Trouble is brewing

[WilliamPowell]

I've seen TWO premierships in my lifetime while Ian Wilson was president. I've seen a wooden spoon under Casey.

So have I....but that doesn't mean he should be immune from the damage he did to our CLub, 1980. And he did plenty of damage!

It staggers me to read a lot of ppl posting abuse at a Tiger legend who brought us so much success as president. Some ppl have no respect for the club's history.

I have great respect for our history - I know our history and yes he while he was president we won 2 premierships.....

But history tells us that Ian Wilson and his board were the reason we had to have the SOS campaign. We were broke and let's not forget that part of history.

One of the saddest and blackest periods in our history.

Making a case for supporting Casey is one thing, but abusing legends from our history is not the Richmond way.

I don't think it is a case of abusing a "legend" but more pointing out that this mans opinion on the Club losing money is not worth much.

He shouldn't be critical when he did the same and has never really take responsiblity for it.

He may be "legend" but he is far from perfect.

[Tiger Spirit]

Let’s all get our collective heads out of the sand here.  We are being bogged down by personalities, who did what and who is and isn’t telling the truth.  How can you tell anything any more?

If we want to get anywhere, let’s forget about these people and look at the bigger picture.  Otherwise we might as well concede we’re going down the same track again.  But this time, there won’t be so many of us left, because some of us are becoming numb to the regular upheaval that goes on at this Club and just don’t want to care any more.

So, for the sake of Richmond, forget about who is right and who isn’t, and think of the future of RFC, because the way this is headed, none of these people seem capable of uniting supporters and resolving the whole issue.  So it is up to members to stand firm and demand the right to have our say.

Regardless of their policies, who they are and what they have done, I will support an election where members get to decide the course of action and future of this Club.  And I’m totally against a minority having their say for the rest of us.

Don’t let’s get bogged down with small and petty issues and resort to splitting hairs.  Please - look at the bigger picture.

[Puntroadroar]

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

[Jackstar]

Ian Wilson was president when there was basically no rules, no drafting, spend what you want.
I have seen 5 Flags.
Since 1982, the club has been run into the ground.
Unfortunately people remember the good bits, it was Wilson who ran the joint into the ground trying to stick it up the pies in the early 1980,s
Also he was pathetic in his interview with KB this morning as well

Hey 1980 dont  jump to conclusion mate, yes I did go to school with Clinton and know him ,didnt say I like him or are a friend, thus I a very objective on the matter.

If you ask me three weeks ago who I would vote for ,i would have been undecided. Since then we have bombarded with Dribble from the faceless men of the alternative ticket and unless they were hiding, only one turned up at the B&F, that was Macek. After talking to him, his next call in life is running the bingo at the local RSL. And yes basically I told him that as well. The alternative ticket is not a alternative. Go and speak to Macek, you will see what I mean, you think Caseys bad,
As for the big picture, we are a football club, not a club that supports glory seekers  who come out and make idiotic statements.
If I was in Caseys shoes, I wouldnt be showing the books to a bunch of losers either

At the end of the day, a 2m loss isnt the end of the world when you have a turnover in excess of 25m
.

[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.

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

Amazing that isn't it PRR  .

[mightytiges]

Anyone know the dates that nominations for the board election start and what's the last date they can be accepted?

Depends when the AGM is froars. From the constitution Section 8.2.4: the election is held on the Friday before the AGM provided there's 2 working days between the election and AGM. From Section 8.2.3 (a): all nominations of members of the Board shall be in writing and signed by the candidate who shall be a member of the Club, and by two Ordinary Members of the Club, (other than Junior Members) and shall be delivered to the General Manager or Secretary not later than 8pm, on a day 21 days before the AGM.

[froars]

Thanks MT - plenty of time for other contenders

[mightytiges]

Thanks MT - plenty of time for other contenders

Organising your diary froars lol

[froars]

I really don't think the RFC is ready for me lol

[mightytiges]

I really don't think the RFC is ready for me lol

You'd start 2 votes ahead of Jackstar  .

[mightytiges]

Dicker and Casey ignore stop signs
By Caroline Wilson
realfooty.theage.com.au
September 12, 2004
 
Rarely has an AFL finals series been forced to struggle quite so hard to compete with the off-field politics of the competition's cellar-dwellers.

And rarely has the solution seemed quite so clear-cut. In recent seasons, we have witnessed both Joseph Gutnick (2001) and John Elliott (2002) fight to remain at the helm of their respective football clubs when it was clear to most that they were finished as AFL club presidents.

The scenario in 2004 is that both Richmond and Hawthorn face remarkably similar circumstances and yet neither Clinton Casey at Tigerland nor Ian Dicker at Glenferrie Oval will accept the writing staring at them from the wall.

Clearly, both must go. Whatever their reasons for hanging on - and both probably believe they are better than any other potential candidate for the job - they are deluded. The truth is that while the vast majority of AFL coaches only leave when sacked or offered better positions elsewhere, club presidents become first intoxicated by and then addicted to their positions of power.

Michael Smith, who left West Coast at the end of 2002, and Graeme McMahon, who resigned as chairman of Essendon last year, are rare examples of leaders who publicly determined their own fate. Perhaps it is no coincidence that the football clubs over which they presided are among the most solid outfits in the competition.

Everyone knows that club presidents are not paid for their efforts and anyone versed at all in football politics knows that Dicker and Casey have spent countless hours beyond the call of duty trying to turn Hawthorn and Richmond into powerful and successful organisations.

...

Meanwhile, Casey, who is out of the country for a month, also appears deluded. Unlike Dicker, he never had a succession plan - Dicker's failed when Martin Jolly from the International Management Group was unable to take the presidency mantle - and Casey continues to say he will not walk away until the right replacement appears.

Now that a seemingly credible ticket has emerged, Casey will not consider it. Groups he claims are supporting him have publicly ridiculed him. His club will lose a reported $2.4 million this season and was dreadful on the field. Casey's five years at the helm have reaped one finals performance and a series of poor decisions. His board is more divided than Dicker's, although at least he appears to have put in place the Tigers' first choice as coach and a credible chief executive.

To that end, Casey, too, can still leave with his head relatively high.

Casey would never admit it but, like Dicker, he seems to have become, in his own mind, bigger than his club.

http://www.realfooty.theage.com.au/realfooty/articles/2004/09/11/1094789736879.html?oneclick=true

[mightytiges]

The Wilson family definitely want Casey gone now. It's becoming relentess!

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.

[Fishfinger]

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.

As for her opening line implying annoyance that the board issue is making the finals series have to struggle to compete, why did she write this article then? So they have to struggle a bit harder? ???

[froars]

I want Casey gone too (she says ducking for cover lol)
But I don't want the whole board having to stand down - my only problem is the leader of the board.  Never liked him, never will - Bombers supporter and the buck has to stop with him for the finances.  My other beef with him is his lack of showing up to face supporters after games and in the media.  Only in bad times like this has he faced the media and that's just to save his own neck now. But I don't see why the rest have to contest the next election.
Casey should go and the automatic three who come up for re-elction this year.  The rest should stay!

[froars]

I asked this question on BigFooty and will put here, because i think it's important. 

I would like to ask Schwab and Welsh a question on Macek. Do they know whether there were moves to get rid of Macek (or was he on the nose) when he was on the board before the Casey takeover? I wonder. Interesting he's on their ticket now if that was the case.

I do not know if this is FACT, but i heard rumblings way back then and it has stuck in my head and gives me great cause of grief as to if there is any cred.  Can Schwab please come out and alleviate my concerns?