Malcolm Speed & Carl Walsh join RFC Board replacing Lord & Cameron (H-Sun)

[Loui Tufga]

Good appointments 

However:

One question it raises (indirectly) and this comes back to this "Nominations Committee" situation is are we no longer gong to ever be in a position to elect board members?

I understand we've only ever get to vote when there are more candidates than positions and that's fair enough

They way the article reads is that the committee will interview (and have in this case) people who want to nominate and then they recommend who should get the gig - not sure this is the right way to go (if I am reading & interepting things correctly).

Bottom line is everyone member is entitled to nominate for the board and the members then in turn have the right to elect who they deem to be the best candidate.

Is this committee removing this right - I think it needs to be explained better by the Club. Certianly comes back to the questions Flags raised a few weeks back

Well if Jackstar and Ramps threw there hats in We would have got to vote

[10 FLAGS]

Good appointments 

However:

One question it raises (indirectly) and this comes back to this "Nominations Committee" situation is are we no longer gong to ever be in a position to elect board members?

I understand we've only ever get to vote when there are more candidates than positions and that's fair enough

They way the article reads is that the committee will interview (and have in this case) people who want to nominate and then they recommend who should get the gig - not sure this is the right way to go (if I am reading & interepting things correctly).

Bottom line is everyone member is entitled to nominate for the board and the members then in turn have the right to elect who they deem to be the best candidate.

Is this committee removing this right - I think it needs to be explained better by the Club. Certianly comes back to the questions Flags raised a few weeks back

Well if Jackstar and Ramps threw there hats in We would have got to vote

Tas if you had come up with a decent campaign I wouldnt be in the sad position to announce my disappointing withdrawal from the race this year  Having said that the nominations committee is something the members need to look into as a matter of urgency. This is an important issue that is not being looked at by members. I fundamentally believe that nominations committees for boards of management are not good for clubs or its members.
 

[Loui Tufga]

Having said that the nominations committee is something the members need to look into as a matter of urgency. This is an important issue that is not being looked at by members. I fundamentally believe that nominations committees for boards of management are not good for clubs or its members.

Agree with this and WP's statements I for one will be emailing the club to express my concerns........

[Jackstar is back again]

I assume they will announce Jackstar seperately to generate maximum media coverage 

Stay tuned

[Loui Tufga]

I assume they will announce Jackstar seperately to generate maximum media coverage 

Stay tuned

We have been, the wireless has been on auto tune 24-7 ?????

[bojangles17]

I wasnt aware these guys were TIGERS nevertheless it's comforting to know we are finally getting some brainpower in the room when their are important decisions to be made that shapes the clubs future...well done...beats getting radio commentators or tv journos

[Ox]

Interesting appointment if true. Someone from outside of footy and from another sport.

Rudi Webster?

[Loui Tufga]

Interesting appointment if true. Someone from outside of footy and from another sport.

Rudi Webster?

?????????

 

[DCrane]

Good appointments 

However:

One question it raises (indirectly) and this comes back to this "Nominations Committee" situation is are we no longer gong to ever be in a position to elect board members?

I understand we've only ever get to vote when there are more candidates than positions and that's fair enough

They way the article reads is that the committee will interview (and have in this case) people who want to nominate and then they recommend who should get the gig - not sure this is the right way to go (if I am reading & interepting things correctly).

Bottom line is everyone member is entitled to nominate for the board and the members then in turn have the right to elect who they deem to be the best candidate.

Is this committee removing this right - I think it needs to be explained better by the Club. Certianly comes back to the questions Flags raised a few weeks back

I agree 100% with this post WP.
Curious post though Powelly, for you are one who complains everytime somebody stands for the board because they are imposing the costs of an election upon the club. Interesting change of tune.

Could this be because one W Powell may want to stand for the board one day?
 

[The Big Richo]

Agree with the sentiments re the selection committee.

I don't like what I hear about Speed, I may make him my new whipping boy along with March.

Not sure he will have the crucial support of Club 80.

[Smokey]

There was an article on the club's website a week ago explaining the role of the Nominations Committee.  Here is the main thrust of it:

At its October 2011 meeting, the board of the Richmond Football Club resolved to change the Election Bylaws.

Among other things, the changes:

1.    Recognise the role of the Nominations Committee which Committee was established by the board in 2011.  Such committees are widely regarded as ‘best practice’ in corporate governance.  The current members of the Nominations Committee are Emmett Dunne, Michael Green, Maurice O'Shannassy and Henrietta Rothschild.

In the context of board elections, the Nominations Committee will -
•    interview candidates;
•    answer questions that the candidate has concerning the role of director;
•    assess the candidate’s qualifications as set out on the candidate’s CV and in light of the director skills matrix which has been set by the board;
•    inform the candidate about the requirements of the role including:
- the legal requirements of all gaming and liquor licensing authorities, the Australian Securities and Investments Commission and the Club’s directors and officers indemnity insurer;
- the time commitment expected and the schedule of meetings for the board and the committees of the board;
- all relevant policies of the board including corporate governance principles addressing conflicts of interest and duty such as involvement with sponsors;
- and may make recommendations to the board concerning the candidates.

2.    Provide for an increase in the number of words in the candidate's statement to members.

3.    Clarify the duties of the Returning Officer.

http://www.richmondfc.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/6301/newsid/125564/default.aspx

Not sure how I feel about it but I can see merit in some of the functions they perform.  I'm still a bit uneasy about the 'jobs for the boys' feeling it portrays though.

[mightytiges]

Interesting appointment if true. Someone from outside of footy and from another sport.

Rudi Webster?

He was our psychologist Ox in 1980. Helped us stick it up Carlton  but he wasn't a board member.

[mightytiges]

Good appointments 

However:

One question it raises (indirectly) and this comes back to this "Nominations Committee" situation is are we no longer gong to ever be in a position to elect board members?

I understand we've only ever get to vote when there are more candidates than positions and that's fair enough

They way the article reads is that the committee will interview (and have in this case) people who want to nominate and then they recommend who should get the gig - not sure this is the right way to go (if I am reading & interepting things correctly).

Bottom line is everyone member is entitled to nominate for the board and the members then in turn have the right to elect who they deem to be the best candidate.

Is this committee removing this right - I think it needs to be explained better by the Club. Certianly comes back to the questions Flags raised a few weeks back

I'd guess it doesn't still stop people from challenging at an election if there's more candidates than the 3 positions up for re-election however no doubt the existing board will promote the candidate that has the tick from this 'nominations committee' over any 'outsiders'. The issue for me is if the board in the future is failing (ie. we are still in the bottom 8 say in 2014) then does this nominations committee reduce the ability of members to make the Prez and the whole board accountable. How independent is a committee set-up and handpicked by the Board?

[10 FLAGS]

Jackos gonna run ... Jackos gonna run 

Vote 1 JACKO 

[bojangles17]

what for, president of the cheer squad