If Paul Gardiner cannot find a way to attend his team's first match as president AND support a charity that he feels strongly about then I would have to question his aptitude for the job as a footy club president. It isn't so much that his presence would have made much difference to the result that matters. The fact that Melbourne acknowledge disunity and are trying to over come it, the fact they are and inch from bankruptcy and the fact they have a reputation, even if only based on perception, for a lack of passion all makes it vital that the president is 100% and that it is clear he would move mountains for his club. This is the impression you get from Eddie and plenty of others.
The furphy that starving children are more important than a game of football would be insulting to me if it was my club’s president. Sure starving kids is an emotive and unquestionably important issue. However I am absolutely positive that if Paul Gardiner attended that football match and otherwise contributed to the cause not a single child would have eaten a single grain less over their entire lifetime. That is the real perspective. Whatever benefit was obtained for OXFAM via Gardener’s participation could have been obtained via other means, even if it was a substituted walker or cash donation.
I don’t really have an issue with Gardiner making the choice he did. I would be disappointed if my club was in the same circumstances and my president made the same decision but that's for Melbourne members to decide and deal with. I am bemused by Gardiner's absolute refusal to acknowledge any merit in any of the arguments though. To bring it down to an argument about kids lives v a game of footy trivialises the job he has asked the members to vote him in for, the concerns of his members and the dire situation that he himself tells him members that the club is in. Add to that it also significantly overstates his personal contribution to saving the lives of children. Full credit for Gardiner for having a social conscience and full credit to him for doing something positive but if he couldn't achieve all that and attend the game he may not be right for the job IMO. That is a call impossible to make after 1 act though. I would be starting to worry just the same if I was a Melbourne member and I would be very annoyed that he ahs refused to acknowledge the concerns.
The furphy that starving children are more important than a game of football would be insulting to me if it was my club’s president. Sure starving kids is an emotive and unquestionably important issue. However I am absolutely positive that if Paul Gardiner attended that football match and otherwise contributed to the cause not a single child would have eaten a single grain less over their entire lifetime. That is the real perspective. Whatever benefit was obtained for OXFAM via Gardener’s participation could have been obtained via other means, even if it was a substituted walker or cash donation.
I don’t really have an issue with Gardiner making the choice he did. I would be disappointed if my club was in the same circumstances and my president made the same decision but that's for Melbourne members to decide and deal with. I am bemused by Gardiner's absolute refusal to acknowledge any merit in any of the arguments though. To bring it down to an argument about kids lives v a game of footy trivialises the job he has asked the members to vote him in for, the concerns of his members and the dire situation that he himself tells him members that the club is in. Add to that it also significantly overstates his personal contribution to saving the lives of children. Full credit for Gardiner for having a social conscience and full credit to him for doing something positive but if he couldn't achieve all that and attend the game he may not be right for the job IMO. That is a call impossible to make after 1 act though. I would be starting to worry just the same if I was a Melbourne member and I would be very annoyed that he ahs refused to acknowledge the concerns.