News Lions Board Spill - update: Board Dispute Resolved

[adey115]

I thought his youngest son was doing year 12 this year?

Ah, looks like might be right - thought it was next year. Still finding out after ten weeks its for family reasons doesn't sit overly well with me.

 

[Ironmonger]

"The rival ticket, from what I’ve seen in the media over the past week, appears to have been formed because:
- The decision not to renew Michael Voss’ contract is unpopular; and
- The Club has not secured the services of Paul Roos as our next Senior Coach."

Totally misleading. I'd suggest that the ticket was formed because Angus and Holmes botched the public announcements and presser of the Voss non-renewal to the point of embarrassing a club legend, and creating a situation where the Club was viewed as a joke - in addition to the botching of the Paul Roos courting. Nowhere has Williams/Power indicated that the Voss non-renewal decision wasn't unanimous. They aren't running a "Bring Back Voss" campaign as part of their ticket.

I think Johnson is right to point out that it's not entirely clear what the rival ticket stands for. Unfortunately he has instead chose to represent what he thinks they might stand for in a pretty self-serving way.

It would be only the second time in nine years, should we win, that the team has made the finals. It’s about time – don’t you agree?

This is just off. Whatever Johnson is going for with that rhetorical question he has failed miserably. He really isn't a very good communicator.

 

[Skoob]

It would be only the second time in nine years, should we win, that the team has made the finals. It’s about time – don’t you agree?

This is just off. Whatever Johnson is going for with that rhetorical question he has failed miserably. He really isn't a very good communicator.

Looks to me like a crude attempt at justifying the absence of Voss.
Unfortunately it ignores who got us here over the last 2 years.
I think Angus genuinely believes the majority of readers are stupid enough to believe his rhetoric.

Even the opening gambit about Essendon etc is a transparent feeble attempt to have us believe he "was going to write to you anyway" as if the board stuff is a "by the way". Otherwise why the **** talk Essendon when he is here to address the ramped up calls for an EGM?
Arrogant, but not quite clever enough to be so.

 

[adey115]

I think Johnson is right to point out that it's not entirely clear what the rival ticket stands for. Unfortunately he has instead chose to represent what he thinks they might stand for in a pretty self-serving way.

Kind of disagree Tom - Angus himself said in a press conference that he was told by Williams/Power that he had "botched" the Roos courting up, and its been fairly obvious across all media reports that the way Voss was publicly humiliated was a joke. I think its fairly clear that the new ticket are embarrassed that Angus has made our club look like dills in relation to Voss, not because of the decision to not renew Voss. Williams has stated publicly that the decision was unanimous. And the new ticket has now stated publicly that they want more "Football" people on the Board - with that major Football person being Lethal, who has previously indicated that he wouldn't be joining the Board, but now is only willing to join the Board on another ticket, sans- Johnson.

Put it this way - seems fairly straight forward to me that that the new ticket has not been formed because of the "unpopularity" of the Voss decision. Otherwise, the new ticket would be running a "Bring Back Voss" campaign, and they ain't.

 

[Betty Noir]

This email suggests that he is either A: dreaming, or B: had a dream.
Please Angus, expedite the process at the very least.

 

[Skoob]

He also says what he knows of the Rival ticket (and why they are challenging) is from what he's gleaned from the media...

They haven't spoken?

WTF!????

The board was told at a meeting last week that Williams and Power intended to contest a spill. To suggest that he knows not why is fairytale stuff. Then again I suppose he can't come out and say "They want me gone 'cause they think I'm shit". (Although I think we can safely read that into it).

 

[Mooch]

And if you were the one in charge of communicating with Roos "6 weeks" prior to the final Voss decision, why did it take 10 or so weeks to get that "due to family reasons" answer? It wasn't a "I don't want to Coach" answer. It was a "I can't move my family" answer.

I'm actually surprised Angus would come out with this because it either exposes a massive lie or massive incompetence. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle.

Is that a backhander to Matthews?

We've had an open invitation for him to come on board for the last 2 and a half years, but we can't sacrifice 4 (in reality 3) of the Board members to get him on, when we have to make the right decisions, not the popular ones?

I wonder how close we are to reality to say that - Roosy doesn't want to work with the current board - Matthews doesn't want to work with the current board - close to nobody wants to work with the current board. Unpopular indeed.

So lets talk about finals.

**** me this club's in trouble.

My thoughts too. Can anybody connected actually confirm this statement? I haven't heard of it before.

While it isn't true that the rival ticket hasn't published a full-on manifesto (why would they give all their tricks away before the game is played?), they already seem to have engaged the supporters and members more than the current board. Hell they've even convinced new members to sign up already!

 

[Mooch]

Ah, looks like might be right - thought it was next year. Still finding out after ten weeks its for family reasons doesn't sit overly well with me.

If he was courting a young lady and only found out after 10 weeks that she is married with 4 kids, nobody could describe that relationship as 'open and honest'.


Or robust

 

[Betty Noir]

The board was told at a meeting last week that Williams and Power intended to contest a spill. To suggest that he knows not why is fairytale stuff. Then again I suppose he can't come out and say "They want me gone 'cause they think I'm shit". (Although I think we can safely read that into it).

It's bad spin, and if he says it enough times he thinks we'll believe it... it seems he does. The writing is on the wall, and he should call the vote immediately... within the shortest possible time frame.

 

[GingerGreatness]

The board was told at a meeting last week that Williams and Power intended to contest a spill. To suggest that he knows not why is fairytale stuff. Then again I suppose he can't come out and say "They want me gone 'cause they think I'm shit". (Although I think we can safely read that into it).

It just makes me shake my head.

I had thought the last week of "nothing" might have... just might have... been because the rival factions were trying to have some discussions to resolve the dispute, or manage it towards a resolution, one way or another.

Nup. No phone calls. No discussions. Just - hey look Marge, my name's in the paper again.

 

[Cousin Jed]

My thoughts too. Can anybody connected actually confirm this statement? I haven't heard of it before.

Yes

 

[Angus72]

Just reading the writeup on the AFL website about the EGM. The club denies receiving a lot of things this year.
The Lion's Roar says it offered Johnson the same opportunity, but the club denies receiving the invitation.

 

[Tassie4ever]

I'm sure it must be just me, but right now, post the Chair's latest email, I am more confused than ever.

Assuming Johnson's summation of Board events is accurate, then the Board voted unanimously to get rid of Voss, and therefore all its members must have been aware of the probable repercussions. Assuming they were all asking the right questions that any responsible board member is obliged to ask. One of which must surely have been: Voss goes, then what happens next? Have we got Roos tied up? If not, what next?

Or was it a matter of Voss goes, then we go through a necessarily thorough [= lengthy] due diligence/process with only Harvey as interim for the season remainder.

If none of the above questions were asked then all Board members are equally culpable for us being where we now are.

Ie, not just Angus.

Again, if Angus is being truthful in asserting that the Club rules were altered years go to permit Leigh Matthews' inclusion on the Board, then what the hell is this all about? Angus' email directly asserts that LM could have joined the Board any time he elected to do so years ago. Why is it that he seeks to do so now and in the current circumstances?

I am in no way critical of LM seeking to join the Board, and even better if we could get Alistair Lynch as well. The more football brains and collective football gravitas we can gather the better.

Maybe what we are witnessing is no more than an old-fashioned internal Board brawl.

Last point- what the hell is this blog descending to when much of what we seem to be doing is bashing Angus and any journo who puts his head up. Bit like blaming News for reporting on Labor dysfunction. Here's a heads up, chaps- we are dysfunctional: we don't have a coach, and our Board is a bit to and fro. That's reality. If anyone thinks all our problems will disappear if LM joins the Board then they are kidding themselves. Especially if the rumours of player disharmony are true.

 

[Hollow Knight]

Just reading the writeup on the AFL website about the EGM. The club denies receiving a lot of things this year.
The Lion's Roar says it offered Johnson the same opportunity, but the club denies receiving the invitation.

According to the Lions Roar twitter account, they have proof of making multiple offers to the Angus camp.

The Lions Roar offer remains open too according to their FAQ. Interesting that the club still apparently has no intention to provide anything.

Scared of legitimising the EGM challenge I suspect.

 

[Angus72]

According to the Lions Roar twitter account, they have proof of making multiple offers to the Angus camp.

The Lions Roar offer remains open too according to their FAQ. Interesting that the club still apparently has no intention to provide anything.

Scared of legitimising the EGM challenge I suspect.

It was even in the papers when the challenge was announced that TLR had asked the two sides to present their case to the members.

 

[Fatcat08]

The Voss decision was an incredibly tough one but, at the same time, it was delivered by a unanimous vote as the result of a thorough review. The resolution to not offer Michael a new contract was moved by Paul Williams. All Directors – Paul Williams, Mick Power, Peter McGregor, Cameron Milner, Linda Nash and myself, voted on the matter. This has been recorded in the minutes of the Board meeting and suggestion to the alternative is wrong

ummmm hate to point out to Angus that nowhere has it been suggested that it wasn't a unanimous decision, in fact Williams has been fairly open in pointing out that he did vote to remove voss. Geez if you're going to release a statement on what is being said in the media, you may want to actually read what has been said rather than just assuming.

Also how about the whole roos called me last week to tell me he wasn't moving, may have been handy to include that in the statement you made on the formation of a panel perhaps.

Geez he's digging himself a bigger and bigger hole.

 

[Betty Noir]

According to the Lions Roar twitter account, they have proof of making multiple offers to the Angus camp.

The Lions Roar offer remains open too according to their FAQ. Interesting that the club still apparently has no intention to provide anything.

Scared of legitimising the EGM challenge I suspect.

They don't have the choice, they have to get the EGM into gear. The LR have nearly 3 times the number of (pledged) signatories required, this alone should sent a robust message. I find it a bit hard to stay rational in the face of such obstinence.

 

[Ironmonger]

Assuming Johnson's summation of Board events is accurate, then the Board voted unanimously to get rid of Voss, and therefore all its members must have been aware of the probable repercussions. Assuming they were all asking the right questions that any responsible board member is obliged to ask. One of which must surely have been: Voss goes, then what happens next? Have we got Roos tied up? If not, what next?

This is pure speculation, but I wonder if Johnson had suggested to the rest of the board that he had information that Roos was a good chance to take the job before the decision on Voss, and then his language softened afterwards.

If that was the case then you could understand why some board members might feel manipulated.

My overriding impression of Johnson is that he is a flawed communicator.

Kind of disagree Tom - Angus himself said in a press conference that he was told by Williams/Power that he had "botched" the Roos courting up, and its been fairly obvious across all media reports that the way Voss was publicly humiliated was a joke. I think its fairly clear that the new ticket are embarrassed that Angus has made our club look like dills in relation to Voss, not because of the decision to not renew Voss. Williams has stated publicly that the decision was unanimous. And the new ticket has now stated publicly that they want more "Football" people on the Board - with that major Football person being Lethal, who has previously indicated that he wouldn't be joining the Board, but now is only willing to join the Board on another ticket, sans- Johnson.

Put it this way - seems fairly straight forward to me that that the new ticket has not been formed because of the "unpopularity" of the Voss decision. Otherwise, the new ticket would be running a "Bring Back Voss" campaign, and they ain't.

With respect, I don't think that's clear at all. It seems to be a collection of loosely connected, possible reasons, none of which deal with specific policies for the club going forward.

I agree with having more football people on the board, but ideally I'd like to hear a bit more detail from the opposition ticket on how that will lead to better decision-making from the club, rather than just assuming that it will.

Maybe the new ticket hasn't been formed because of the unpopularity of the Voss decision, but it certainly stands to benefit from it.

 

[WhiteLionFeva]

Sounds to me like he isn't writing his own material, in which case he needs to change advisers. Smells like the sort of letter a bad lawyer would draft. The let's list all the good points for our case type letter except that they aren't good points at all. You only have to listen to the interview Julian Burnside SC gave about do we want our society to be seen to support bullying to realise how bad legal advice can be, even from otherwise competent counsel.
I would rather Angus leave his tired political statements to the EGM when he'll no doubt need them.

 

[adey115]

This is pure speculation, but I wonder if Johnson had suggested to the rest of the board that he had information that Roos was a good chance to take the job before the decision on Voss, and then his language softened afterwards.

If that was the case then you could understand why some board members might feel manipulated.

I reckon that is spot on.

 

[POBT]

My overriding impression of Johnson is that he is a flawed communicator.

Which makes it incredibly difficult from outside to work out what his other strengths and weaknesses are.

 

[Ironmonger]

Which makes it incredibly difficult from outside to work out what his other strengths and weaknesses are.

Exactly.

 

[Hollow Knight]

Angus seems to be sticking to the theme that the decision at board level is a choice between the "popular" option (Matthews) and the "right" option (presumably himself).

Ignoring how politically naive that view is for a second, he is doing a terrible job so far at making a clear case that he is the "right" option.

 

[Betty Noir]

Angus seems to be sticking to the theme that the decision at board level is a choice between the "popular" option (Matthews) and the "right" option (presumably himself).

Ignoring how politically naive that view is for a second, he is doing a terrible job so far at making a clear case that he is the "right" option.

He's taken the adversity breeds success to whole new strata. I'm thinking, instability breeds contempt is more accurate. I feel like he's being played. Egged on by his own people perhaps? Overcome by the warm glow that comes with heading up the outfit.

 

[Ceebee]

Just reading the writeup on the AFL website about the EGM. The club denies receiving a lot of things this year.
The Lion's Roar says it offered Johnson the same opportunity, but the club denies receiving the invitation.

Lift your game Angus ,stop denying and actually do something positive.