Duff and Joseph have won.

[Therussian]

Their is no market up their. Its an NRL state that we would be lucky to get anything out of. More chance in Melbourne IMO

yes but it is the fastest growing population in the country, and the AFL need to get in before the NRL titans take a strangle hold and the A League get a side in there within 2 years.

 

[mighty mick]

Bang on. The irony of people arguing about buying or not buying memberships.

Cough, cough....Mark Brayshaw....cough......

if his agenda is the gold coast we should not lose this as a mute point of no confidence,

 

[Crow-mo]

How is it best for the club to lose its soul and die for some quick AFL cash. Make no mistake - AFL cash, not Gold Coast cash, as there are no sustainable money there with a ground that may hold 20k in 5 years time.

Aren't supporters the real reason the game is played?

look at it another way, setting aside the actual issues here for a moment.

The supporter (of any club) would always want to be able to go and see his/her team play, every week, locally. always.
now, this has no bearing at all, on whether that is, or is not, a practical option. they are separate issues, and probably, lumping them together does serve either point of view.

So, your interests do not have to coincide with that of the club, sure, most of the time it will - but they can be distinct.

 

[pharro]

It would appear a lot of posters didn't see James Brayshaw on the news tonight.
I don't think there is too much doubt about where he sees this club in the future.

Is there a quote?

 

[giantroo]

I hope you ladies and gentlemen can make it to the game. I know i cant any more, because of school but hopefully we can reach 20000+ at the game. Its a final and most of you guys would love to go to any final, no matter what it is. Last final we made, we got flogged, lets try again hopefulyl with a bigger crowd. At least this time were not playing the final at the gold coast but here in Melbourne. Our True homeland. Try getting there and support the boys. Stop all this negative thing get in between our club and the supporters.

Once Again Go North!

 

[Crow-mo]

To my mind there is no difference. Melbourne is inseparable part of the club. Selfish? Possibly, but clubs are more about physical location than some people like to think...

look there is a difference, and you can argue that there isn't a difference in this case - sure. but that is not an absolute for all occasions.

 

[pharro]

You must be joking, were members even allowed to ask questions?

First question from Limerick was paddled to the lawyer who built an immediate stonewall. It was clear beyond that no questions were welcome or would be answered.

 

[giantroo]

yes but it is the fastest growing population in the country, and the AFL need to get in before the NRL titans take a strangle hold and the A League get a side in there within 2 years.

Fastest, pfft. research shows Melbourne is.

 

[giantroo]

Is there a quote?

Yeh what did he say?

 

[giantroo]

First question from Limerick was paddled to the lawyer who built an immediate stonewall. It was clear beyond that no questions were welcome or would be answered.

No wonder they had no chance!

 

[HooRoo]

The Brayshaws got on too!

Election should be declared void, wasn't transparent.

As opposed to every election we have had for the past 20 years. I think it has been quite the opposite with much debate (although most not healthy) being generated

 

[Ashley B]

yes but it is the fastest growing population in the country, and the AFL need to get in before the NRL titans take a strangle hold and the A League get a side in there within 2 years.

We currently get 14 games in Melb why would i want 7 more likely 5 or 6? Do u like soccer, rugby, cricket, because most Fitzroy South Melbourne supporters probably do now. How many do u know in Melbourne?
If teams leave Melbourne you will be having conversations about football with alot less people not that it matters as your team will still be here.
We can be financially viable here,but it will take hard work and money??? Keeping 14 games in Melbourne is achievable but there needs to be a big cleanout and the club has to be transparent and honest with its biggest asset the North members and supporters. I am not holding my breathe.

 

[RoganSaint]

My best mate is a roos fan and he would be shattered if you guys move... If there was one piece of advice I would give it is this, if you are going to 'have a foot in two camps' be very careful about it, and get in first. Saints came to Tassie after the Hawks and never really got the momentum up here, now they have pulled out there are a large number of members who won't be renewing because they feel let down by the club. What I am saying is that if you need to increase the membership base, and you are looking interstate to do it, you need to be looking very long term because fans won't stand getting dicked when you pull out in a better financial shape.

Best of luck guys, sincerely

 

[windsock]

I was there just got back we have a moronic conservative supporter base. Stupid vote idiots reminds me of the Republic vote.

Why didn't you get up say something?

 

[Roobunny]

look at it another way, setting aside the actual issues here for a moment.

The supporter (of any club) would always want to be able to go and see his/her team play, every week, locally. always.
now, this has no bearing at all, on whether that is, or is not, a practical option. they are separate issues, and probably, lumping them together does serve either point of view.

So, your interests do not have to coincide with that of the club, sure, most of the time it will - but they can be distinct.

I don't disagree with the general premise of that argument at all but...

I'm a South Australian born and bred supporter, I'm usually lucky if I see them play once a year (pesky Crows and their sell out games ) so it's got very little to do with that for me. However my club's history and existence is based around Arden Street. Take that away and the club loses meaning to me. I have no affiliation with the Gold Coast and I can't honestly see what benefits it could possibly bring. I don't believe the market is there, and it certainly won't be enough to make up for those who walk away. Sure we may have money for a change, but will there be any passion left? For me that's what football is about (I know it's a business nowadays, but it's passion that makes people buy memberships etc). I can't see the Gold Coast Kangaroos, genuinely surviving and becoming wealthy, and I can't see myself caring if they do. I just don't see how this is viable.

I can't imagine how it feels for Melbourne supporters/members.

 

[pharro]

Gents, My grandfather was a B&F and leading goalkicker at the roos and was nominated for the team of the century
So i am by no means 'trolling' (I'm a Collingwood supporter as my father played for the maggies)
As much as you can have one nth are my second team.

But from an outsiders point of view, this isn't the worst thing that could happen to the roos, (need i mention Fitzroy)
Melbourne is just not big enough for 9 teams, The roos just dont have the financial muscle needed to survive, if a deal could be struck to get 7,8,9, games in Melbourne then you still get to watch your team as many times as you would this season anyway, and the club is viable for the next 15 years gaurenteed.

I will be seeing 14 games this year. And you say the 7 games you're offering me is the same amount? Where did you go to school?

 

[Therussian]

We currently get 14 games in Melb why would i want 7 more likely 5 or 6? Do u like soccer, rugby, cricket, because most Fitzroy South Melbourne supporters probably do now. How many do u know in Melbourne?
If teams leave Melbourne you will be having conversations about football with alot less people not that it matters as your team will still be here.
We can be financially viable here,but it will take hard work and money??? Keeping 14 games in Melbourne is achievable but there needs to be a big cleanout and the club has to be transparent and honest with its biggest asset the North members and supporters. I am not holding my breathe.

i'm not saying i agree with it, i'm just bringing a less emotional point across.
yes i like soccer and cricket what has that got to do with it.
you dont have to be in the state to talk about footy
If you could be financially viable here why have you not been doing it for the last 20 years when you have been succesful on field.

again, i'm not agreeing and i'm not having a go, but look at the facts guys.

 

[kangalover]

I hope you ladies and gentlemen can make it to the game. I know i cant any more, because of school but hopefully we can reach 20000+ at the game. Its a final and most of you guys would love to go to any final, no matter what it is. Last final we made, we got flogged, lets try again hopefulyl with a bigger crowd. At least this time were not playing the final at the gold coast but here in Melbourne. Our True homeland. Try getting there and support the boys. Stop all this negative thing get in between our club and the supporters.

Once Again Go North!

Good post giantroo and please all you whinging moaning posters who seem to know already everything that the Board has yet to set in place take note of giantroo and be patient, wait and see what the outcome of this new board is before you go mouthing off about something that has not yet happened.

For people who supposedly love their club with a passion I cannot believe how influenced you all are by hearsay because nobody other than the newly elected board know what plans they intend to put in place.
So be patient wait and see what is implemented you cynics may all be pleasantly surprised.

 

[Tas]

That a number of the candidates didn't write off the Gold Coast completely sends a meesage that at the very least we must explore the option be it one game, 2 or 3 or more

No one likes it.

This was the whole issue with Canberra, it was providing a bit of cash but should the crap hit the fan would not give us any security, there was no room to grow in Canberra.

Switching the games from Canberra to Gold Coast really pushes us to get our house in order during the short-term. We probably would never achieve that while we were at Canberra and would have seen us suffer a slow, painful death with merging or disappearing as the only likely outcomes.

Nobody can dismiss it because it is the contingency plan. If we can't make Melbourne sustainable the AFL will probably bankroll any club wishing to relocate there, like they have done with Sydney. You do not really want to drive people away from the club who are in the contingency market by saying we will never go there when they do figure as the unpreferred option.

I think the club has not been dishonest with the supporters and I think that is important. We were always open with Canberra about why we were there, the scenario with the Gold Coast is different.

However one would hope these guys are a bit more educated about the clubs plight than your 'rank and file' members so any decision is based on the number in front of them

I'm not defending the decision, merely stating a fact

I think everyone around the club would love to see the club thriving here, but we are struggling and probably lack the means to reverse that at this point in time. We are not getting enough exposure, we not expanding our supporter base fast enough and for all the good media exposure we get there is just as much negative. We haven't had a positive outlook on the club sine 1999 and the club can only sustain a period of non-performance for so long.

I think the club sees the Gold Coast as a real option for co-existance where we play a chunk of games there and get a guaranteed number in melbourne. They will continue to think that way until something changes. If we grow to 30-35k members in Melbourne the club would probably feel we have the supporter base sufficient to stand on our own playing all our games in Melbourne.

There is no point making the Gold Coast hostile by saying we are only there for the cash, or making the AFL look elsewhere for someone to help develop the market there. At this point in time we need a successful GC campaign. It is no coincidence that our CBF payment more than doubled the year we decided to work on the Gold Coast. Now it is not in the AFL's interest for us to tread water, they want us to be able to afford to put a winning team on the park because it serves their interest. A successful side playing in GC suits the AFL's agenda.

We just need to be clever the way we play the football politics. The club can buy the time and money it needs to make a real fist out of expanding our supporter base here by promoting the Gold Coast. They wont be ready to support an AFL side for many years to come. We can help them grow to become ready while we secure our own interests here in Melbourne.

If our support here does not grow or wanes over the years then the club will have an alternative down the road if our desired result doesn't work out. Irrespective how much we want for our club to be a Melbourne based club only, their responsibility is primarily to ensure the club survives and is in a position to compete.

Those goals will only clash if our supporter base here does not grow.

 

[Therussian]

I will be seeing 14 games this year. And you say the 7 games you're offering me is the same amount? Where did you go to school?

my bad.

 

[apollo_creed]

As opposed to every election we have had for the past 20 years. I think it has been quite the opposite with much debate (although most not healthy) being generated

which is dissapointing.

if the debate got abusive and nasty then relocating to Collingwood may be suffice.

 

[Crow-mo]

I don't disagree with the general premise of that argument at all but...

I'm a South Australian born and bred supporter, I'm usually lucky if I see them play once a year (pesky Crows and their sell out games ) so it's got very little to do with that for me. However my club's history and existence is based around Arden Street. Take that away and the club loses meaning to me. I have no affiliation with the Gold Coast and I can't honestly see what benefits it could possibly bring. I don't believe the market is there, and it certainly won't be enough to make up for those who walk away. Sure we may have money for a change, but will there be any passion left? For me that's what football is about (I know it's a business nowadays, but it's passion that makes people buy memberships etc). I can't see the Gold Coast Kangaroos, genuinely surviving and becoming wealthy, and I can't see myself caring if they do. I just don't see how this is viable.

I can't imagine how it feels for Melbourne supporters/members.

the thing is, I agree with nearly everything you say. it would of course be ideal if you guys were viable and successful where you are. however the issue, can really be brought down to this: are you? I don't know, and probably most of you don't either. your new board, will look at this.

as for viability on the gold coast - you are certainly correct, no team would succeed up there on their own steam. However, that is not the choice. the choice is whether you go with the AFL's blessing and cheque book at the ready. If you stay, and it turns out to be an optimistic (i.e. wrong) decision and you can't make a go of it - lose a few dollars and your stuffed. Lose a squillion on the Gold Coast, and your covered.

you're walking a tight rope, your board needs to decide on whether you can make it to the other side without a safety net. Particularly as you are being offered a platinum plated safety net if you walk another line.

 

[conwaynmfc]

the thing is, I agree with nearly everything you say. it would of course be ideal if you guys were viable and successful where you are. however the issue, can really be brought down to this: are you? I don't know, and probably most of you don't either. your new board, will look at this.

as for viability on the gold coast - you are certainly correct, no team would succeed up there on their own steam. However, that is not the choice. the choice is whether you go with the AFL's blessing and cheque book at the ready. If you stay, and it turns out to be an optimistic (i.e. wrong) decision and you can't make a go of it - lose a few dollars and your stuffed. Lose a squillion on the Gold Coast, and your covered.

you're walking a tight rope, your board needs to decide on whether you can make it to the other side without a safety net. Particularly as you are being offered a platinum plated safety net if you walk another line.

A net made out of platinum would hurt should one fall into it.

No thanks.

 

[CoastBhoy]

Duff's strong win at Kangaroos' election
Email Print Normal font Large font February 28, 2007 - 9:24PM

Advertisement
AdvertisementKangaroos president Graham Duff has won overwhelming support at the club's board election, with his six-member ticket all winning seats.

Duff and his five supporters won all six of the shareholder-elected board positions.

Rival board member Peter de Rauch, who was involved in a bitter battle with Duff during the election campaign, was voted out, along with his supporters.

The three member-elected positions were won by the three-member ticket of former club powerbroker Ron Joseph, along with brothers Mark and James Brayshaw.

Mark Brayshaw has formerly been an executive at other AFL clubs, while James is co-host of the Nine Network's AFL Footy Show and a radio and television football commentator.

The member-elected positions were created through a constitutional amendment, allowing the vote to go ahead.

The new board is to meet for the first time on Friday, when a new president will be elected, with Duff declining to say whether he wants to keep the job.

© 2007 AAP

 

[CoastBhoy]

Duff wins Roos' fight
by: Paul Gough
Sportal


Kangaroos' chairman Graham Duff has won his fight to retain control of the club but what that means for the embattled AFL club's immediate future remains unclear.

Duff and his entire six-man ticket was elected to the board by Roos' shareholders at Wednesday night's annual general meeting while 1970s powerbroker Ron Joseph, former player Mark Brayshaw and his brother, television personality and former state cricketer James, as expected won the remaining three board positions which were voted upon by club members.

That meant a defeat for long-time Kangaroos' powerbroker Peter de Rauch, who was ousted from the board despite controlling about one million of the estimated four million Kangaroos shares that were first offered when former chairman Bob Ansett floated the club in the late 1980s to raise much-needed revenue.

The Roos were also successful in changing their constitution on Wednesday night, enabling members to vote in a club election for the first time in 20 years, and also saving the club from a significant tax bill after the Australian Tax Office ruled that the club's unique structure meant it could no longer be considered a not-for-profit organisation and thus exempt from tax.





But the Roos will now not have to pay that debt, which was so significant that in the club's financial report it was revealed that 'if the restructure (of the club's constitution) does not take place in accordance with proposed amended constitution, that (tax) exemption will not be available and the resulting taxation liability would make it difficult for the club to continue'.

Despite the tax reprieve, the club's report still revealed the Roos' difficult financial position, with the club some $4.86 million in debt, after having made a loss of just over $280,000 last year.

This has led to constant speculation over the club's future in Melbourne, particularly after the club signed a deal to play 10 games at Carrara on the Gold Coast over the next three years.

De Rauch had claimed in the lead-up to the election that a vote for Duff was effectively a vote for the club relocating to the Gold Coast.

However Duff said on Wednesday night the club had no 'pre-ordained position' on whether to relocate to the Gold Coast.

"What we have is a three-year (10-game) contract with the Gold Coast," he said.
"This board in its discretion may decide in the future that there may be more or less that we can do (on the Gold Coast) but anyone who thinks there is a pre-ordained position with respect to the Gold Coast is mistaken."

But significantly the Roos' board now contains one Gold Coast-based member in Michael O'Brien - a member of Duff's ticket - whom Duff believes will help the club attract significant new sponsorships in Queensland.

Duff said that while the club is yet to decide on its long-term home, he said at least that decision now could be taken 'from a position of stability within the club' following months of board infighting between Duff and de Rauch.

However the Roos' internal problems may not be over with new board member Joseph, one of the architects of the club's success in the mid-1970s, admitting on Wednesday night he had spoken to other prominent North Melbourne figures about assuming the presidency - one of whom is believed to be former AFL commissioner Peter Scanlon.

But Joseph has ruled out running as chairman when the new Roos' board meets to decide its new leader, probably on Friday, with Duff likely to be the only candidate.

"I have consistently said I am not interested in the chairmanship of the North Melbourne Football Club, I don’t think I am good enough to be the chairman," Joseph said.

But when asked if he knew anyone from outside the new board that he felt could come in and take over as chairman - as Richard Pratt has recently done at Carlton - Joseph said 'Yes'.

"I have spoken to a few people but I am not going to canvass those things tonight," he said.

Despite having been a critic of Duff in the past, Joseph said he was prepared to work alongside the man who has been Roos chairman for the past year.

"I am happy to work with anyone who is working for the North Melbourne Football Club and I am sure Graham is happy to work with me and we will go forward," he said.