was identified and something done to change it. And until that happened, everything else that was done would ultimately mean nothing, without those changes first taking place. Something that seems never to have entered the Alternative ticket's thinking, which is no real surprise.
Instead their focus seems fixed on trying to discredit Casey, but all they ever do is shoot themselves in the foot. And all we seem to hear from the Alternaitve group is repetitive and reactive mumbo jumbo. What proactive thing have they ever outlined that could give you confidence that they are the real deal, when they continually make excuses as to why they can't do this or do that? It's possible they just might know about finances, but they seem to have little idea or understanding about the real and deep-seated issues affecting RFC and running a football club. Their entire campaign lacks real focus and any sort of balance or vision.
-
I’ve actually been wondering if Danny’s contract is where this really started, MT. Because none of this makes sense. Why, for at about four years was Casey unopposed as President? But suddenly, towards the end of last year, and not long after the Club dug its heels in about Danny’s contract, all this stuff starts to come to the surface.
I agree, good riddance to any of those whose mentality was to sack Danny mid contract. They clearly belong on the Alternative ticket, because that’s the sort of backward thinking, and lack of understanding of how to fix the deep-seated cultural problems within the Club, they seem to have.
-
I’ve actually been wondering if Danny’s contract is where this really started, MT. Because none of this makes sense. Why, for at about four years was Casey unopposed as President? But suddenly, towards the end of last year, and not long after the Club dug its heels in about Danny’s contract, all this stuff starts to come to the surface.
I agree, good riddance to any of those whose mentality was to sack Danny mid contract. They clearly belong on the Alternative ticket, because that’s the sort of backward thinking, and lack of understanding of how to fix the deep-seated cultural problems within the Club, they seem to have.
You could be on to something here TS.
The more this thing goes on the more convinced I am that Casey is actually the right person for President. Couldn't agree more with you about him being the only person in eons to actually start to change the culture there.
I think he has got noses out of joint, because he is dragging us kicking and screaming into to the modern football world. Sure not everything has worked, but at least he is willing to try something different...hey if at first you don't succeed.
-
In the last 2 financial years Caseys administration has lost close to $ 3 million and delivered a wooden spoon. last year he said we would break even this year and we lost $ 2 million, next year ive heard the club is forecasting a loss of 800,000 ... god help us!
If we lost another $ 2 million next year...can someone tell me...What Happens? Would we be solveny or insolvent? ....People... we are one year away from disaster! for all the bells and whistles...i think we should change. and even if it means Miller goes out the door...we should still change...because in in the end theres only one reality. our club is a famous club with a storied history...and if we lose huge money next year again...we may have no history because we may not have a club.
some people may say...that the AFL would never let that happen....maybe....but i say that if we are 5 or 6 million in debt by the end of next year...we wont win another flag for 50 years.
Im supporting change coz i have no alternative. I would have preferred a better alternative ticket...butr if its good enough for francis bourke...then its good enough for me!
-
I’ve actually been wondering if Danny’s contract is where this really started, MT. Because none of this makes sense. Why, for at about four years was Casey unopposed as President? But suddenly, towards the end of last year, and not long after the Club dug its heels in about Danny’s contract, all this stuff starts to come to the surface.
I've been wondering the same thing TS. There was a heap of pressure placed on the Club from "supporters" to sack Spud but the Club for once resisted for the sake of stability. That decision has of course has been vidicated. I wouldn't be surprised if a few of these "supporters" got their noses out of joint because the decision makers at the Club didn't cave in their wishes as per norm over the past 20+ years.
-
Im supporting change coz i have no alternative. I would have preferred a better alternative ticket...butr if its good enough for francis bourke...then its good enough for me!
Everyone’s entitled to support whoever they choose. But there’s no way known I’m gonna vote for just anyone. Because no way known has the Alternative group shown that they have the answer to anything, least of all running a football club.
If they’re so interested in finance, go get involved in the finance industry. This is a footy club and it requires more than just number crunchers to make it work.
If we were to lose Miller through all this then we might as well close up shop anyway, because he’s about the only one there that has the serious nous to change the things that need changing.
What’s with the scare campaign these people have running anyway? That’s the only way they can generate support, I suppose. The old tried and true political way of gaining support. Go the scare tactics.
What about the AFL okaying things with the Club. If it’s ok with them why isn’t it ok with this group? Do they know something no one else knows?
I was more concerned about our ability to survive in this competition in the past than I am now. So this group can take their scare mongering somewhere else. It might work for some, but it has no credence with me. And they have even less credence.
-
While Barrott has not put his name to the Macek campaign document, both he and Royce Hart have told the challengers they will happily speak out on behalf of the challengers.
Well someone is telling fibs. The Hun has Royce saying he is too far away from the action to get involved and Barrot meeting both sides this week.
The President's Club... each contribute at least $9000 a year to Tigerland... The more recently formed Tiger Executive - a coterie group contributing $5000 a head
I believe the President's Club is for two tickets not one. So they are roughly equal. Is that correct?
As it stands, Casey has lost another director in Motorola boss Alan Niklos, who quit three days ago for business reasons, while Rob Turner, who opposed Frawley's contract extension and has been at odds with Casey at the board table, has been subtly tapped on the shoulder and was last night considering his future.
Turner's been "considering his future" for a while now. Not surprised Frawley's contract extension is in some part behind the angst. If certain board members and challengers believe sacking the coach mid-contract is still an answer to our woes then good riddens. That's how we ended up with Spud in the first place. No one else wanted to go near us.
It'll be interesting who all the nominees for the election are. Only this week to go.
Nice spin MT. But you've made no mention of the fact that Francis Bourke supports Casey being kicked out of the club. The point of the article is about Francis Bourke. You've gone a long way to ignore it.
-
Agree bg25. It's unreal how the only time this group ever seem to bob up is when they can put the boots into Casey. Why is that? Never do they say anything about what they will do for the Club. I just wonder how such narrow minded and reactionary people can bring success to RFC now when they couldn't in the past? Casey might not be a true Richmond person in the eyes of some but, despite those views, to me, he seems to have done more to change the real areas holding RFC back than anybody else before him. Why didn't or couldn't anyone before him have enough initiative or motivation to do that? After all, weren't they more "Richmond" than he will ever be?
The tack that this group has taken just highlights the credibility and validity of their campaign. And such is the depth of mind within this group that Wood goes on KB's radio programme and says that Casey told him that he wouldn't cross the road to have coffee with half his Board. I think that comment was supposed to be a killer blow to Casey and/or his ego. Well, to people of such mentality, it could seem that way to them I suppose, but to me it just reinforces Casey's resilience. Because, if we believe everything we read and hear, then all's not tickety boo within the Richmond boardroom. Not good news I guess. But, despite that, if any or all of it is true, RFC has still managed to create momentum and instill enthusiasm and hope amongst supporters, and we're still a long way from the next footy season. Things even seem to be heading in the right direction, on and off the field. Apparently while the RFC board is at loggerheads.
Interestingly enough though, Schwab cleared out because he couldn't work within the Boardoom environment and conditions at the time. However, this sort of environment doesn't seem to stop Casey from continuing to make things happen. He seems able to get on with things, regardless of the prevailing working environment and seems to have that ability to just push on unhindered, whatever comes his way. I would rather someone who can roll with the punches being in charge of the future and direction of Richmond, rather than those who would simply roll over and play dead at the first sign of resistance. And it would seem that Schwab and co. would need a nurse-maid and an endless supply of tissues to work within the environment Casey seems to have had to deal with in recent times.
It's fair to say that RFC has been a laughing stock for years. Any embarrassment or negativity that comes along nowadays is simply water off a duck's back. Just push on and get on with things. What else can you do? And that's what Casey seems able to do. Through initiative, he has started the ball rolling on changing the mediocrity within the Club and done what no one before him could or would do. For his efforts, he gets kicked in the guts, instead of getting credit for being proactive enough to attempt to change things.
Who knows how things will turn out, but there's more chance of positive change happening now than ever before. Because it's been my belief that real success could never be possible until the culture of mediocrity was identified and something done to change it. And until that happened, everything else that was done would ultimately mean nothing, without those changes first taking place. Something that seems never to have entered the Alternative ticket's thinking, which is no real surprise.
Instead their focus seems fixed on trying to discredit Casey, but all they ever do is shoot themselves in the foot. And all we seem to hear from the Alternaitve group is repetitive and reactive mumbo jumbo. What proactive thing have they ever outlined that could give you confidence that they are the real deal, when they continually make excuses as to why they can't do this or do that? It's possible they just might know about finances, but they seem to have little idea or understanding about the real and deep-seated issues affecting RFC and running a football club. Their entire campaign lacks real focus and any sort of balance or vision.
Clinton Casey has been president for 5 years, and you're judging him on only his performance after this season ended. The same season we won the wooden spoon. If he was apppointed president for the post season, I'd agree with you, but he's been there 5 years. And he should be judged over the 5 years, not the last 5 weeks. And in those 5 years, he's not done what you're claiming. He's been a financial disaster for the club.
-
1980, it's only been since Casey realised that we were going nowhere that he had to do something to change things. Hence the appointment of Miller. The changes made since his arrival and the subsequent appointments of Wallace and Wright have not had time to see any results as yet. We need to give them that time first.
But people are hell bent on sabotaging things when it seems we actually have the deep seated problems within this Club finally nailed and we know what to do about them.
If people don't want Casey then don't vote for him. But if they want things to change, don't vote for the Alternatives, they'll just take us back to what we had the last two or so decades.
Read the writing on the wall people.
-
1980, it's only been since Casey realised that we were going nowhere that he had to do something to change things. Hence the appointment of Miller. The changes made since his arrival and the subsequent appointments of Wallace and Wright have not had time to see any results as yet. We need to give them that time first.
But people are hell bent on sabotaging things when it seems we actually have the deep seated problems within this Club finally nailed and we know what to do about them.
If people don't want Casey then don't vote for him. But if they want things to change, don't vote for the Alternatives, they'll just take us back to what we had the last two or so decades.
Read the writing on the wall people.
Thats not the way I see it. Up until this year, that is, Year 5 of 5 years in charge, Clinton Casey had full support from his board. It was only the end of last season when the issue of recontracting Frawley and the fact that Casey did not share the clubs financial results with his board that some of the board members dissented. He had full support until then. In fact, it was preseason this year when a couple of them raised issues with Casey about the way he was running the club.
So he was given 4 years of full support from his board. None of us heard a peep from any board member being unhappy with Casey for 4 years.
Just like Miller argued Frawley shouldnt be sacked for the sack of unity and to lose our reputation for sacking coaches, if indeed thats why he argued to give Frawley the extra year, because I shudder to think he actually thought Frawley could turn it around in season 2004, the same way the Casey board thought unity at the board level came above all else for 4 years. It came to a head when the clubs losses were not shared with the board before they were made public. And the fact there was a lot of evasiveness from Casey for many months not just with the board, but also with the members about what the loss was going to be.
And all this hoo ha about Miller appointing Wallace and Casey should get the credit for hiring Miller and the sun suddenly is shining. Wallace could have been RFC coach for season 2004 had Miller not argued to renew Frawley's contract. He was available, out of a job, and facing a long time out of footy, just like Rodney Eade was.
Had he convinced Kevin Sheedy to join us, then he'd have earned his self-promoted reputation for being a smart footy operator. If anything, we over paid for Wallace by chasing him one year later than we should have. A year ago he was a vermin that ditched the dogs for a richer role at the swans, and going cheap. This year due to the bad playing performances of both us and the Hawks, suddenly he became the messiah.
-
Some people want a profitable Club and I want the changes that will ensure the deep seated cultural issues within the Club are solved.
With Casey's initiative, he has started the changes that I've been wanting to see for years.
If all that's important to people is money then go support the Alternatives, just don't expect any success.
-
Some people want a profitable Club and I want the changes that will ensure the deep seated cultural issues within the Club are solved.
With Casey's initiative, he has started the changes that I've been wanting to see for years.
If all that's important to people is money then go support the Alternatives, just don't expect any success.
You make out as if we were giants on the field whilst Casey has been at the helm. We suck on and off the field. I just dont see how you've been able to wipe from your memory the wooden spoon Casey brought the club this year. It was only 2 months ago for goodness sake. And he's had 5 years to make a difference and change things.
-
Nice spin MT. But you've made no mention of the fact that Francis Bourke supports Casey being kicked out of the club. The point of the article is about Francis Bourke. You've gone a long way to ignore it.
That's why the Hun has Barrot in the heading because the article was about Francis Bourke ;).
Where's the spin? Caro's and the Hun's articles were conflicting in regards to Barrot's support. I said "someone is telling fibs" and after today it shows that that was the Hun and not Caro in this case.
As for Francis Bourke or any ex-player or official who comes out in support for either side, IMO it will make a big difference to many Tiger fans but personally it won't alter my view. I listen to what they have to say as I did today on SEN but unless I hear substance to back up their arguments for change then to me it's just their opinion which is no more valid than mine or any other Tigers' member.
I for one am not going to told that everything was hunky dorey at Tigerland back in 1999 simply because we made a profit. What a joke that is! There's no disputing Casey's stuffed up big time but it's ludicrous to blame all the ills at the RFC on him. We've been crap for the past 20 years not just the last 5 and I simply don't intend to replace twiddledee with twiddledum just for the sake of change. Yeah that mentality has got us far all these years hasn't it. I will sit down and from the 35 candidates or so carefully decide which 9 I believe should steer our Club on it's new direction. Remember we're voting for 9 individuals not tickets. Hey we might end up with a new board without Casey, Schwab and Welsh.
-
And all this hoo ha about Miller appointing Wallace and Casey should get the credit for hiring Miller and the sun suddenly is shining. Wallace could have been RFC coach for season 2004 had Miller not argued to renew Frawley's contract. He was available, out of a job, and facing a long time out of footy, just like Rodney Eade was.
Firstly, Danny Frawley was contracted for 2004 - he was given a contract extension after 2001 - that was for 2003 & 2004. The only thing that was removed was a stupid clause that tied his contract to making finals - have no doubt there still would have been some sort of payout.
Everyone keeps going on about money and the decision to honour Frawley's contract at the end of the day was about money. If we had sacked Frawley at the end of 2003 we would have had to pay him for 2004 and as result it would be highly unlikely that we could have afforded Wallace, Eade or any other experienced coach - we would have been stuck with a Clarkson (and after the Hawls draft efforts this would not have been good ::)) or worse still another Frawley.
-
Also who's to say for sure that Wallace (ignoring his Sydney contract ;) ) would've taken up our offer to coach us a year ago if we had got rid of Spud mid-contract. Based on past history we would have ended up with just another Frawley not just for this year but also for 2005 :help.
-
It was only 2 months ago for goodness sake. And he's had 5 years to make a difference and change things.
The club had been deluding itself for 20 years. The past 5 years under Casey were no different. Just have to look at the ridiculous decision making in that time to see that. However, the past 2-3 months has seen 100% more positive direction, long-term planning and implementation of those plans at the Club than the past 20 years combined. Helps when you finally employ professionals at every level to run the place. As much as Casey oversaw combined $3m losses in the past 2 years and a wooden spoon, he has also overseen the desperately needed restructuring of our Club that past boards failed to do. Yeah we can continue to throw up our hands in self-pity and anger about 2004 but I'd rather just get on with the future. Whoever wins this election will benefit from the changes and tough decisins that have already taken place provided they don't interfere with the course the Club is now on.
-
IM(ever so)HO - who ever wins would have to stick to the new business plan that has been implemented - never lose sight of the fact that it has AFL backing and in these times that is so very important even if most people wish it wasn't.
Seriously think about it..........
I mean do the alternatives or any other person nominating intend to walk into Punt Road sit in the board room and say to Steven Wright and the rest of the Admin team - "loved what was in the FTB Steve, you know your 10 point plan great stuff..... but you gotta turf it because it has links to Casey and we cannot have that!" :banghead :banghead
Hmmmm................ I think not.
For the first time in over a decade I am genuinely excited about the future, rather than the excitement being some sort of deluded form of hope...
-
1980, we’ve sucked for longer than just 5 years. But you tell me who has the answers to our problems. Did the previous Boards?
I never got to vote for a President who had no idea about the Richmond or AFL footy culture. But we got him, for better or worse. He was deluded, like the rest of them, that there were problems. But, given time, before we shaft anyone who tries to fix things, he has shown that he can and will do something about the issues that have held this Club back.
Because he didn’t understand the culture of the place, it took three years for him to work out we were going nowhere and the depth of our problems. Firstly, he acknowledged we had problems, unlike others before him. Secondly, he acknowledged that he (and I guess his Board) didn’t know hot fix those things, so Miller was identified as someone who did.
From that decision, we are now starting to see the effects that has made to the whole Club. I’m sorry that it’s taken so long, but why aren’t you complaining about the previous 20 years before that. Or are you happy with that?
Casey seems to have more of a handle on fixing anything than the Alternative Group do. That’s why he gets my support.
On the other hand, the Alternative group has given us no real answers to anything. From their campaign, are we to just assume they don't think there has been anything wrong with the culture at RFC? Or do we just assume they know how to fix everything?
They seem happy enough to agree with every change that Casey has implemented, but somehow they reckon he’s incompetent. How does that work?
-
And all this hoo ha about Miller appointing Wallace and Casey should get the credit for hiring Miller and the sun suddenly is shining. Wallace could have been RFC coach for season 2004 had Miller not argued to renew Frawley's contract. He was available, out of a job, and facing a long time out of footy, just like Rodney Eade was.
Everyone keeps going on about money and the decision to honour Frawley's contract at the end of the day was about money. If we had sacked Frawley at the end of 2003 we would have had to pay him for 2004 and as result it would be highly unlikely that we could have afforded Wallace, Eade or any other experienced coach - we would have been stuck with a Clarkson (and after the Hawls draft efforts this would not have been good ::)) or worse still another Frawley.
I'd rather the club lost $2.3m paying out a crap coach like Frawley and save me the trouble of watching a crap team embarrass the RFC jumper this year, than lose $2.3m and make me watch a crap coach and a crap team for the entire 2004 season.
If ever there was a good reason to lose money, its getting rid of Danny Frawley!
-
Also who's to say for sure that Wallace (ignoring his Sydney contract ;) ) would've taken up our offer to coach us a year ago if we had got rid of Spud mid-contract. Based on past history we would have ended up with just another Frawley not just for this year but also for 2005 :help.
And who's to say we wouldnt?
Wallace would have jumped at the opportunity to get back into coaching after the humiliation of the Sydney debacle. There were a lot of ppl in football, and he was one of them, that thought he'd never get to coach again. A year is a long time in footy and the wheel turned for him. But he wouldve been cheaper iof we signed him when no-one wanted him, rather than when there was an auction going.
No wonder we're losing so much money. And by the by, so did the Roos when Miller was there. That's why they got rid of him. He bankrupted the place.
-
It was only 2 months ago for goodness sake. And he's had 5 years to make a difference and change things.
The club had been deluding itself for 20 years. The past 5 years under Casey were no different. Just have to look at the ridiculous decision making in that time to see that. However, the past 2-3 months has seen 100% more positive direction, long-term planning and implementation of those plans at the Club than the past 20 years combined. Helps when you finally employ professionals at every level to run the place. As much as Casey oversaw combined $3m losses in the past 2 years and a wooden spoon, he has also overseen the desperately needed restructuring of our Club that past boards failed to do. Yeah we can continue to throw up our hands in self-pity and anger about 2004 but I'd rather just get on with the future. Whoever wins this election will benefit from the changes and tough decisins that have already taken place provided they don't interfere with the course the Club is now on.
2-3 months doesnt wipe away 5 years of negligence. And developing a plan and executing it are 2 different things. And I'm voting against Casey because once the heat of the board election is off, he's going right back to running things his way. Lots of yes men on the board, and the plan out the window.
A leopord doesnt change his spots, and a man with an ego doesnt become accountable to his members either. Casey is not president because of his love for the Richmond footy club. No-ne had even heard of the clown before they put him up for the job. He wasnt known as a major contributor, corporate doner prominent member or anything.
He is pres for his own ego. And his 5 year track record demonstrates it.
-
Wallace would have jumped at the opportunity to get back into coaching after the humiliation of the Sydney debacle. There were a lot of ppl in football, and he was one of them, that thought he'd never get to coach again. A year is a long time in footy and the wheel turned for him. But he wouldve been cheaper iof we signed him when no-one wanted him, rather than when there was an auction going.
No wonder we're losing so much money. And by the by, so did the Roos when Miller was there. That's why they got rid of him. He bankrupted the place.
Wallace wants to be a career coach so yes I agree 1980 he would've wanted to coach again as soon as possible but not at Richmond prior to this year no matter how much we begged. Anyone half-decent quite rightly wouldn't go near the place as our blame and sack the coach mentality if they didn't perform short-term miracles meant the job was a career coach killer. If we had sacked Spud we would have only perpetuated this perception. Fortunately we finally chose stability and copped the short-term crap to rid us of those bad old ways. As a result we had the best available coaches competing to coach us and snagged the man we wanted.
As for Miller. He had become CEO of the Kangaroos by that stage (they now get $1-2m from the CBF which they didn't get before to keep their heads above water). He isn't CEO at Tigerland. He's employed quite rightly where his expertise is and that is overseeing the football department.
-
2-3 months doesnt wipe away 5 years of negligence. And developing a plan and executing it are 2 different things. And I'm voting against Casey because once the heat of the board election is off, he's going right back to running things his way. Lots of yes men on the board, and the plan out the window.
A leopord doesnt change his spots, and a man with an ego doesnt become accountable to his members either. Casey is not president because of his love for the Richmond footy club. No-ne had even heard of the clown before they put him up for the job. He wasnt known as a major contributor, corporate doner prominent member or anything.
He is pres for his own ego. And his 5 year track record demonstrates it.
There hasn't been accountability at Tigerland towards members for years. The board had become a play thing for a select minority to fight over and handover. You just have to count the number of elections we've have (or rather haven't). Casey's original appointment a clear example of that. We only got this election because both sides wouldn't give in to the demands of the other side and they were forced to come to a truce - a full board election. Now that the average member by luck or by design will finally have his/her say we must continue each year to make whoever wins accountable by voicing our right for them to face all of us before a vote.
As for his loyalties, I couldn't careless to be honest. Wallace and Miller aren't Richmond people either. More interested in a successful future for the Club and whether he or someone better belongs on the board to deliver it. If the only criteria needed for the president (and the board) to bring us success was for them to be long-term loyal and passionate Richmond people then we wouldn't have gone through the last 20 years as the worst performing Club in League.