Trouble is brewing

[froars]

The question I pose is a legitimate one on Macek, and I know I heard the rumour – just don’t remember who told me – although I have an inkling.  It’s stuck in my head, because I have met Macek on a number of occasions and always found him to be a nice man – so it shocked me at the time that others thought otherwise. 
But I would like to know if they didn’t think he was a good board member based on personality clashes or his efforts while a director.  Either doesn’t bode well, because if they are to form a new board, they have to work and get on well together IMO.
Do they hate Casey so much that they would see even Macek as a better option, or are they just doing it because like it or not, Macek has made an impact on the supporters.
Either option is unacceptable to me if this is the case.  The idea is to find the best leader – not a better alternative to the worst option.

[froars]

It would be nice if all this stuff could be sorted out amicably (very unRichmond-like I know), but the question is how?
I would really like to see Leon Daphne as president again, but Leon has ruled that out for his own personal reasons.
So, I’ll chuck in another option in Terry Grigg, the vice president at the time Leon resigned and was going to be president when Casey stepped in.
I better declare I know Griggy personally and is a friend (although I wonder if he sees this, I still will be lol).  C’est la vie – because Terry knows I would never do anything to harm the RFC and would just have to accept I say this in the best interests of the club.
I backed him when he first tried out for the board, based on knowing him and knowing what a diehard Richmond supporter he was, working for the club during the Save Our Skins, president of the Ton Up group, and many many other things he has done unnoticed by supporters.  And a successful businessman to boot.
His name hasn’t been brought up in these discussions, and I can’t vouch for all parties concerned, but I believe he got on very well with the current board, and was on friendly terms with members of the Schwab ticket.
Best of all, he was a hundred per cent successful in his duties as director, being in charge of membership, which in his tenure reached the highest membership figures going just short of the 30,000 mark (which I still believe is the highest amount, despite reports otherwise).
Just an option, and I hope people can see past my personal bias – I think my bias is outweighed by the respect he has around the club anyway.
I hate this infighting – this, to me, is a viable alternative to the current state of play.
The only thing is Griggy hasn’t thrown his hat in the ring – that’s up to him I guess, but I’d welcome some mediation in this.

[mightytiges]

Spud was asked whether Casey should go. He said he didn't want to get involved in politics. Only said Casey was very supportive of him. Spud then said the obvious that no club can be successful when there's disunity. Talked about locking all the parties in a room and them deciding to do what's in the best interests of the Club.

A nice idea but I think it's gone past that stage Spud. Too much pride and bitterness and too many egos involved now for a compromise to be produced. The temporary ceasefire was hard enough to get and now there's disagreement over that.

IMO the 1998 final round flogging to the Dees and then poor 1999 season when no promised changes were made made many Tiger fans fed up with the side and Club. If Sheedy had come on board at the end of 1999 his presence alone would have kept us around that 30,000 mark but once he said no that was enough heartache for many. IMO it wouldn't have mattered who the president was our membership numbers would have fallen. With Wallace, Miller and a good trade/draft period we have a good chance to reach and break the 30,000 mark independent of whoever the president is.

[WilliamPowell]

If the alternative is as credible as some claim why are so many public faces that back it appear afraid of facing the members at a December election. If the majority of the 27,500 members feel the same way and want him gone then Casey will be no more. It's as simple as that.

Exactly MT.

What are they afarid of losing?

The current board Casey and the rest of them have said they will face the members on December. The alternative appear to be trying everything to avoid it. Do they not turst us the members to make a decision that's in the best interest of the club. It appears not.

We have a right to decide

[mightytiges]

This is all still playing politics. Casey has gone away for a month when nothing much is happening. Presumely he'll be back just after the trade period. If we do well there he'll promote that in October. Then November will be spent talking about the kids we drafted and by early December before the proposed election and AGM we'll know which players are out of contract and who we can pick up in the PSD. Casey will be counting on the popularity of these choices to push his case on top of the plans in place. The alternative ticket would want Casey out as soon as possible so he doesn't get any credit for these decisions and will probably argue it's the work of Miller and Wallace anyway. They also appear concerned/afraid of their chances at an election given the chairman controls the proxies.

[Fishfinger]

Just a bit of a side issue with regard to the membership figures.
As a Family Membership purchaser I can say that it used to count for 6 members (2 Ad + 4 Ch) but now only counts for 4 (2 + 2).
I think our numbers are comparable to the 30,000 because from memory the change occured in 2000.

Not knocking Terry, froars. The work done to bring the numbers up from 8000 to 30000 in only a couple of years was fantastic, and if it was his department he deserves accolades. Just trying to show that our numbers are still as good in real terms.

[froars]

When was the 2 + 2 introduced, Fish?  Didn't know it had, but not surprised - I watch my package get little benefits taken off it yearly as the price increases.  But it is a good point.  I still stand by Terry lol - even as a mediator between these parties he probably would be good even if he didn't stand.

[Tiger Spirit]

I'm extremely happy for Caroline that for her the decision is clear-cut. Wish it was for me.
Also happy for her she gets her say, via her article.
You're spot on MT. What about the rest of us getting our say. We don't have a column so we need the board election.

That’s what I’m livid about too Fishfinger.

With all the distorted views of each party going around, how anyone can be expected to make a decision is beyond me.  And that’s why I keep going on about the fact that we need to stop all these ego driven people from eroding our Club and not let rebel factions interfere with the rights of Richmond members to have their say.  Who are they to make up our minds for us?

If they are the right people to lead the Club then let the members decide that.  As others have said, what are they afraid of and why won’t they front the members?

I haven’t read Caro’s article and I have no intention of reading it, because I heard her on 3AW over the weekend and that was more than enough to know what her view on this is, if I didn’t already know.

Caro’s more than entitled to her opinion but, as you alluded to Fishfinger, so are we.

And, if indeed Casey or any other Director needs to go then let the members decide.  Why does a decision need to be made by the back room boys, without the Members getting to have their say, yet again?  That’s what I think a lot of us would like to know.

We’ve had faceless and nameless people in the background making decisions for who knows how long, getting us nowhere and we can let that sort of decision making continue or we can put a stop to it by ensuring that we get our say at an election.

I’d love to know how many times Richmond members have had the opportunity to vote over the last 20 years, because if it was any more than 2 or 3 times, I would be very surprised.

[1980]

We won a wooden spoon and never made the finals under Neville Crowe's presidency but he had to fix the mess that Wilson and the other 1980's presidents got us into. Wilson may be classed as a legend of the Club but the damage he did during the 80's was mindboggling. We were broke! I don't call that abusing him just stating a fact no matter how unpleasant it is to those who are still in awe of him. No different to stating facts about what's happened under Casey's regime. Anyone who says we are in a worse position now than in the 80's doesn't know what they are talking about.

The posts I was reading had a lot to say about Wilson driving the club broke in the late 80s, but ommitted to mention that he also presided over the club when it won 2 premierships.

Wilson is a Richmond legend. Casey is not. The two cannot be compared in terms of what they've contributed to the club. 2 premierships VS one wooden spoon. I'd tolerate Casey's failures over the past 5 years if he'd contributed 2 premierships in the Punt Rd trophy cabinet.

If you want to make a case that Wilson was responsible for the mess of the late 80s, then all the more reason why Casey should be kicked out. Presidents left to indiscriminately spend money lead to SOS campaigns. Or are you going to argue that Casey is a sound financial manager? That would give me something to laugh about

[WilliamPowell]

I’d love to know how many times Richmond members have had the opportunity to vote over the last 20 years, because if it was any more than 2 or 3 times, I would be very surprised.

I was thinking about this yesterday after reading Caro's article because she made the comment about there now being "a credible alternative" and her implying that Casey should go and the others take over. Again this view that the members shouldn't get a say.

So how many times have we voted in the last 20 years?

There was an election in January of this year. The last time I remeber voting was back in 1994/5 - when Mal Brown stirred the pot and then challenged Leon Daphne. Before that? I can honestly say I don't remember.

[Tiger Spirit]

I’d love to know how many times Richmond members have had the opportunity to vote over the last 20 years, because if it was any more than 2 or 3 times, I would be very surprised.

I was thinking about this yesterday after reading Caro's article because she made the comment about there now being "a credible alternative" and her implying that Casey should go and the others take over. Again this view that the members shouldn't get a say.

That’s why I didn’t bother with her article WP.  If she thinks that there is a credible alternative then good luck to her.

What about the rest of us, or don’t we deserve a say?

So how many times have we voted in the last 20 years?

There was an election in January of this year. The last time I remeber voting was back in 1994/5 - when Mal Brown stirred the pot and then challenged Leon Daphne. Before that? I can honestly say I don't remember.

That's all I can remember too WP.

[Tiger Spirit]

with so many wise people associated with or around Richmond then why in god's name are we where we are today? ???

Good question PRR.  But why would "wise" people want to get themselves involved in the snake pit that seems to be the Richmond Boardroom?

Wise people would have better ways to spend their days than being back stabbed and having their authority diminished by influential background people.

Genuine Richmond people would be lost and swallowed up in all the politics and behind the scenes goings on to be able to make any effective contribution to the Club.

Anyone on the RFC Board would need some of these to keep themselves sane I reckon 

Might sound harsh, but wouldn't surprise if it were true.

[mightytiges]

We won a wooden spoon and never made the finals under Neville Crowe's presidency but he had to fix the mess that Wilson and the other 1980's presidents got us into. Wilson may be classed as a legend of the Club but the damage he did during the 80's was mindboggling. We were broke! I don't call that abusing him just stating a fact no matter how unpleasant it is to those who are still in awe of him. No different to stating facts about what's happened under Casey's regime. Anyone who says we are in a worse position now than in the 80's doesn't know what they are talking about.

The posts I was reading had a lot to say about Wilson driving the club broke in the late 80s, but ommitted to mention that he also presided over the club when it won 2 premierships.

Wilson is a Richmond legend. Casey is not. The two cannot be compared in terms of what they've contributed to the club. 2 premierships VS one wooden spoon. I'd tolerate Casey's failures over the past 5 years if he'd contributed 2 premierships in the Punt Rd trophy cabinet.

If you want to make a case that Wilson was responsible for the mess of the late 80s, then all the more reason why Casey should be kicked out. Presidents left to indiscriminately spend money lead to SOS campaigns. Or are you going to argue that Casey is a sound financial manager? That would give me something to laugh about

I did mention the 2 premierships along with his disasterous decision making although it's a bit unfair to compare team success initially between the two. Casey inherited a bottom 4 side and Club which no decent coach wanted to go near whereas Wilson inherited a team of superstars and reigning premiers coached by Hafey. Although it make look like it, I'm not defending Casey's record as after 5 years the legacy he inherited should have been corrected by now and if he understood where realistically we were at on-field we wouldn't have counted on team success to balance the books and subsequently we wouldn't have lost $3 million over the past 2 years. It's only taken a year like 2004 to wake the inner sanctum of the Club from it's state of delusionment.

One of the major problems we have had in the past is we as a Club don't adapt to changes in the footy landscape and continue to use outdated methods. Wilson failed when the league started to become semi-professional and player and transfer costs ballooned especially of those (even duds) poached from other Clubs. More recently we have repeated the poaching mistakes but not necessarily from a financial cost but mainly at the expense of developing our own young players from the draft.

The last sentence in my previous post was just stating that at the end of 1984 (when Wilson finished) we were on our kness financially. From memory ironically the true state of our books was not disclosed although I could be incorrect there. I just remember reading somewhere that was so but can't remember which year in the mid 80's it was. In 2004 we are presumably $600K in debt out of a total turnover of $25 million. We couldn't afford another large loss next year but right now our position is still comfortably managable if we put in place realistic budget forecasts.

As far as legends go - Dyer, Bartlett, Hart, Bourke, etc - are the only ones as far as I'm concerned. Hafey as a 4 time premiership coach is also one but which "legend" of a president let him go after one poor season! Sorry Wilson is no legend of mine and Casey is just another successor in the great line of failed presidents we've had over the past 24 years.

When it comes down to all that goes into presiding over a VFL/AFL footy club, yes Casey is a dud but so was Wilson and for that matter so were the ex-board members who now lead the alternative ticket. Hence my dilemma come election time (if we even have an election).  

[Tiger Spirit]

As much as I don't want Casey around either due to his failed record, at least now I see positive change occurring. It's taken a year of major stupidity and failure to do it - a wooden spoon as well as putting heaps of $$$ into a footy department that blind freddy could see would fail again big time in the hope success would come out of thin air - but nevertheless the Club is now moving forward.

You can see that MT, but I wonder why the rebel ticket doesn’t, even though they agree with some of the key changes you’ve outlined.

As for current and future plans:

- Not caving in to outside pressure and sacking the coach unlike previous admins. Short term agony for long term benefit (ie. getting Wallace). I know many disagree with me in keeping on Danny.
- The appointments of Wright along with Wallace to go with Miller.
- The beginnings of a total clean out of our list and finally the Club understanding the merits of drafting youth.
- Our TTP will be reduced from 100% to 97% and ridiculous $$$ contracts should become a thing of the past.
- Recognition that's we've got a big job to fix us up and it's going to take time.
- Wright mentioned on club snorner that we'll be now following realistic and achievable budgets. We won't be relying on and budgeting for good gate receipt numbers and a good on-field performance to balance the books as we've done in the past.
- AFL acceptance of our 2005 and beyond business plan.

I don’t disagree with your point about Danny MT, because I thought we had to take that hard road before we could ever hope to get a coach such as Wallace.  And I think it has now paid off.

So I wonder if all these people in the background and those coming forward now have got their noses out of joint because Casey wouldn’t and won’t succumb to their demands like others before him have?  And instead of doing things the “Richmond way” he’s chosen to go another way.

No doubt these background, influential people would have been calling for Danny’s head any time in the last two to three years and, in seasons gone by, he would have gone.  But the Board never gave in to any of these demands, if there were any.  And good on them for stopping the rot, if that is the case.

Would be interesting to know what really goes on sometimes.

And I wonder too what other areas he would have done things his own way that they didn’t agree with, but have now paid off.  Even though some things didn’t work out, you would have to think that for every risk that doesn’t pay off, there would be others that will and have.  I would prefer that to just plain going nowhere, like what happened with other administrations.  Not everyone will agree with that I know, it’s just my view.

[mightytiges]

No doubt these background, influential people would have been calling for Danny’s head any time in the last two to three years and, in seasons gone by, he would have gone.  But the Board never gave in to any of these demands, if there were any.  And good on them for stopping the rot, if that is the case.

Spot on TS. History shows this is how these backroom people operate. We were up to our 4th coach in 5 years under the previous admin and were averaging a new coach every second year for 20 years. The rot has finally stopped.