2024 HFC AGM
- Thread starter rdhopkins2
- Start date
- Tagged users None
SpanishBrowne
Senior List
- Feb 27, 2019
- 285
- 915
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
way too many votes for Don.
Is Don. Is Done.
Is Don. Is Done.
Can we get some reasonable perspective about Don Scott.
First, he did manage the Sorrento TAB (not Mornington).
Secondly, he didn’t spit the dummy about his son Doug being cut from Box Hill. His issue was, as a father, Doug had been struggling with an injury all year and was told by the coaches and club doctors that he was OK and to just keep playing through the pain barrier. It was only when he went to his LOCAL doctor, after the season, who arranged a scan or X-ray, that confirmed he had been struggling with a stress fracture of his leg! Fairly entitled, as a father, to be p*ssed off with that, especially as he (Don) was a former champion player and knew the ropes.
Thirdly, there has never been a Hawthorn player who has displayed or demonstrated greater loyalty and love to his fellow players and coaches - bar none. Whilst he has had huge issues with administrators and presidents and board members (similar to Kevin Bartlett) his loyalty to his teammates was and still is unrivalled.
But in saying all of that, he has not read the room regarding this election. I voted against him, as did the majority, because we’ve moved into a different era and have a president and board who are serving us well. And we’re talking about a candidate (Don), as much as I respect him, who struggles to turn on his computer.
But he’s a club champion and legend who, in his own passionate way, loves the club and who deserves our respect - and certainly not to be mocked by others who haven’t put their bodies on the line for the club as he has. If still in doubt, just look at the last quarter of the 1971 grand final.
First, he did manage the Sorrento TAB (not Mornington).
Secondly, he didn’t spit the dummy about his son Doug being cut from Box Hill. His issue was, as a father, Doug had been struggling with an injury all year and was told by the coaches and club doctors that he was OK and to just keep playing through the pain barrier. It was only when he went to his LOCAL doctor, after the season, who arranged a scan or X-ray, that confirmed he had been struggling with a stress fracture of his leg! Fairly entitled, as a father, to be p*ssed off with that, especially as he (Don) was a former champion player and knew the ropes.
Thirdly, there has never been a Hawthorn player who has displayed or demonstrated greater loyalty and love to his fellow players and coaches - bar none. Whilst he has had huge issues with administrators and presidents and board members (similar to Kevin Bartlett) his loyalty to his teammates was and still is unrivalled.
But in saying all of that, he has not read the room regarding this election. I voted against him, as did the majority, because we’ve moved into a different era and have a president and board who are serving us well. And we’re talking about a candidate (Don), as much as I respect him, who struggles to turn on his computer.
But he’s a club champion and legend who, in his own passionate way, loves the club and who deserves our respect - and certainly not to be mocked by others who haven’t put their bodies on the line for the club as he has. If still in doubt, just look at the last quarter of the 1971 grand final.
Thanks for everything Don, but time to move on. That was then. This is now.
- Nov 10, 2022
- 12,709
- 10,253
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
So similar to the 1996 merger vote total
good post
I don't think Don is a good fit for our board these days. But I do not mind at all that the current board members are held to account and know that he's watching their every move closely. That kind of scrutiny can be part of what drives best practice.
It might not feel like it all the time but we're probably a better club for Don's 'arm's-length' involvement.
It might not feel like it all the time but we're probably a better club for Don's 'arm's-length' involvement.
pattymalone00
Club Legend
For anyone there btw was it still held in the players gym watched both years online but background looked much better this year…
DogDaySonny
Club Legend
- May 4, 2023
- 1,136
- 2,911
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Only a crayon eater would type a reasoned, respectful response like this. Leave the internet.
- Nov 10, 2022
- 12,709
- 10,253
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Sad this thread is dominated by Don talk
You can choose your friends but you sho' can't choose your family, an' they're still kin to you no matter whether you acknowledge 'em or not, and it makes you look right silly when you don't.
Ned Ryerson
Future Captain
His playing days and past deeds for the club in the 70s and 90s have zero relevance to what he offers in a governance role at our football club in 2024. Nobody is doubting what Scott did for the club in past - plenty had good reason to doubt what he was bringing to the table as a board member now. Glad he saw fit to waste the club’s money on his vanity project though.
- Jun 8, 2015
- 1,050
- 1,751
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
What was the qualification to get a vote? Did you have to pre-register or something?
Lethal/Legends members at my place - no one got an email from the club.
Happy to check spam filters even though too late to vote - vero?
Ned Ryerson
Future Captain
Vero, yes. Some members on here seemed to have it hit their spam filter.
I prefer a Brown and Gold blend to any single colour.
Blending them together creates a harmonious flavor profile.
The Brown in the blend provides structure and backbone, while the Gold adds complexity.
Jet_black
Team Captain
- Dec 16, 2022
- 441
- 885
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Might want to check with the club whether you have correct emails for the members at your place. I got the email to vote as did older kid who is over 18.
And yes it was vero.
- Apr 8, 2006
- 42,684
- 44,536
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Dallas Cowboys and Texas Longhorns
Was speaking to a well known player manager this week who said Hawthorn is currently the best run club in the league in his view. He said Geelong second best.
Don may have needed to specify in his campaign who he wanted outed. As if you are selecting 2 out of 3 presumably Don supporters voted for Silk and Shearer too. I think a majority were either in the Don or no Don camp. So had he said, vote for me and Shearer than it could have been more 3,987 Scott, 4,053 Silk, 10,453 Shearer. Still loses but very close.
cryptor
Brownlow Medallist
- May 11, 2008
- 25,144
- 66,575
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
I’m not convinced he was running for any other reason than to agitate.
When interviewed on SEN he failed to articulate a clear reason for running, just some vague reason around the transparency of the previous year’s financial reporting.
When asked what he would be bringing to the board he said he didn’t know.
When asked if he believed he could work with the current board he got defensive and fired back if they thought they could work with him.
Ned Ryerson
Future Captain
This is damning. You honestly can't defend wasting the club's time and resources on a board election process when this is the candidate's response. We are blessed to have a hell of a lot of premiership heroes at this club - I would be pissed off at any of them if they ran for the board for shits and giggles and cost the club money in doing so.
Last edited:
For those that watched the AGM, was there any discussion of what we will be doing with our Tassie games post 2028?
DogDaySonny
Club Legend
- May 4, 2023
- 1,136
- 2,911
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
They are in discussions with the Tassie govt and will tell us when there is news.
Nah, not shits and giggles.
20,000 members voted - almost 4,000 voted for Scott. He lost out of the 3 but many voted for him.
We’re a democracy - that’s why we have elections despite the cost.
The notion of aspiring candidates having to meet a committee formed by the board for permission to stand is simply not right. Scott was entitled to stand, he published his reasons for standing and he did.
Again, under our constitution, that’s the democratic process.
We should not have a HFC board that controls elections or dissuades members from standing.
Go back a few years where we had a president who was a member of a Melbourne men’s club - and he managed to second onto the Hawthorn board 7 or 8 members from his private men’s club. That is technically undemocratic because those 7 or 8 were not initially voted onto the Hawthorn board by members.
Give me any day the constitutional right of Don Scott or Billy Blogs from Latrobe (if he’s a member) to stand for the board. The members will get it right when they vote (as they no doubt did in this case).
I didn't support Don's bid to be nominated but fully supported his right to stand.
The one question that Don asked (which was the only question asked off the floor) was that he believed that the minutes of the 2023 AGM were not correctly recorded. I picked up a copy of the minutes at the AGM and in this regard he may be correct. I don't know what Don objected to as Andy Gowers at first said he didn't hear the question and then said he would talk to Don privately rather than ask what the objection was. Don did ask a question last year where Andy responded that he would meet Don personally to discuss the topic, and that is not recorded in the minutes, so it may have been that. Don also objected to the money set aside for the racism investigation which was also not minuted.
This is an incorrect procedure on behalf of Andy and/or the minute secretary, as any question asked at an AGM needs to be given an answer and be minuted, then, if there is no resolution or there is planned further discussion privately, that also needs to be minuted and the result of that discussion should have been in this years' minutes, and it wasn't. The fact that Don asked a question this year, which was shut down, should also be on the minutes next year, so it will be interesting to see if it is.
There was also incorrect procedure in the passing of the minutes as Andy only called for those in favour, which looked like it was about one third to one half who raised their hands, but didn't ask for objections or questions in relation to the minutes. I doubt many would have objected, possibly just Don (those that didn't raise their hands were mostly unconcerned, it was hardly a 1996 merger debate meeting), but Don could have asked his question then had it been called for.
A total of 10227 people voted for the Board vacancies. Each person gave 2 votes for the two vacancies which resulted in a total of 20454 votes
The total votes were:
The one question that Don asked (which was the only question asked off the floor) was that he believed that the minutes of the 2023 AGM were not correctly recorded. I picked up a copy of the minutes at the AGM and in this regard he may be correct. I don't know what Don objected to as Andy Gowers at first said he didn't hear the question and then said he would talk to Don privately rather than ask what the objection was. Don did ask a question last year where Andy responded that he would meet Don personally to discuss the topic, and that is not recorded in the minutes, so it may have been that. Don also objected to the money set aside for the racism investigation which was also not minuted.
This is an incorrect procedure on behalf of Andy and/or the minute secretary, as any question asked at an AGM needs to be given an answer and be minuted, then, if there is no resolution or there is planned further discussion privately, that also needs to be minuted and the result of that discussion should have been in this years' minutes, and it wasn't. The fact that Don asked a question this year, which was shut down, should also be on the minutes next year, so it will be interesting to see if it is.
There was also incorrect procedure in the passing of the minutes as Andy only called for those in favour, which looked like it was about one third to one half who raised their hands, but didn't ask for objections or questions in relation to the minutes. I doubt many would have objected, possibly just Don (those that didn't raise their hands were mostly unconcerned, it was hardly a 1996 merger debate meeting), but Don could have asked his question then had it been called for.
A total of 10227 people voted for the Board vacancies. Each person gave 2 votes for the two vacancies which resulted in a total of 20454 votes
The total votes were:
- Don Scott (3987 votes) - 38% of people gave Don 1 of their 2 votes...19.49% of total vote
- Tim Shearer (8427 votes) - 82% of people gave Tim 1 of their 2 votes...41.20% of total vote
- Ian Silk (8040 votes) - 79% of people gave Ian 1 of their 2 votes...39.31% of total vote
Last edited:
DogDaySonny
Club Legend
- May 4, 2023
- 1,136
- 2,911
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
I despise procedural objections, which is why adherence to procedure is so important to good function. The procedural objectors can cause a whole pile of non-substantive but legitimate disruption with procedure.
