News Hawthorn AGM 2022

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Errrgh, it’s a bit heavy on it, isn’t it.



That's a really shit 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.

I agree that Kennett should be fairer and more respectful in referring to the other candidates - and he’s far too heavy handed in spruiking those he’s supporting. But bear in mind all candidates have the right to, and will, notify HFC members of their CVs and objectives prior to the election.

I must have missed the bit in Kennett‘s statement where, after his spiel about the board’s good financial mangement, he apologised to members for losing the club $15,000,000.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

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.

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?
 
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?

Nope the presidency is one of the 3 vacant spots, so if Nank takes the presidency and Kennett departs you have 3 open spots. So if Gowers was elected president and the non-Kennett change candidates in Merlino or Sill knocked off both the present board members standing for re-election we wouldn't have a single woman on the board and likely the only club in the league with that scenario. Hoping all parties involved are thinking this one through.
 
Errrgh, it’s a bit heavy on it, isn’t it.


Not surprised he couldn't find time for another paragraph in all of that to apologise to members for the failed attempt to subvert the democratic process of the board elections by keeping the nominations deadline secret from his non-preferred candidates.
 
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.

Was this for the last election or for this one?

I haven't received any link for this one.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

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
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.
 
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.
 
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.
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
 
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

Optics matter - being the only club without a single female director would be a really bad look.
 
Optics matter - being the only club without a single female director would be a really bad look.
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.

There wouldn't be many organisations that would consider an all male Board acceptable, in any industry, even the most male dominated.
 
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.

There’s only 2 women on the board at the moment - and the two opposing camps realising that there’s more to be gained by ensuring an outcome that ensures board diversity isn’t contrived it’s just sensible. I wouldn’t mind saving the money on a vote also and focussing on the presidency vote alone. I’m sure the 5 vying for the 3 positions can come to a consensus among themselves for the good of the club as opposed to themselves.
 
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.
 
40% of our playing list are women. Probably similar (if not more) of our membership.

We need significant female representation at board level.

There’s also a financial incentive to having 40% of the board made up of women. It makes sense to be increasing the present representation not potentially reducing it to 0.
 
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.

I recall that true story - but wasn’t the player Stephen Lawrence (and not Andy Gowers)?
 
You 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.
common knowledge the 4 strongest clubs financially are

Eagles
Hawks
Pies
Tigers

you can also refer to all the clubs financial reports
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top