News Koch blocks Tredders push for the board

[PowerBaz]

This whole thing feels like a distraction and has been timed to maximise that distraction.

Ask yourself the question, what are we being distracted from?

It's definitely timely but maybe just a newsworthy story seeing as the footy season is upon us.

 

[JimmyBC]

Koch not wanting Tredders on the board has nothing to do with his political views. This isn't China or North Korea, freedom of political expression is still technically legal, even if it is frowned upon on the internet and in much of the media.

If you want to know why they don't want Tredders involved, go listen to or watch the radio segment with Rowe, Tredders and Hinkley post the 2021 prelim debacle. There's your answer.

Yea they don't like each other it was pretty frosty afterwards too according to some.

 

[DaTBird187]

and what higher standard was that?

Literally anything.

 

[TeeKray]

This whole thing feels like a distraction and has been timed to maximise that distraction.

Ask yourself the question, what are we being distracted from?

The whole club is nothing more than a play thing for David Koch and a vehicle for the continued employment of the Hinkley family lol, everyone else including the members is literally dragged along for those two purposes.

 

[El_Scorcho]

He literally offers nothing. You could say those things about Sir Donald Bradman and he was a campaigner of an administrator and caused serious rifts at SACA. You allow people like him on the board and you get Mark Riccuto. He hasn't had any serious involvement with the club for 15 years. Here's an article from 2014 that looks at our 2004 premiership team: Class of '04: Where are they now?.

Basically everyone on that list is more qualified to be on the board than Tredrea. I thought I was clear in my post. Whatever your criteria, there is someone better than Tredrea. It would be a sad indictment on our club if the best we could find is 'some guy that won a flag with us 20 years ago, that has had no day to day involvement with AFL for 15 years, has no business experience, has had a massively sheltered existence as a footballer/media personality, and has expressed interest mostly because he has some free time on his hands from being sacked from his previous job'. This is not a anti player thing - Wanganeen was a great appointment. I am sure you can find 1 passionate, successful person, with some AFL credibility who adds more than Tredrea.

We need a campaigner who will cause a rift on the board. That's exactly what we need right now. We have plenty of business board of director types. They clearly can't and/or don't want to fix what is wrong with the club. If we keep appointing the same sort of board members, we'll keep getting the same pathetic excuse for Port Adelaide where winning isn't valued.

Tredrea has something you can't get elsewhere, living memory of being part of the club when we were ruthless, accountable, the version of Port Adelaide we'd all like to see. He was a leader to the point where he is our only AFL premiership captain. He played the game and carried himself in exactly the way we'd like to see Port Adelaide players carry themselves. Skillful, ruthless, tough, a great teammate, a burning desire to win, while also being a saint off the field.

Maybe Tredrea isn't the perfect candidate for the board if everything is running well and we've got the right people in place, but after the last decade we need someone who will come in and agitate for a return to a more traditional Port Adelaide mentality.

 

[DaTBird187]

This whole thing feels like a distraction and has been timed to maximise that distraction.

Ask yourself the question, what are we being distracted from?

Booing everyone who takes to the stage tonight?

 

[Andre]

Can't have any asking the tough questions. If Tredrea stands at the Member election, then even if Koch and co. are still around, I'll get the minimum membership level required to vote and voting for him. He won't be a yes man like Wanga's. Fiacchi wasn't a yes man (hence why they put Wanga's up against him), but Tredrea is much more well known and has the ability to get his views out in public. If he gets elected they'll be trying to shut him up in the 'interests of public unity', but I can't see him taking that shit.

 

[PowerBaz]

Can't have any asking the tough questions. If Tredrea stands at the Member election, then even if Koch and co. are still around, I'll get the minimum membership level required to vote and voting for him. He won't be a yes man like Wanga's. Fiacchi wasn't a yes man (hence why they put Wanga's up against him), but Tredrea is much more well known and has the ability to get his views out in public. If he gets elected they'll be trying to shut him up in the 'interests of public unity', but I can't see him taking that s**t.

Yeah but that's exactly why it will be hard for him to get in. Perhaps he's better off getting back in the media and making his views felt.

Darren Cahill would of had a pretty good understanding of what he though but at that level you have to play the game to some degree.

 

[P4Life]

I am more than okay with having Tredrea on the Board and actually think he will be an asset. But there are a few things that seem a bit off.
Firstly has had nothing to do with the Club for approx 10 years however when his world comes crashing down he decides to contact the club in late September and tell them he he is ready to take over Darren Cahills position. For all we know the Club and the AFL may have already approached Cahill's replacement and offered them the position. That alone gives me sense of entitlement vibes. Club advises more than happy to have you onboard but you need to wait until December 2024 when Member appointment opens up. Instead of saying, okay wish it was sooner, but will wait the 10 months between Feb 2024 and Dec 2024 he turns to his Media mates to make it a story about him. Suddenly 10 months is an issue when you have been awol for 10 years +.
Dont get me wrong I would like him on the Board but does a true Port person turn this into a circus for the sake of 10 months.

 

[TeeKray]

I am more than okay with having Tredrea on the Board and actually think he will be an asset. But there are a few things that seem a bit off.
Firstly has had nothing to do with the Club for approx 10 years however when his world comes crashing down he decides to contact the club in late September and tell them he he is ready to take over Darren Cahills position. For all we know the Club and the AFL may have already approached Cahill's replacement and offered them the position. That alone gives me sense of entitlement vibes. Club advises more than happy to have you onboard but you need to wait until December 2024 when Member appointment opens up. Instead of saying, okay wish it was sooner, but will wait the 10 months between Feb 2024 and Dec 2024 he turns to his Media mates to make it a story about him. Suddenly 10 months is an issue when you have been awol for 10 years +.
Dont get me wrong I would like him on the Board but does a true Port person turn this into a circus for the sake of 10 months.

Darren Cahill approached Tredrea about joining the board as his replacement, not the other way around.

 

[FourthTimeAround]

Title should read “Koch blocks Tredders push for an unelected board position”.

He would get voted in a heartbeat, we all know that.
And as much as I don’t want Koch anymore (did good, but jumped the shark long ago) and know what his real motivation is, you can’t really question his response. A lot of club legends would think about putting their hand up if they didn’t need to run the risk of failing a vote.

 

[P4Life]

Darren Cahill approached Tredrea about joining the board as his replacement, not the other way around.

I know the Cahill name is the biggest at PAFC but with due respect Darren Cahill does not decide who his replacement is. More than okay with Cahill telling Tredrea that his position will be vacant, but surely Cahill and Tredrea knew that the Board was going to have to approve of the replacement.

 

[Chewy316]

I am more than okay with having Tredrea on the Board and actually think he will be an asset. But there are a few things that seem a bit off.
Firstly has had nothing to do with the Club for approx 10 years however when his world comes crashing down he decides to contact the club in late September and tell them he he is ready to take over Darren Cahills position. For all we know the Club and the AFL may have already approached Cahill's replacement and offered them the position. That alone gives me sense of entitlement vibes. Club advises more than happy to have you onboard but you need to wait until December 2024 when Member appointment opens up. Instead of saying, okay wish it was sooner, but will wait the 10 months between Feb 2024 and Dec 2024 he turns to his Media mates to make it a story about him. Suddenly 10 months is an issue when you have been awol for 10 years +.
Dont get me wrong I would like him on the Board but does a true Port person turn this into a circus for the sake of 10 months.

Warren has still been attending every B&F night, pretty sure he attended the 150th anniversary night, up until last year (when he was locked out due to covid vaccination policy at Adelaide Oval) he attended every game. What exactly more do you want of him in terms of being involved with the Club before you see him as being a worthy candidate? When Koch is bringing on West Coast supporters onto our Board the idea that Club legends need to spend more time around the Club to be considered is bullshit.

I know the Cahill name is the biggest at PAFC but with due respect Darren Cahill does not decide who his replacement is. More than okay with Cahill telling Tredrea that his position will be vacant, but surely Cahill and Tredrea knew that the Board was going to have to approve of the replacement.

Would you prefer the Club elect Phil Smyth to the vacant role? Because he's on the short list.

 

[Chewy316]

Title should read “Koch blocks Tredders push for an unelected board position”.

He would get voted in a heartbeat, we all know that.
And as much as I don’t want Koch anymore (did good, but jumped the shark long ago) and know what his real motivation is, you can’t really question his response. A lot of club legends would think about putting their hand up if they didn’t need to run the risk of failing a vote.

Whilst Robbo has covered the story in relative detail, there are some glaring omitting facts that I, REH and a few others are aware of that give us great pause and every right to question Koch for his response. Quite frankly if this idea of not picking Club legends over Club legends was an actual policy it wouldn't have taken Koch 5 months to tell Warren his approach had been rejected.

 

[bomberclifford]

Darren Cahill does not decide who his replacement is

He doesn't decide but it's not uncommon for board members to float some candidates for their replacement, which is what has occured here.

 

[bomberclifford]

Phil Smyth

lol. This is exactly who Koch would appoint.

 

[Power Raid]

Tomorrow night is useless. Its tonight

What I don't understand is Koch's response. In my opinion a strong, honest and experience leader would say:

"Tredders, your a good bloke but your CV isn't strong enough yet. The areas I suggest you work on are X, Y and Z. If you develop in these areas, I would strongly recommend you to the board".

"If you wish to seek to join the board via the members votes, this avenue is open late this year. Personally I would recommend upskilling prior to pursuing this avenue, as a board position is not easy, but this is open with or without my support and with or without the necessary skills"


The fact that a reason wasn't given to Tredders, suggests a couple of things:
1) It isn't Tredders CV or experience that is the issue
2) Koch is concerned Tredders is his own man with a following at Port
3) Accountability is an issue at Port
4) Koch is a poor communicator and his words are sometimes meaningless (we have seen multiple examples such as "turn things around or watch out" and the premiership comment)


Perhaps ask Koch and seek clarity.

 

[Doctor Feel]

He literally offers nothing. You could say those things about Sir Donald Bradman and he was a campaigner of an administrator and caused serious rifts at SACA. You allow people like him on the board and you get Mark Riccuto. He hasn't had any serious involvement with the club for 15 years. Here's an article from 2014 that looks at our 2004 premiership team: Class of '04: Where are they now?.

Basically everyone on that list is more qualified to be on the board than Tredrea. I thought I was clear in my post. Whatever your criteria, there is someone better than Tredrea. It would be a sad indictment on our club if the best we could find is 'some guy that won a flag with us 20 years ago, that has had no day to day involvement with AFL for 15 years, has no business experience, has had a massively sheltered existence as a footballer/media personality, and has expressed interest mostly because he has some free time on his hands from being sacked from his previous job'. This is not a anti player thing - Wanganeen was a great appointment. I am sure you can find 1 passionate, successful person, with some AFL credibility who adds more than Tredrea.

"Wanganeen was a great appointment"

 

[MrMeaner]

Koch is a cancer on the club. While I have concerns about some of Tredrea's judgments, he is exactly the kind of person needed to attempt to break up the cosy nest of nepotism we have become since the Northern Beaches Dilettante became involved in the club.

Watch this newly found policy be jettisoned as soon as the Sydney Spiv doesn't need to think of an excuse to justify his rule by fiat.

That we have become a plaything for a breakfast TV buffoon is an embarrassment.

We need a ****ing revolution to save the club. Revolutions need their fair share of maddies willing to blow things up for the greater good. Tredrea fits that bill.

 

[bomberclifford]

Wanganeen was probably the worst board appointment we've had in the AFL. He did nothing and was actively involved with another club while sitting on our board.

 

[P4Life]

Warren has still been attending every B&F night, pretty sure he attended the 150th anniversary night, up until last year (when he was locked out due to covid vaccination policy at Adelaide Oval) he attended every game. What exactly more do you want of him in terms of being involved with the Club before you see him as being a worthy candidate? When Koch is bringing on West Coast supporters onto our Board the idea that Club legends need to spend more time around the Club to be considered is bullshit.



Would you prefer the Club elect Phil Smyth to the vacant role? Because he's on the short list.

Tredrea is quoted as saying he “has been effectively out of the place since I retired in 2010”.
Hey I want him on the board, my point is more about the sense of entitlement he seems to think he has.

 

[Doctor Feel]

Wanganeen was probably the worst board appointment we've had in the AFL. He did nothing and was actively involved with another club while sitting on our board.

He painted something i guess.

 

[VineValerian]

Whilst Robbo has covered the story in relative detail, there are some glaring omitting facts that I, REH and a few others are aware of that give us great pause and every right to question Koch for his response. Quite frankly if this idea of not picking Club legends over Club legends was an actual policy it wouldn't have taken Koch 5 months to tell Warren his approach had been rejected.

Yup.
Mid last year he told Tredders it was all good, and he would pass his interest on to the Board for consideration.
In October, Richo told him to visit the club, and all seemed in order.

Feb 2023 and 24 hours prior to the AGM, he backflips and says it's off the table, and go get a member's endorsement ................ in 12 months' time.
How convenient.
Gives them time to suss out another former player (who would be a stooge to the Board) before then. Then give him great wraps prior to the election (remember Gav and Georgie?).

Voila! Just the man we wanted gets in.

Tredders gave Ken a nasty interrogation post 2021-PF. Would not be the man Kochie would be looking for.

 

[dav3]

Seems like a strange thing to want to get ****ed about. Not all people follow social media. Some people actually need a reasonable amount of notice to attend events as they have other commitments to manage.

Just saying you can't really call it "keeping it quiet" when members were notified by email and I'm pretty sure I got a letter a few weeks ago too, and it's been on the club site and socials. I barely touch social media, but there's no point crying about not being told if you don't look and haven't given them a way to get the info to you.

Just adding it to the list of idiocy people in this f**king place cry about into their "Yes We Ken" shirts about because they have a bit of sand in their vags over some club decisions

 

[agmsy]

Whilst Robbo has covered the story in relative detail, there are some glaring omitting facts that I, REH and a few others are aware of

Anything you're able to share? Would be interesting to have more insight.

that give us great pause and every right to question Koch for his response.

I'm of the same view. I'm not privy to whatever details you and others are, and I'm not yet convinced that Tredrea is a good candidate beyond being immediately anti-Hinkley, but I can see that Koch's reaction is all about protecting himself and not at all about what's good for the football club.