News Lions Board Spill - update: Board Dispute Resolved

[Tairy Greene]

So say after the EGM, the Williams/Power ticket get their way with the board and all is settled, then surely that means the AFL package will still be offered as the board will be stable? So why is Angus hanging on if he's just said as much?

 

[Gibbo_88]

Well that escalated quickly.

We've gone from months of stone cold silence from the Chairman to e-mail updates every 12 hours...

I have spoken to AFL CEO Andrew Demetriou this morning and he has strongly rejected the claims

Really makes me cringe when people talk like that. It's good to see the media really starting to have a go at the lions. Hope they keep it up for the next month.

It's sad to really see how far the club has fallen.

 

[Haso]

Well that escalated quickly.

We've gone from months of stone cold silence from the Chairman to e-mail updates every 12 hours...

He's in full-scale self-preservation mode now. Despite the fact that his encucumbancie is now completely untenable.

 

[Elixuh]

At least now we get to vote on all of these issues in the one go on the 13th and get it sorted.

 

[GingerGreatness]

So does the 'clarifier' actually clarify why the board rejected the AFL offer?

It stresses there was no link between AFL funding + its acceptance.

But the last e-mail from the club clearly said it was rejected. We still don't know why, other than "best interests of the club".

I like my clarifiers to clarify stuff. I'm not sure this does.

 

[whatboutbob]

...and what about the ~$450k in salary cap space we were hoping to use to front-end contracts prior to Oct 31...dependent on the AFL funding...?

 

[Lace Out]

I'm missing the bit where Angus says he's tipping it in from his own pocket.

 

[Rizzler]

I just sent the following email to Angus Johnson:

Dear Angus,


Can you please stop spamming me with email clarifications from you rebutting what has been reported in the media.


You have done this about 5 or 6 times.


It’s time to realise that it’s not the media’s fault, it’s yours because the only message that you keep communicating is that of self-interest.

 

[Rizzler]

I also sent the following email to "Black" Angus:

Dear Angus,

As an 18 season member of the Lions I’d like to outline the following points in relation to the Lions constitution:

1. Despite you saying countless times legal advice prevented you from letting Leigh Matthews run for the board, under clause 4.1(c) the board at all times had the discretion to grant the same rights and privileges to life members that full members have.


2. In any event, if you had not acted on the legal advice who would have been the party aggrieved by your decision? Other than you of course.


3. It does not take 75% of members to change the constitution. It takes 75% of the full members who attend a general meeting. Quorum is reached with 3 full members, so if only four full members attend a general meeting the constitution can be changed with the vote of 3 members.


As a passionate Lions fan I’m at a loss as to why you are choosing to fight against the AFL, Leigh Matthews and the supports of the Lions.


Do you honestly think it’s in the best interest of the Club to continue these battles? You yourself keep saying you’ve been on the board since 1999, that’s exactly why change is needed, your position is not a job for life.


I really doubt how effective the 1,000 words you are going to write in relation to remaining on the board when the person you are running against just had to write three, “Triple Premiership Coach”.

 

[patfullfankezz]

Hide the babies quick, Angus might start kissing 'em!

 

[Old Den]

There is a word bouncing round in my head that has me feeling a little uneasy...proxies.

 

[patfullfankezz]

I'm happy to proxy for anyone who needs one...if I can proxy...I am a full voting member and have been for 7 years......I should be able to proxy?

 

[Gibbo_88]

Are you able to have someone who isn't a member vote or do they have to be a member of the club to be at the EGM?

 

[adey115]

There is a word bouncing round in my head that has me feeling a little uneasy...proxies.

Hey you know what we need.... an email listing for all the voting members. Now where are we going to get one of those?!

 

[Rizzler]

As reported by Andrew Stafford the other day the Lions have about 6,700 members with voting rights. All Victorian Lions members are granted voting rights and I believe there about 4,000 or so of those. This means there are only roughly 2,700 voting members who could attend the EGM and up to 4,000 members who could vote by proxy. The proxy problem is very worrying. I'm as worried as a democrat during the Florida recount following the 2000 USA election.

 

[Always a Lion]

I would love it if proxies were to be compiled and submitted by one group (like TLR), or individual member on mass. At least this way we'd be able to track the voting trends and a level of accountability would be a better possible. Even if proxies were to be sealed, at least we'd know how many were submitted.

Not implying anything untoward may happen with proxies, just like to make extra sure nothing does. Besides, I am very suspicious of the powers that be ATM.

 

[Rizzler]

Under clause 7.4 of the Lions constitution the proxy must be a full member

 

[CarloLion]

Hey you know what we need.... an email listing for all the voting members. Now where are we going to get one of those?!

All good, I know a couple of IT guru's

 

[Haso]

Under clause 7.4 of the Lions constitution the proxy must be a full member

 

[Ceebee]

Still worried.do not trust any of them except Leigh.
Mongrels have too much to lose.they have something up their sleeves.

 

[luthor]

From Angus' latest email:

" Members may have seen a report by Andrew Hamilton in today's Courier Mail that the Board has rejected a financing package from the AFL.

These claims are incorrect and deliberately misleading. I have spoken to AFL CEO Andrew Demetriou this morning and he has strongly rejected the claims."


The bolded section above is totally bizarre.

So Angus had to speak to Vlad for him (Vlad) to reject the claims.

WTF???

So Angus himself didn't actually know whether or not the claims were factual or not????? The way that little gem reads is that had to get Vlad to hold his hand before issuing his statement.

So what I get out of all that is that Angus didn't have the knowledge (or maybe the stones) to reject Hammo's claims outright all by himself.

That hole just keeps getting deeper.....stop digging Angus.... for Chrissakes.

 

[luthor]

He's in full-scale self-preservation mode now. Despite the fact that his encucumbancie is now completely untenable.

As self appointed Vegetable Rights spokesman on this board, I'll let you off with a warning this time Haso.

Whatever you do, please avoid any references to zucchereenies , buck chows or even fresh fruit.

 

[alscotoz2]

This whole episode is truly bizarre. The boy Johnson appears somewhat touched...

 

[Skoob]

When Leigh Matthews wants the opportunity to speak in the media, there will be a queue of people to take that interview and broadcast it, every time.
Angus and Co won't have that luxury. There will only be so many times that the media covers Angus comments. Apart from anything the media has fairly derided him on many occasions over the past couple of months, especially since Leigh has come out in opposition - so think AFL 360 guys, Footy Classified etc.

And of course, if you're Dr Henry, you get once chance on SEN at 6.30am and thats it.....

While the Club enjoys a positive relationship with The Courier Mail as a media partner, it is important to note that I was not contacted by the journalist for the Board's views before this damaging and factually incorrect article was published.

Don't know if anyone watched 7 News last night but it must have been a slow news day for them to bother with the poor ole lions.
They did a door stop after the board meeting and true to form;
Mick Power : "members to have a say, blah.. Leigh Matthews blah, blah...pride etc etc"
Angus: "No comment, a statement will be on our website"!!

Engaging sort of a prick isn't he.

 

[thespide81]

Interesting article in The Australian today. If true, removing Angus could be more difficult that many hope. Andy D usually gets what he wants. This report is in direct contrast to Hammo's article last week which said Andy D wouldn't back Angus if it resulted in Leigh walking away.


ANDREW Demetriou has lent his substantial support to the four besieged members on the Brisbane Lions board, having twice made approaches to rebel directors Mick Power and Paul Williams urging them to resign immediately. In spite of the rift that threatens to tear the club apart, yesterday's scheduled board meeting went ahead and, incredibly, passed two significant motions, including a proposal to amend the constitution governing the club to allow full membership rights to life members of the Brisbane Bears, Fitzroy Lions and Brisbane Lions football clubs.The move was unanimously supported by the seven board members, allowing former triple premiership-winning coach Leigh Matthews to run for election.In normal circumstances, that opportunity would have arisen at the Lions' annual meeting, scheduled for December 16.Coincidentally, the only two directors up for re-election at that meeting -- prior to yesterday's tension-filled gathering -- were Mick Power and Paul Williams, the two men leading what AFL House has described as being "tantamount to a boardroom coup". Lions chairman Angus Johnson reiterated his plea to Williams and Power to stand down from their positions in light of their attempt at a "hostile take-over".Johnson revealed that during his discussions with Demetriou and AFL chairman Mike Fitzpatrick he had, in fact, tendered a proposed succession plan that would see him vacate his role "in an orderly fashion". It appears that proposal has been rejected by Power and Matthews, who met Demetriou on Tuesday."I will continue to work towards a proper and decent handling of this situation -- what has happened to date and continues to occur is neither of those, and it's become an ugly situation which needs to find a resolution sooner rather than later," Johnson told The Australian."The actions launched by two directors against the majority of the Lions board are one thing -- for those men to believe it is proper to remain a part of the board they are trying to oust is an another thing entirely."It flies in the face of the very basics of decent corporate governance. In the end this club does not belong to any one person. This club belongs, and is answerable to, its members."But at the same time it is incumbent upon board to make hard decisions which serve the best interests of the club they represent. That doesn't always mean their decisions will be popular."The "decisions" he refers to includes the axing of the club's favourite son, Michael Voss, as head coach after five years at the helm -- a period in which the Lions won only 43 of the 109 games they played.The push for control of the Lions is being driven by the rebel group's criticism of the handling of Voss's departure and the process that has subsequently led to the appointment of another club legend, Justin Leppitsch, as his replacement.Matthews's desire to join the Lions board has won overwhelming support from both sides. -

See more at: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...y-fnca0u4y-1226741268590#sthash.iqTjuWls.dpuf