Errrgh, it’s a bit heavy on it, isn’t it.
"That said ..."
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
PLUS Your club board comp is now up!
Errrgh, it’s a bit heavy on it, isn’t it.
Errrgh, it’s a bit heavy on it, isn’t it.
That's a really s**t statement overall. He owes it to the democratic process of the board election to put the facts forward regarding the professional credentials of Sill, Merlino and Gowers. You can't heavily spruik certain candidates and then just say 'oh and there's 3 other blokes - bye!'.
The real issue I have now though is voting for change is also voting for absolutely zero gender balance on the board if Hudson, Pellizzer and Lui are all not elected. Not having a single female board member would be a pretty bad look when other clubs have got close to gender parity on boards now and female presidents.
I think of the 3 vacancies the change candidates and present candidates should sit down and come up with a solution that appeases both board diversity and some change being represented and avoid an election at board level. Then let Nank and Gowers go at it for the presidency.
That's a really s**t statement overall. He owes it to the democratic process of the board election to put the facts forward regarding the professional credentials of Sill, Merlino and Gowers. You can't heavily spruik certain candidates and then just say 'oh and there's 3 other blokes - bye!'.
The real issue I have now though is voting for change is also voting for absolutely zero gender balance on the board if Hudson, Pellizzer and Lui are all not elected. Not having a single female board member would be a pretty bad look when other clubs have got close to gender parity on boards now and female presidents.
I think of the 3 vacancies the change candidates and present candidates should sit down and come up with a solution that appeases both board diversity and some change being represented and avoid an election at board level. Then let Nank and Gowers go at it for the presidency.
That was my understanding.Isn't Gowers for President separate from the three board spots i.e. one of the women up for election have to make it even if Sill and Merlino are chosen?
You are a very unconvincing propagandist, probably because your case is so weak......
Isn't Gowers for President separate from the three board spots i.e. one of the women up for election have to make it even if Sill and Merlino are chosen?
Errrgh, it’s a bit heavy on it, isn’t it.
Errrgh, it’s a bit heavy on it, isn’t it.
If I recall correctly, I was invited to vote in an email containing a direct link to a uniquely identified ballot. I simply chose my candidates and submitted the ballot.
Last one.Was this for the last election or for this one?
I haven't received any link for this one.
In regards to the underhanded way Kennett is going about this election, I think Carrie Fisher said it best...
View attachment 1543695
Isn’t contrived outcomes the issue and problem? Vote for the person who’s the best candidate, think all 3 women on the board want that.The real issue I have now though is voting for change is also voting for absolutely zero gender balance on the board if Hudson, Pellizzer and Lui are all not elected. Not having a single female board member would be a pretty bad look when other clubs have got close to gender parity on boards now and female presidents.
I think of the 3 vacancies the change candidates and present candidates should sit down and come up with a solution that appeases both board diversity and some change being represented and avoid an election at board level. Then let Nank and Gowers go at it for the presidency
Gowers may be a man, but it does feel like he is fighting against a system.Gowers isn't a system, he's a man.
Best candidate’s for me regardless of genderThat's a really s**t statement overall. He owes it to the democratic process of the board election to put the facts forward regarding the professional credentials of Sill, Merlino and Gowers. You can't heavily spruik certain candidates and then just say 'oh and there's 3 other blokes - bye!'.
The real issue I have now though is voting for change is also voting for absolutely zero gender balance on the board if Hudson, Pellizzer and Lui are all not elected. Not having a single female board member would be a pretty bad look when other clubs have got close to gender parity on boards now and female presidents.
I think of the 3 vacancies the change candidates and present candidates should sit down and come up with a solution that appeases both board diversity and some change being represented and avoid an election at board level. Then let Nank and Gowers go at it for the presidency.
Best candidate’s for me regardless of gender
Don’t care if the board is all male, all female, or a mix of both
Best candidate’s please
And the Board represents and should reflect the diversity of our supporters & also needs to recognise the fact we have both a male and female team.Optics matter - being the only club without a single female director would be a really bad look.
Isn’t contrived outcomes the issue and problem? Vote for the person who’s the best candidate, think all 3 women on the board want that.
40% of our playing list are women. Probably similar (if not more) of our membership.Optics matter - being the only club without a single female director would be a really bad look.
40% of our playing list are women. Probably similar (if not more) of our membership.
We need significant female representation at board level.
I read an article on Gowers a couple of years ago. Been trying to find it. From memory the gist of the story was he stopped a porno being played on the team bus, because he was concerned for underage and the impressionable players it could leave. So approached the bus driver to stop the video. That action shows leadership, that he has the courage and integrity to follow his convictions and beliefs.
Which is a far cry from Jeff, who is spin doctoring what he wants.
I’m on the Gowers for president train, if it means voting Jeff supporters out for the club to move forward so be it.
common knowledge the 4 strongest clubs financially areYou are a very unconvincing propagandist, probably because your case is so weak. Your arguments are about as convincing as Mr Putins for invading the Ukraine.
'We are the second wealthiest club in the AFL' - I'd like some evidence for that statement.
New coach and what will be the youngest list in the AFL' - can't argue with that, but an experienced list in the premiership window would be vastly better to my mind.
A fully owned $100 mill training facility completed within 3 years, the best in the country which we will own - Many promises have been made about Dingley and currently they are that, promises. Vaporware. I'd rather have Granny's than Dingley. perhaps this represents the clubs misdirection of recent years, concentrating resources in the wrong directions.
'80K + MEMBERS' Makes us 20,000 behind the leader, ranked 6th, many say our numbers are boosted by 'dodgy' memberships.
'Good governance and sound decisions' - LOL. I hope you are making a joke, because I don't think many folks believe that.
'More of the same Vote 1 Nankivell' Nankivell can shove his head up Jeffs clacker and stay there. He obviously likes it there and is familar with the position.