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.
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
Honestly the board just needs to shut the **** up and let the football department do it's job without interference. The club was in much better shape until one week ago where we manufactured a crisis and now we're scrambling to fix one almighty mess we've made.The footy club needs to be on the same page from the board down. All our issues 100% start with the board.
Even if Barham resigns, who's moving in? We need to have one of those board takeovers where someone else has a ticket and offers us a plan and something to vote for.
While there are question marks rightly in truck, we have had Knights, Hird, Bomber, Worsfold now Rutten that have failed in getting a defensive game plan capable of running deep into finals. He may be a problem but the issues run far deeperYou're kidding yourself if you think we could fall into the finals playing any other game plan. I'm not phased by losing, it's about how you lose. I would mind if we lost every game of the year if we were competitive and had a structure that was scalable. Rutten has had 3 years to build a structure...he's failed
I had never really paid attention to board matters but Eddie McGuire made a comment the other night on Footy Classified that Essendon is renowned for having a large board. This allows for factions to grow and there not to be a total buy-in for the direction of the footy club. It would be great if something like that was looked at in the future, but I can't see why that would happen.The problem with a 10 person board is that building a ticket that big is difficult.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
The only way this works (and I want it too as well) is if the whole lot of them get behind the external review and agree to action all recommendations whether they’re mates with the bloke in the gun or notThe problem with a 10 person board is that building a ticket that big is difficult.
I would love nothing more than (and I mean genuinely) for them to make the hard call tomorrow and keep Rutten, do an external review and cut out dead wood (players who don't 'buy in', Dodoro, Campbell, Sheedy etc).
However I don't see it happening, mostly that would mean both the two factions on the board would have to admit they got it wrong. The Barnham side would have to admit undermining Truck was silly with no genuine chance at Clarkson, and the Brasher side would have to admit backing Campbell and Dodoro was a mistake.
However there is too much ego involved for that.
That’s true but it’s also customary for the board to present a united front.I had never really paid attention to board matters but Eddie McGuire made a comment the other night on Footy Classified that Essendon is renowned for having a large board. This allows for factions to grow and there not to be a total buy-in for the direction of the footy club. It would be great if something like that was looked at in the future, but I can't see why that would happen.
Unfortunately I feel this has a snowflakes chance in hell of happening.The only way this works (and I want it too as well) is if the whole lot of them get behind the external review and agree to action all recommendations whether they’re mates with the bloke in the gun or not
I think the terms of reference are going to limit the review to the administration, and if it’s conducted by PWC then mostly I guess it’s looking at the finances, staff turnover and cultural issues more than the NFP side of things. So yeah.Unfortunately I feel this has a snowflakes chance in hell of happening.
Is it unrealistic for the members to expect the terms of reference to be released?I think the terms of reference are going to limit the review to the administration, and if it’s conducted by PWC then mostly I guess it’s looking at the finances, staff turnover and cultural issues more than the NFP side of things. So yeah.![]()
I think from his press conference he said it was the whole club, he mentioned one of the big 4 consulting firms and some footy people and Dorothy Hisgrove.I think the terms of reference are going to limit the review to the administration, and if it’s conducted by PWC then mostly I guess it’s looking at the finances, staff turnover and cultural issues more than the NFP side of things. So yeah.![]()
I had never really paid attention to board matters but Eddie McGuire made a comment the other night on Footy Classified that Essendon is renowned for having a large board. This allows for factions to grow and there not to be a total buy-in for the direction of the footy club. It would be great if something like that was looked at in the future, but I can't see why that would happen.
When it is fully announced it should have the terms of reference. But with this club who really knowsIs it unrealistic for the members to expect the terms of reference to be released?
No current season stats available
Don’t you remember every single player was popping hamstrings in the 2nd half of 2012. Thanks weaponWe wouldn't even be having this conversation if Rutten was a past Essendon player. Hird in his second year was given a pass for missing finals from 10-3 and 138% after round 14. Literally lost 8 of the last 9 games with losing margins of 71, 67, 96, 94 included in that stretch. Can you imagine if Rutten did that?
I'm just sick of how this football club operates. Knights got zero support and Hird gets probably one of the most expensive coaching teams ever assembled. Rutten gets disrespected for no good reason.
I'd be ok with specifically making sure we don't employ Essendon people until the club stabilises.
Can we poach Christina Holgate from the Pies board? The men aren't cutting it anymore.Call me sexist, whatever. Sonia Hood, class. Peggy O’neal, class. The bulldogs old girl, she’s a ripper . Melbournes prez, you’d have a beer with her, she carries on like me. We need a female in charge, so obvious it hurts.
Lore I’m looking at you
Who is Vice President ? Can he speak in front of the camera ? Because poor old Barham has shown it’s not his strong point. That presser was *ed up and did not fill me with confidence. But then again, he did make more sense than “ the back pocket plumberS” inane ramblings.
Call me sexist, whatever. Sonia Hood, class. Peggy O’neal, class. The bulldogs old girl, she’s a ripper . Melbournes prez, you’d have a beer with her, she carries on like me. We need a female in charge, so obvious it hurts.
Lore I’m looking at you
No to Jobe. As much as I love him, he’s still far too “Essendon”, given his links to the players, board, and I’m sure even some passive links with shady back room figures due to Tim.Yep, probably should make Jobe president. Also get Carey on in some sort of coaching role, I genuinely felt he had a lot of sympathy for us.
Agree, go the Icelandic approach - tear the place down and boot the boys.Call me sexist, whatever. Sonia Hood, class. Peggy O’neal, class. The bulldogs old girl, she’s a ripper . Melbournes prez, you’d have a beer with her, she carries on like me. We need a female in charge, so obvious it hurts.
Lore I’m looking at you