Trouble is brewing

[froars]

There should be no tickets - just shove all these people up on both sides who want to stand for the election.
But tell me something oh wise ppl who know more than me (which is just about everyone lol) what happens next year?  Because aren't 3 board members each year meant to stand down for re-election each year?

[Jackstar]

We need NEW FACES on the board, not recylced hacks. Our board is like our footy team, pick up the Houlihans, Britains, of this world , fair dinkum.
I am Glad that Macek has jumped on board as the "alternative ticket is not an option now, probably never was.
If Caseys board isnt the answer, lets hope a " New Ticket "comes to hand with new faces and new ideas, otherwise there is no alternative.
At least the current board is learning by there mistakes

[RonBranton]

I note one of the new members on the Schwab ticket:

female
31 years old
lawyer

hmm - that's three things that are a worry.



 

[froars]

PLEASE EXPLAIN MORE RONNIE lol

I might have to put you over my knee tonight 

 

[Tiger Spirit]

The Schwab ticket is an insult to people’s intelligence.

They can shuffle the deck chairs all they like, but unless they come up with some meaningful plan to get us out of the hole we’re in, they are just kidding themselves.

Macek, another disgruntled EX- BOARD member.

Yep and he said, on Fox Footy back in June this year, that he didn't have the time to devote to the Presidency.

There should be no tickets - just shove all these people up on both sides who want to stand for the election.

Couldn’t agree more.  I’ve never been in favour of going down this track, because it just perpetuates the old Richmond way of doing things that has never solved anything, but has created this never-ending cycle that I wish we could just get off.  And we could if people would just nominate themselves for the Board, rather than seeing these civil wars break out whenever someone gets their nose out of joint.

You could take these people seriously if they actually knew what they were doing, had a plan of action and demonstrated they were totally committed to RFC.  Instead, we get these half-hearted, short-sighted, lightweights who haven’t got the time or the inclination one day, but oodles of time the next, in which to resurrect RFC.

Like others, I’m sick of all this political poncing.  And I’ll continue to support the current administration, because what other option is there, when no viable alternative has materialised to now?  And you have to doubt that one will, barring a miracle, because saviours of the RFC aren’t exactly falling out of the sky, not ones with half a clue and the time to do the job justice, anyway.

[1980]

Facts of the matter are as follows.

We had a coach that couldnt coach and had a poor list -no-one would disagree there
this caused a down turn in gate receipts and overall revenue- FACT.
the club relied on revenue from gaming venues which fell way short of forecasts thus causing massive shortfall- FACT.

Facts of the matter are that we are:

1) wooden spooners
2) with 27k+ members, we still lost a record $2.4m
3) we are bottom of all melb clubs for attracting corporate sponsers
4) we did stupid things like outsource key revenue streams to Craig Kelly and Elite Sports
5) we hired a CEO without interviewing him on the AFL's recommmendation who cost us even more money

You just cant do any worse in one year without kicking off another SOS campaign. This is the lowest we've been since 1990, 14 years ago, and the man responsible should go.

If you had concerns about a liteweight like swab taking over, then you've got no reason to worry about it any longer now that Macek is nominating for the job.

[Tiger Spirit]

If you had concerns about a liteweight like swab taking over, then you've got no reason to worry about it any longer now that Macek is nominating for the job.

I think we would still have lots to worry about.

How has Macek got the time and enthusiasm to do the job now when he didn’t have any of that 3 months ago?  What if he says he will do the job and a short time after taking over the role decides he doesn’t have the time after all and hands it over to Schwab?

Who’s supporting him and what’s their plan?  If it’s the same people and the same plan they had before they’ll never ever get my support.

What are their reasons for going down this track and why can’t they just nominate for the Board?  They could give us a whole bunch of reasons, but I doubt any of them could justify this sort of approach.  So why would I want a Board made up of wishy washy members who have no justifiable reason for any of this?

Why can’t they work with the Club, instead of against it?

From the changes the Club has made recently, what do they see as being wrong with how they have gone about things?  I doubt they would even know and if they don’t it just makes this whole thing a bigger farce than I thought possible.
 
They look a bit silly when RFC has been in action for some time now, making much needed changes.  While Schwab and co have been busy doing nothing, the whole thing seems to have all but passed them by.

[WilliamPowell]

If you had concerns about a liteweight like swab taking over, then you've got no reason to worry about it any longer now that Macek is nominating for the job.

But unfortunately I still have concerns with Macek. He coveted the presidency of the RFC when Leon Daphne stood down - he has always wanted to be President.  I said yesterday that when Macek was on SEN he told us what was wrong but like the rest of the ticket didn't tell me or any one else what he and his ticket were going to do to fix the problems.

I am so tired of being told what's wrong - I know what is wrong - give me a viable plan to fix the problems and I'll listen. And please don't use the excuse of "we not being shown the books" - we all know what's in them.

The current administration has a plan - which appears to be a good one - this ticket has nothing.

As TS said Macek said in June that he didn't have the time. It never ceases to amaze me the amount of time these people seem to be able to find now.

I have thought about this alot and my view has not changed. Bottom line if the only alternative is ticket that contains 4 former board members and  continues to not put forward any plan for the future of our footy club versus what we have now (remembering they have put forward their plan to fix the problems and it has the backing of the AFL) then I would still vote for the current board.

[Harry]

Agree with 1980.

You can't forgive and forget the damage Casey has done to this club.  Bottom line.  You can't sit and hope Casey has learnt from his mistakes.....we did this with Frawley and look where it got us.

Why can't he fill the board vacancies ?  Is he looking for more yes men ? 

The internal rumblings within the current administration further proves that Casey is not the man for the job. 

What people say when they resign from the board should be taken with a grain of salt.  "Don't have the time", or "have got other priorities" are all standard lines everyone uses when departing.  It's not like they will publicly say that the president is a dictator and the remaining board is full of yes men.  They had the club's interest at heart and I don't hold anything against these former board members.  When suggestions and recommendations fall on deaf ears, the only alternative you have is to leave.

Bring on Macek.  He is a viable alternative.

[bg25]

Casey and the current board can walk if they want to, but surely having a board election is both peaceful - and allows the members to have their say. Private deals done to arrange handovers from one group to the next serve only to disenfranchise the members.

I agree that an election should be held to allow members to have THEIR say. I REALLY resent one or two people mounting a challenge and DEMANDING that the current President step aside, with threats of action if they don't......there is a term for that - BLACKMAIL.

How dare they make demands and not go to the members, after all whether they were good or bad choices in the first place they were the CHOICE of the members i.e. we voted for the current board (that is those that could be bothered.

Speaking of finances....yes we had money when Daphne was Pres, but look at the state of Punt Rd......our player and administration facilities were a joke. We sold stuff and worked out of portable rooms. Yes we raised money through the Dyer foundation and the AFL and MCC gave money towards them but I think RFC has probably also contributed. Since 9/11 there has also been a downward trend in money markets and companies are also generally tighter with their money....so there are other reasons apart from simply bad fiscal management.

Casey's no saint, but the alternative no way!

[froars]

Beats me why suddenly ppl on some boards are suddenly so pro Mickey Mouse ticket now that Charles Macek has come on board.  Do they really know him, his background or just impressed by his curriculum vitae? 
I bet there are many more contesting/existing board members with just as impressive credentials.
What's so great about Charles - pls tell me.  Nice bloke, successful individual but why the sudden turnaround by ppl and just because he has those great qualities, what makes ppl think he will be good as a footy director/president.
He was on the board before - what did he do while he was on that board pls - i'm asking because I don't know.
Did he do anything greater than what we have now or was he just there at the right time when our finances were right?
Was he finance director?
What was his role?  Was he an active member of the board - or just sat back and watched others around him do everything?  If my memory serves me correct, people who were on the board at the time weren't too impressed with him.  My memory could be wrong and i have misjudged him, but i have queries about him that i want answered.
I know he's successful - i want to know if he can fit in his life the RFC and make it as much a priority as his other business interests and more so.
He gets my vote at the moment based on the fact he has been nice to me in that past lol
But I don't know who i'm going to vote for at the end of the day and will make my decision at the very last moment based on all the info i can accumulate.
But i bet i won't be swayed by the fact he was nice to me - i need more info on why I should vote for him.
Same for all candidates and existing board members.
And i don't want to read curriculum vitaes - i want to hear from people who can give balanced views on them, even if they are best of mates with them.  I bet that never happens, but i'll be delving tonight to get ppl's views. 

[Tiger Spirit]

Bring on Macek.  He is a viable alternative.

On the basis of what is Macek a viable alternative?  Because people don’t rate Casey?  If Macek has nuff nuffs on his ticket, how is him now being the front man to that short-sighted group going to change or improve anything significantly enough to warrant people changing their minds about them?  Unless they offer something better and different then we might as well proceed the way we are, if that’s the case.

And seeing as Casey has put himself up for re-election, members can decide his fate then.  At least that way we get a say on how things turn out.

And that’s one of the main reasons I don’t agree with or support any of this rebel ticket stuff.  Especially when they don’t explain the reasons for this course of action.  And they haven’t even given us any reason as to why and how they will be any better than the current Board.

We can continue to play tennis with who is better or worse, of the two, but it seems that there are no innocent parties here.  All are tainted to some degree, and for one reason or another.

So it seems to boil itself down to a choice between the devil we know and the one we don’t.  Therefore, I would rather see Richmond run democratically for once and send out a message that we members want and deserve to have a say, rather than continually letting a few have their say for us.

Casey and the current board can walk if they want to, but surely having a board election is both peaceful - and allows the members to have their say. Private deals done to arrange handovers from one group to the next serve only to disenfranchise the members.

I agree that an election should be held to allow members to have THEIR say. I REALLY resent one or two people mounting a challenge and DEMANDING that the current President step aside, with threats of action if they don't......there is a term for that - BLACKMAIL.

Totally agree with Piping Shrike and bg25.

[1980]

Bring on Macek.  He is a viable alternative.

On the basis of what is Macek a viable alternative? 

And that’s one of the main reasons I don’t agree with or support any of this rebel ticket stuff.  Especially when they don’t explain the reasons for this course of action.  And they haven’t even given us any reason as to why and how they will be any better than the current Board.

Macek is a viable alternative because when he was on the board we had $1m in the bank. Now we have a loss of $2.4m.

They have explained their reasons for this course of actions. 2.4m of them. Their reason is the club is badly run, losing money, turning profits into losses, not attracting corporate sponsers, winning wooden spoons. Appointing crap CEOs then firing them....

How many more reasons do you need?

Seems to me the only time you think that warrants a change of board is if the club is reduced again to rattling tins again. Everything else is fine with you up to that point.

[1980]

If you had concerns about a liteweight like swab taking over, then you've got no reason to worry about it any longer now that Macek is nominating for the job.

But unfortunately I still have concerns with Macek. He coveted the presidency of the RFC when Leon Daphne stood down - he has always wanted to be President.  I said yesterday that when Macek was on SEN he told us what was wrong but like the rest of the ticket didn't tell me or any one else what he and his ticket were going to do to fix the problems.

I am so tired of being told what's wrong - I know what is wrong - give me a viable plan to fix the problems and I'll listen. And please don't use the excuse of "we not being shown the books" - we all know what's in them.

The current administration has a plan - which appears to be a good one - this ticket has nothing.

As TS said Macek said in June that he didn't have the time. It never ceases to amaze me the amount of time these people seem to be able to find now.

I have thought about this alot and my view has not changed. Bottom line if the only alternative is ticket that contains 4 former board members and  continues to not put forward any plan for the future of our footy club versus what we have now (remembering they have put forward their plan to fix the problems and it has the backing of the AFL) then I would still vote for the current board.

Well WP we've been at this all week so neither of us is going to change our minds LOL

But a footy club has to be successful both on and off the park. Very few clubs are successful when they're losing money and when the board is disfunctional. Essendon is a good example as a Melb club. As much as we hate Eddie, that scum of a club has been very different since he took over.

When it comes to our footy club, no-one can argue that Casey is anything but a loser. A loser of money, a loser of board directors. The only thing he has won for us is a wooden spoon. Again sympbolic of what a loser he is.

You leave a guy in there that inherits $1m and turns into a loss of $2.4m, he'll lose you $3m the next year. I wish my boss was as generous as you are. Thanks for losing us so much money sonny but we're not going to fire you, we're going to keep you there until someone comes along and convinces us they wont do the same.

You can focus on Macek and demand to see his plan all you like, but the bottom line is, the guy that caused the losses should go. He's bad for the club. He's a proven loser. If he put the club before himself, he would have gone already.

And at least Macek is a Richmond supporter. Casey was an Essendon supporter.

[Tiger Spirit]

Macek is a viable alternative because when he was on the board we had $1m in the bank. Now we have a loss of $2.4m.

We might have had money in the bank, but we couldn’t play footy to save ourselves.  Can they guarantee they can put together a competitive team on the ground?

They have explained their reasons for this course of actions. 2.4m of them. Their reason is the club is badly run, losing money, turning profits into losses, not attracting corporate sponsers, winning wooden spoons. Appointing crap CEOs then firing them....

How many more reasons do you need?

I think I’ve explained myself, time after time.  As WP says, we know what’s wrong, we just want to know how they will fix it.  If I don’t know that then how can I or anyone support them?  I don’t expect you to agree or even like my view, but it’s the only one I have.  I want the Club run democratically, not by a bunch of short-sighted nuff nuffs who just seem to have their collective noses out of joint, because they haven’t given any logical explanation as to why they are doing this.

Seems to me the only time you think that warrants a change of board is if the club is reduced again to rattling tins again. Everything else is fine with you up to that point.

If you think that the alternative is ok, then you believe that.  But I have seen nothing that makes me think they can do any better.  They might be conservative enough to get us back on a financial footing but, from what they have shown, they do not have the vision and capacity to ensure that we put together a team capable of playing competitive football, which, in time, will undoubtedly ensure more upheaval and turmoil.

So, rather than coming to that inevitable conclusion, why don’t we just start running our Club in a democratic way and cut the petty rebel ticket scenarios every other year?  That’s where I’m coming from.