Club Mgmt. Board of Directors as led by President Dave Barham

[Lore]

Spoiler: Timeline of events

• 15/8: President, Paul Brasher resigns, replaced by Dave Barham who foreshadows external review
  • Votes for Brasher: Peter Allen, Simon Madden, Sean Wellman
    Sean Wellman

    Age

    50

    Ht

    193cm

    Wt

    90kg

    Pos.

    Def

    Career

    Season

    Last 5

    D

    14.1

    4star

    K

    9.7

    4star

    HB

    4.5

    3star

    M

    4.5

    4star

    T

    1.0

    3star

    No current season stats available

    D

    8.0

    2star

    K

    4.4

    2star

    HB

    3.6

    3star

    M

    2.6

    3star

    T

    0.8

    3star

  • Votes for Barham: Andrew Muir, Dorothy Hisgrove, Melissa Green, Kate O’Sullivan, Kevin Sheedy
• 21/8: Senior Coach, Ben Rutten
  Ben Rutten

  Age

  41

  Ht

  190cm

  Wt

  98kg

  Pos.

  Def

  Career

  Season

  Last 5

  D

  13.4

  3star

  K

  6.3

  2star

  HB

  7.0

  4star

  M

  5.3

  5star

  T

  1.3

  3star

  No current season stats available

  D

  10.6

  3star

  K

  6.2

  3star

  HB

  4.4

  4star

  M

  3.6

  4star

  T

  1.0

  3star

  sacked
• 24/8: CEO, Xavier Campbell resigns
• 24/8: Directors to resign
  • Paul Brasher, immediately
  • Simon Madden, immediately
  • Sean Wellman, after new football director is appointed
  • Peter Allen, after AGM & finance portfolio handover in December
• 26/8: Details of coaching selection committee appointment
  • Sub-committee of 6: Josh Mahoney
    Josh Mahoney

    Age

    47

    Ht

    180cm

    Wt

    83kg

    Pos.

    Fwd

    Career

    Season

    Last 5

    D

    11.3

    3star

    K

    6.8

    3star

    HB

    4.5

    3star

    M

    3.5

    4star

    T

    1.6

    4star

    G

    0.9

    4star

    No current season stats available

    D

    9.2

    3star

    K

    5.4

    2star

    HB

    3.8

    3star

    M

    2.2

    3star

    T

    1.6

    4star

    G

    0.4

    3star

    (Chair, GM-Footy), Robert Walls, Jordan Lewis
    Jordan Lewis

    Age

    38

    Ht

    186cm

    Wt

    86kg

    Pos.

    D/M

    Career

    Season

    Last 5

    D

    23.5

    5star

    K

    12.1

    4star

    HB

    11.5

    5star

    M

    5.5

    5star

    T

    2.7

    4star

    MG

    310.5

    4star

    No current season stats available

    D

    15.0

    4star

    K

    6.8

    3star

    HB

    8.2

    5star

    M

    4.8

    5star

    T

    2.8

    5star

    , Simone McKinnis OAM, Andrew Thorburn and Dorothy Hisgrove (board member).
• 26/8: Details of external review process
  • Ernst & Young to coordinate with support from Andrew Thorburn, working closely with Nick Ryan (Acting CEO) & Dorothy Hisgrove (board member)
  • Focusing on four areas: (1) Board effectiveness & composition, (2) a review of leadership, operations and culture including the footy department, (3) the senior coach appointment and (4) the new CEO appointment.
• 26/9: Andrew Welsh appointed to the board of directors, replacing Simon Madden
• 29/9: Brad Scott appointed as Senior Coach
• 30/9: Kevin Sheedy claims decision to appoint Brad Scott was 6-1 against him
• 3/10: Andrew Thorburn appointed as CEO - alternative link
• 3/10: “External review to be handed to the board next week”: Andrew Thorburn, Crichton Medal Address
• 4/10: Andrew Thorburn resigns as CEO
• 11/10: External review preliminary findings
• 24/10: External review preliminary findings II
• 2/11: Dan McPherson appointed as General Manager of Performance & Cam Roberts as Head of Development
• 11/11: Dean Rioli appointed to the board of directors, replacing Paul Brasher
• 14/11: Tim Roberts & David Wills appointed to the board of directors, replacing Sean Wellman and Paul Allen respectively
• 28/11: Dorothy Hisgrove announced as first female vice-president (at the Essendon Women's Best and Fairest night)
• 1/12: Craig Vozzo appointed as CEO
• 13/12: Board director election results: Andrew Welsh and Andrew Muir elected
• 15/5: The club's First Nations Advisory Council established, to be led by Dean Rioli (chair, Indigenous board member), and including: Leanne Brooke (EFC EGM – Community & The Long Walk. Essendon FC), Dorothy Hisgrove (EFC VP and National Manager Partner KPMG), Kane Ellis (CEO of Illawarra Aboriginal Medical Service), John Evans (Pro Vice-Chancellor Indigenous Engagement at Swinburne) and Che Cockatoo-Collins (EM, Indigenous Affairs NBN, EFC Past Player)
• 16/5: Board of Directors declare support for the First Nations Voice to Parliament, after consultation with the new First Nations Advisory Council
• 28/8: EGM - Football, Josh Mahoney has accepted a role as GM Football Operations at the AFL
• 10/10: GM - Performance Daniel McPherson, and Head of AFLW/AFL Operations Manager Aysha Ward have been elevated to the club executive as joint leaders of the club's football department, as GM-AFL and GM-AFLW respectively

 

[Mr Mojo Risin]

Sure, I’m not saying they don’t. I’m saying you have to convince 6 people, three of which are not football people, and all six of which supported other teams 3 years ago, of your ability to do all aspects of the job next year.

Your experience counts insofar as you can use it to show you are qualified and capable — the most qualified and the most capable candidate — for the position.

Anyway idk why this keeps getting back to Hird’s pro/con list. We have two whole threads about that already.

This thread is supposed to be about the board’s ineptitude and how they reconcile the various processes they have put into action.

I was responding specifically to you saying if Hird is selected it means the process wasn’t followed. All I’m saying is that’s not necessarily the case. If Hird does win legitimately, I think the panel will need to publicly break it down why.

 

[CBombers17]

I don’t think I’ve ever seen a set of KSCs that involved a formal percentage weighting of different criteria.

I would expect it to be a qualitative process, where what you did and how you did it matter, not just tick the senior coach box and you get 10% added to your score.

From what we’ve been told “experienced” includes football administration and assistant coaching, which is a prerequisite to even get into the process.

We also know that there is an additional process for candidates who haven’t been senior coaches before, and I would say that’s the main advantage Hird has — not having to do the first process. But that also assumes that he didn’t do the first process, if his experience is too long ago they might have put him through that part as well anyway (especially if it’s psych evals).

Some examples from yesterday - the top mark for a response got a 5 and that was for "
All behavioural indicators were seen. The candidate provided an excellent response demonstrating consistent application of capability at this level and could mentor others"

And for the next mark down (a 4 mark) was - "most behavioural indicators were seen. The candidate provided a thorough response which clearly demonstrated capability at this level"

There's 20% right there (rated this way in every question). Proven application of capability at the required level can easily be a huge advantage in these scenarios - IF it's weighted this way. Hird could easily have an advantage in most aspects and the panel would be doing their job 100% correctly by ranking him most highly.

 

[ghostdog]

Sure, I’m not saying they don’t. I’m saying you have to convince 6 people, three of which are not football people, and all six of which supported other teams 3 years ago, of your ability to do all aspects of the job next year.

Your experience counts insofar as you can use it to show you are qualified and capable — the most qualified and the most capable candidate — for the position.

Anyway idk why this keeps getting back to Hird’s pro/con list. We have two whole threads about that already.

This thread is supposed to be about the board’s ineptitude and how they reconcile the various processes they have put into action.

So glad this comment returned to the topic.

The real issue as I see it is this;
To hire a new coach, either the panel had to confer to draft the selection criteria, or Mahoney drafted the selection criteria as the chair and gave that to the other panelists to get their heads around. One hopes the criteria were drafted by the former method for the integrity of the process.

Here's the problem though; the external review wasn't completed when the criteria were drafted. This means that the criteria, and therefore the coach that is selected, wiil not account for the full gamut of football issues that the review identifies. We've been positioned to accept a coaching appointment being made without full understanding of the context of football department problems. Therefore, any appointment that is made will be burdened with those issues on the hop, after the review is released. That's called setting someone up to fail.

 

[Lore]

So glad this comment returned to the topic.

The real issue as I see it is this;
To hire a new coach, either the panel had to confer to draft the selection criteria, or Mahoney drafted the selection criteria as the chair and gave that to the other panelists to get their heads around. One hopes the criteria were drafted by the former method for the integrity of the process.

Here's the problem though; the external review wasn't completed when the criteria were drafted. This means that the criteria, and therefore the coach that is selected, wiil not account for the full gamut of football issues that the review identifies. We've been positioned to accept a coaching appointment being made without full understanding of the context of football department problems. Therefore, any appointment that is made will be burdened with those issues on the hop, after the review is released. That's called setting someone up to fail.

Lewis mentioned that they were given criteria (here). Mahoney talked a little bit about talking to the board about the definition of “more experienced”, which indicates that the criteria come from some degree of negotiation between him and the board (32:50).

Lewis also mentioned doing his own sort of review of the club, asked like 20 people, past and present staff, players, parents, so he could get a good feel for what a new coach would be walking into and what is needed (video). We don’t know if other panel members did the same but I guess that’s part of the thing about having six different perspectives.

Don’t forget that the internal review of the footy department is already done… the external review is adding to that. So they (and in particular Mahoney, who did the internal review) already have some idea about what they think they need.

On top of that, Thorburn is heading the external review and is also on the coaching selection panel, so if the external review is going to reveal anything else then he’d have preliminary recommendations to pass on to the panel.

It does sound like the footy department staff/players have already been interrogated (they squeal a bit when they get asked questions) so it’s reasonable to assume that the coaching and footy elements of that review were prioritised.

I agree it’s imperfect and the timing has really limited opportunities and put the pressure on various parties to produce some sort of minor miracle in terms of a thorough and well-executed process (both processes), but there does seem to be some attempts to mitigate the issues you’ve identified which suggests someone is across it.

Also that apparently a coach reveal has been delayed because Hisgrove is overseas — that’s actually a good thing in terms of respecting the processes and ensuring it’s done properly instead of cutting corners to reach a predetermined conclusion on a predetermined date.

And having heard Mahoney talk on radio a couple of weeks ago I don’t overly mind how the selection criteria came about as long as he was involved in it. Mahoney does seem to be fairly level headed and clear eyed, I hope trust is not misplaced there. Would be interesting if he landed in the CEO role

 

[Old Campaigner]

I don’t know how Mahoney survives the parachuting of Hird if the selection panel he’s chairing with the support of Hisgrove and Thorburn recommends someone else.

Can you imagine? The panel front up to the board and say they think Yze is the best of the candidates, the board deliberates and announces the job is going to Hird.

 

[ghostdog]

Lewis mentioned that they were given criteria (here). Mahoney talked a little bit about talking to the board about the definition of “more experienced”, which indicates that the criteria come from some degree of negotiation between him and the board (32:50).

Lewis also mentioned doing his own sort of review of the club, asked like 20 people, past and present staff, players, parents, so he could get a good feel for what a new coach would be walking into and what is needed (video). We don’t know if other panel members did the same but I guess that’s part of the thing about having six different perspectives.

Don’t forget that the internal review of the footy department is already done… the external review is adding to that. So they (and in particular Mahoney, who did the internal review) already have some idea about what they think they need.

On top of that, Thorburn is heading the external review and is also on the coaching selection panel, so if the external review is going to reveal anything else then he’d have preliminary recommendations to pass on to the panel.

It does sound like the footy department staff/players have already been interrogated (they squeal a bit when they get asked questions) so it’s reasonable to assume that the coaching and footy elements of that review were prioritised.

I agree it’s imperfect and the timing has really limited opportunities and put the pressure on various parties to produce some sort of minor miracle in terms of a thorough and well-executed process (both processes), but there does seem to be some attempts to mitigate the issues you’ve identified which suggests someone is across it.

Also that apparently a coach reveal has been delayed because Hisgrove is overseas — that’s actually a good thing in terms of respecting the processes and ensuring it’s done properly instead of cutting corners to reach a predetermined conclusion on a predetermined date.

And having heard Mahoney talk on radio a couple of weeks ago I don’t overly mind how the selection criteria came about as long as he was involved in it. Mahoney does seem to be fairly level headed and clear eyed, I hope trust is not misplaced there. Would be interesting if he landed in the CEO role

Yeah I can see Mahoney trying his best with what he's got. Barham announces we're looking for an experienced coach. Mahoney responds publicly saying it ain't necessarily so. Another instance of Barham's ego needing to be checked.

If it all goes pear-shaped, it might look like this;

• coach is appointed through the clunky process outlined
• coach fails, in part due to being unresponsive re: football issues identified in the review after the hiring process is complete; wasn't required to have plans for those unidentified matters, after all
• board decides to parachute in a replacement, because we ran a process previously and it didn't work

Sorry to have my black hat on so often. I'm out of trust.

 

[Lore]

Yeah I can see Mahoney trying his best with what he's got. Barham announces we're looking for an experienced coach. Mahoney responds publicly saying it ain't necessarily so. Another instance of Barham's ego needing to be checked.

If it all goes pear-shaped, it might look like this;

• coach is appointed through the clunky process outlined
• coach fails, in part due to being unresponsive re: football issues identified in the review after the hiring process is complete; wasn't required to have plans for those unidentified matters, after all
• board decides to parachute in a replacement, because we ran a process previously and it didn't work

Sorry to have my black hat on so often. I'm out of trust.

I can see it too. But trust is a choice

 

[Eleven 38]

I think from the first press conference we knew Barham was shit house doing media.

He clearly shouldn't have said we need an experienced coach in the second presser or whichever one it was, it was just a wrong choice of words.

He's an absolute deer in headlights in front of a camera.

 

[Beerfish]

Can you imagine? The panel front up to the board and say they think Yze is the best of the candidates, the board deliberates and announces the job is going to Hird.

Somebody posted ages ago that if this happened and the club lied as to who had been recommended the panel wouldn't be able to say anything due to NDA's. If I was on that panel there is no NDA in the world that would stop me from calling that out.

 

[yodellinhank]

I think from the first press conference we knew Barham was s**t house doing media.

He clearly shouldn't have said we need an experienced coach in the second presser or whichever one it was, it was just a wrong choice of words.

He's an absolute deer in headlights in front of a camera.

I think every club rolls with a similar line at the start of the process, don't they? Just that the media really latched on and won't let it go with us because of the big named experienced coaches not taking a big interest

 

[yodellinhank]

If the panel recommends Hird and the board choose someone else I'll flip my lid.

 

[DERO]

If the panel recommends Hird and the board choose someone else I'll flip my lid.

The club is like a vault. If that happens it'll never get out so you'll never know!

 

[Duckworth]

Somebody posted ages ago that if this happened and the club lied as to who had been recommended the panel wouldn't be able to say anything due to NDA's. If I was on that panel there is no NDA in the world that would stop me from calling that out.

There are also ways to say things without breaking an NDA. Leaving a long pause etc.

 

[Beerfish]

There are also ways to say things without breaking an NDA. Leaving a long pause etc.

Of course but if someone thinks an NDA means they can say I said something I didn't they are in for quite a shock.

 

[Old Campaigner]

Somebody posted ages ago that if this happened and the club lied as to who had been recommended the panel wouldn't be able to say anything due to NDA's. If I was on that panel there is no NDA in the world that would stop me from calling that out.

Yeah, it's the sort of thing that could ruin the panel members' professional reputation.

There are also ways to say things without breaking an NDA. Leaving a long pause etc.

Off the record conversations with journalists...

 

[boncer34]

I think he's a great leader and the club, the supporters and most importantly the playing group will respond very well if he is appointed.

In terms of his experience he like all second time coaches will come with the benefits and learning from his first go. And all the derogatory comments in the world won't have stopped a very smart man like Hird from coming back bigger and better than the first time around. Undestimate winners like Hird at your peril IMO.

Do you think Hird knew about the drugs program?

 

[CBombers17]

Do you think Hird knew about the drugs program?

I don't buy the hype around the 'drugs program'.

What do you reckon?

 

[jmoo wan]

are we still talking about the drugs program? it was ages ago, i doubt anyone even remembers who was head coach at the time.

 

[Doss]

I don't buy the hype around the 'drugs program'.

What do you reckon?

What do you mean by ‘the hype’?

 

[CBombers17]

What do you mean by ‘the hype’?

I don't believe Hird ordered for 40 of his players to be whacked up with peds either with or without their knowledge.

 

[Doss]

I don't believe Hird ordered for 40 of his players to be whacked up with peds either with or without their knowledge.

I don’t believe he personally ordered a programme he knew to be illegal either.

I do believe he knew Dank was unconventional at best and chose to look past that and that makes him complicit enough by association.

 

[boncer34]

I don't believe Hird ordered for 40 of his players to be whacked up with peds either with or without their knowledge.

So Dank and Robinson ran a program without his knowledge under his nose?

 

[faible]

are we still talking about the drugs program? it was ages ago, i doubt anyone even remembers who was head coach at the time.

Pretty sure it was that ex-Geelong guy that got done for drugs right?

 

[CBombers17]

I don’t believe he personally ordered a programme he knew to be illegal either.

I do believe he knew Dank was unconventional at best and chose to look past that and that makes him complicit enough by association.

Plenty had employed Dank in AFL circles before he got to us and you could argue that in itself could help him pass the smell test for a rookie coach.

Then you add the 'senior' support and guidance the club provided in Bomba and add a lack of governance by a club that's still shit at it to this day - then the lack of evidence they actually took anything banned - and all this adds enough Gray area that the only part that matters for me was did Hird want the players whacked up with banned peds.

There's probably not much point opening up these debates. We all had a pretty good crack when it happened. If people think he shouldn't be coach for Saga reasons I'm not going to argue the point with them either.

 

[Don Won]

AND this discussion is a reminder of what waits for us behind the let’s-hire-Hird door