Official Club Stuff 2024 AGM - to be held on Friday 6th December 2024, 1 director to be elected by members. Nominations called for.

[rogerjames]

Yep, pulled him aside afterwards and spoke to him privately.

The argument that the club appeared to be making was that we’d misunderstood what the Crows constitution change means and the change doesn’t actually give their members total control (I think because of some legalese notion of what a member actually is in this context, I.e. the AFL are the members, not the actual paying/ticketed members). Other more learned posters may be able to correct me or elaborate on that, but that’s what I took from Richardson and Koch’s response.

I can’t speak to what was said offline because I wasn’t a party to it.

The public answer was a bit of a greatest hits of obfuscation, from “if we gave members control of the board you’d just vote in ex-players” (the self fulfilling prophecy as above), to “the Crows getting control doesn’t mean they get control, it’s different to us”, and when confronted with the fact that 1 of the last 19 premiers were AFL controlled clubs Koch went to feigning ignorance and then pushing that Brisbane weren’t member controlled and that they’d just won the flag (ignoring the larger point that even if it was 2 of 19, it’s still a huge majority of premiers who are member controlled clubs).

Good description of proceedings in relation to board composition question. I didn't understand what Koch was talking about re the Afl are the members. He was very confusing & I hope someone who was there can interpret what he meant. It is critical we as members get a better understanding of the board composition of other clubs & how they operate.

 

[VineValerian]

Sounds like a lot of the meagre crowd had many probing and relevant questions, most of which were not specifically answered,but the club answered the questions they wanted to answer instead.
Absolute amatuer hour, with club and Ken hiding behind a "had a previous engagement" excuse for non attendance, on what should be the most important night of the year for us.
Honestly, how hard would it have been to re-schedule clashes to avoid any conflict, which would have been known months in advance?
Blissfully ignorant and clueless about what success means to our club, and how to achieve it.
Roll on and re-appoint Cardone and the other guy for three more years of dross and mediocrity.
Pat yourselves on the back for a job poorly done, and go off to luxuriate in your own delusional Nirvana, whilst you quaff some vintage Grange and gobble own prime Smoky Bay oysters.
Pfftt.
Loses and traitors to our Heritage and everything we stand for

 

[Papa G]

That's exactly right. Last night & at the previous AGM Koch has emphasised the need for a board with a broad range of skills inorder for the club to be successful. Surely all members agree with this, seems like common sense to me. Basically he is implying that members are simpletons who will only vote for footballers.

So despite this club (Koch) philosophy, prior to Tredders election, they had no-one on the board & football committee, the committee that makes critical football decisions, who had played at an elite football level. This clearly is at odds with Koch's stated philosophy.

So Davies, whose first priority is to keep his well paid job, gets to recommend basically whatever he wants. What does Davies know about elite level football?

So of course the members are going to address the obvious inbalance in board composition. It's commonsense. In Tredders we have a premiership captain (acting for Primus of course) who had high standards & a media performer who does not bow to the Vic media bullies who continually run their agendas. Of course we vote him in.

Imo members voting George in was a clear message to the club that we are unhappy with Snowdens role in recommending Kens coaching extensions. It was also a message that only one board member with strong football knowledge is not enough. The members know George has the clubs interests at heart from his previous work. Lets hope that this extra football knowledge at board level can help address the players continual failure in finals. Being totally uncompetitive in 2 out of 3 finals after finishing 2nd on the ladder is completely unacceptable.

The simple point should have been made that the members are voting in former successful footballers because that is the area we are so badly lacking in.

 

[simba_]

holly texting

We Exist To Weave Content

 

[Nelso]

After reading the comments above, anyone considering renewing their membership will have their mind made up now.

It is blatantly obvious that the Chairman, CEO and coach do not give a stuff about the members.

There is a total lack of accountability from all three and as a result we are stuck in groundhog day.

 

[rogerjames]

Spoke to Rob Snowden too, can blame the guy for backing in Hinkley but he came at the role with a volunteers heart and looking to put in more than he got back, what at the end of the day is more than some of the others imo.


He was a footy ops boss at two premiership clubs, to say he doesn't have strong football knowledge is rough rogerjames
You can have knowledge without physically kicking the thing

I am well aware of his background & agree my comment was probably a bit unfair. But given his previous success, how he has allowed the coaching set up to continue for so long is a mystery to me. We clearly have a head coach who now sits on the bench during games acting more like a cheerleader. Its farcical.

 

[rogerjames]

After reading the comments above, anyone considering renewing their membership will have their mind made up now.

It is blatantly obvious that the Chairman, CEO and coach do not give a stuff about the members.

There is a total lack of accountability from all three and as a result we are stuck in groundhog day.

This is 100% true but we already knew that. They have clearly demonstrated that over the last few years. However, the point is the members care about the club & we have a duty to do what we can to help make it successful even if our views are at odds with club views. The disconnect is very real, worse than it's ever been, but it doesn't mean we should just walk away.

 

[It Just Is]

It highlights the problem and they use it as an example of success.. it's hilarious and sad at the same time.

I was thinking the same about it being taboo to tell players losing prelims isn’t success.

Like we didn’t just lose one of our best players and leadership group members to Collingwood on a whim.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

After reading the comments above, anyone considering renewing their membership will have their mind made up now.

It is blatantly obvious that the Chairman, CEO and coach do not give a stuff about the members.

There is a total lack of accountability from all three and as a result we are stuck in groundhog day.

There is a high degree of members of our club being season ticket holders rather than members, like for teams that are privately owned, in the majority of major sports around the world.

However the overwhelming majority of members don't really give a stuff outside of what happens off the field. Or if they do, they can't or won't try and change things.

 

[rogerjames]

The simple point should have been made that the members are voting in former successful footballers because that is the area we are so badly lacking in.

Yes and imo we failed to do that. Its actually quite a difficult environment to ask questions or make statements that you know will be viewed adversely by a range of people. There is a price for doing this so it takes courage. Well done to the members that did show up & particularly to the members that asked the questions.

 

[Bump Bailey]

Interesting that Richo said privately the players can't hear they failed. That's a huge culture red flag imo

This is legitimately a demoralising development to read.

Like why do we bother supporting this organisation. Sigh

 

[Duck Farmer]

It had been discussed earlier (CD or MR?) that there would be changes to the game plan to improve finals performances

Koch again mentioned why didn't the Swans play that way against us in reference to their poor GF performance.

So our brains trust are tweaking our game plan to rely more on the oppo shitting the bed in finals. I feel we're in safe hands.

 

[Launchpad McQuack]

View attachment 2183193

To chest beat over these "results" whilst simultaneously downplaying expectations for a flag is blatant gaslighting.

 

[Launchpad McQuack]

The simple point should have been made that the members are voting in former successful footballers because that is the area we are so badly lacking in.

They also seen happy to overlook the fact that members elected Snowdon to the board.

 

[Duck Farmer]

The public answer was a bit of a greatest hits of obfuscation, from “if we gave members control of the board you’d just vote in ex-players”

As opposed to "if we gave the AFL control of the board they'd just appoint lawyers, accountants, millennial disruptors, and gormless B-grade TV celebrities"?

 

[Enviable Tradition]

I thought Koch was wrong about Brisbane but he was right, their board has non member elected directors,. They used to be all member elected but the constitution changed in 2013. I reckon that's when Brisbane started to become financially dependent on the AFL. They were very dependent on the AFL for survival by the time they sacked Leppitsch a few years later.

From their Constitution

9.2 The number of Directors shall be as determined by the Board from time to time but shall not:

(a) be less than five (5) or greater than twelve (12) in number; and
(b) be less than the number in office at the time of such determination.

......
9.14 Notwithstanding anything else contained in this Constitution, the Board shall have the right to appoint up to four (4) additional Directors, each of whom the Board, in its absolute discretion considers, possesses the expertise, experience or other special attributes to make a meaningful contribution to the Corporation. Subject to this Constitution, a person appointed as a Director under this clause shall hold office:

(a) for an initial period of two (2) years from the date of appointment, and after the expiration of the initial two (2) year period:

(b) is deemed to hold office as a Director appointed under clause 9.10;
(c) shall hold office at least until the next occurring annual general meeting of the Corporation;

(d) and must retire at the next occurring annual general meeting and is eligible for election at that meeting.

So is that a minimum 5 member elected and a maximum of 4 others?

So majority member elected?

On SM-G975F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Doctor Feel]

Holly texting is the best part about this.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

So is that a minimum 5 member elected and a maximum of 4 others?

So majority member elected?

On SM-G975F using BigFooty.com mobile app

I don't know what their split was on their 9 member board in 2023. 4 appointed by the board is a maximum, not a compulsory number.

 

[Enviable Tradition]

They did the same thing last Agm. They approach the person privately after the Agm formal procedures are completed to discuss their question. Sure is pathetic.

Credit though to both Koch and Richo for actually engaging and conversing after the AGM.

They did hang around for quite a while and actually try and give everyone time (which would be hard).

Unlike Ken.

On SM-G975F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Enviable Tradition]

Lol, do they realise those tables are actually damning rather than indicative of what a great job they're doing? We've won all of these games and all the other teams that have won that many games have won all the flags and played in all the grand finals except us. Totally ridiculous.

The one that had Geelong up there with flags and only one red bottoming out number that was just totally ignored was actually quite funny, especially as they were bragging about us not bottoming out.

On SM-G975F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Enviable Tradition]

It highlights the problem and they use it as an example of success.. it's hilarious and sad at the same time.

By ALL metrics...

On SM-G975F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Enviable Tradition]

This is 100% true but we already knew that. They have clearly demonstrated that over the last few years. However, the point is the members care about the club & we have a duty to do what we can to help make it successful even if our views are at odds with club views. The disconnect is very real, worse than it's ever been, but it doesn't mean we should just walk away.

I dont think of myself as at odds with the clubs views.

Just the incumbents views.

On SM-G975F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Duck Farmer]

View attachment 2183193

 

[Duck Farmer]

Basically he is implying that members are simpletons who will only vote for footballers.

Like when Koch hand picked Wanganeen?

 

[Duck Farmer]

The one that had Geelong up there with flags and only one red bottoming out number that was just totally ignored was actually quite funny, especially as they were bragging about us not bottoming out.

On SM-G975F using BigFooty.com mobile app

Also it doesn't matter that we've turned 4 PFs into donuts when you look at how well we've smashed the total wins column. We don't want any of that Hawthorn 3 PFs for 3 GFs for 3 flags shit at our club.