Toast Presidency and The Board

[jathanas]

Thank you 76woodenspooners

One of BigFooty’s all-time-favourite posters, Reykjavik , was all across the board level stuff. He once posted a list of the responsibilities of a Not-For-Profit board like that of Collingwood …

abcdef.....ijklmnop

NFP board responsibilities
Specific responsibilities of a not-for-profit (NFP) board include:

• Driving the strategic direction of the organisation
• Working with the CEO to enable the organisation to obtain the resources, funds and personnel necessary to implement the organisation's strategic objectives
• Implementing, maintaining and (as necessary) refining a system of good governance that is appropriate for the organisation
• Reviewing reports and monitoring the performance of the organisation
• Regularly reviewing the board's structure and composition, so that these are appropriate for the organisation
• Appointing – and managing the performance of – a suitable CEO
• Succession planning for the CEO

While the above points are also applicable to for-profit boards, NFP boards also face a unique range of issues, such as:

• Difficulties in defining and measuring organisational effectiveness
• Transgression of role boundaries
• The negative impact of the structural compositions of some NFP boards, including those arising from representative models
• Funding dependencies and constraints

In practice, the role of the board is to supervise an organisation's business in two broad areas:

1. Overall business performance - ensuring the organisation develops and implements strategies and supporting policies to enable it to fulfill the objectives set out in the organisation's constitution. The board delegates the day to day management of the organisation but remains accountable to the shareholders for the organisation's performance. The board monitors and supports management in an on-going way.
2. Overall compliance performance - ensuring the organisation develops and implements systems to enable it to comply with its legal and policy obligations (complying with statutes such as the Corporations Act 2001, adhering to accounting standards) and ensure the organisation's assets are protected through appropriate risk management.

http://www.companydirectors.com.au/...ctor/NFP-governance/The-role-of-the-NFP-board

Link to original post …

Side by Side with Reykjavik - RIP (re-read Rey's message to us all #108, pg 5)

Reyk, I'm ridiculously happy to see you posting! :)

www.bigfooty.com

 

[PIEWITHSAUCE]

Does the plan include Flags or Diversity and Equity?

It includes bold diversity.

 

[Markfs]

This is a moot discussion because we won’t get a say regardless of the policies, IMO. Playing it out though are you angling towards the posters or candidates?

If it’s the candidates both should be building their platform on a basis of strong governance, connection to head office and their vision for the future. Where they differ is Korda should be preaching stability at a time when there’s already been a lot of movement and Browne should be proclaiming himself as an agent of change. I suspect on the basis of those two policies there’s wiggle room for both to have a sack or keep the coach stance once this is all said and done. If I were them I wouldn’t be commenting on the coaching position publicly because it’s a fools gambit and I think they’re both smart enough to not reveal their true intentions on that front.

In regards to posters wanting to hear that well that says more about them than the candidates. I don’t want ours to be a club where the members can decide the future of the senior coach. I mean have you seen the quality of football IQ on here?...

well korda has been preaching stability and proceeding with the filling of casual vacancies etc....and browne has probably said a few words about change.

I agree with what you say, but i asked the question because so many people are posting that the candidates should state their policies - critically, what is going to be done with buckley.

you would hope that people paying for legends memberships and above - if they are actually paying the money - would have a little more sense than people coming on here saying that they are collingwood supporters. I'm hoping that.

 

[gouki88]

There's a HS "exclusive" article from about 45mins ago relating to "Browne's bold plan"........might have a bit more info if it's not just clickbait. Behind paywall so I can't see it.

I've got a paywall bypass extension on my web browser.

Ex-Channel 9 boss Jeff Browne has declared his intention to take over the presidency of the Collingwood Football Club.

Speaking for the first time publicly about his bid to claim the top job at the Holden Centre, Browne, 66, said it was time for a “revitalised” direction at Australia’s most famous sporting club.

But in an attempt to avoid a bloody extraordinary general meeting, Browne, on Monday night told the Herald Sun he will first approach sitting Pies president Mark Korda to negotiate a peaceful handover.

Browne’s ticket will demand four of the club’s seven board seats and allow three current directors to stay.

“Collingwood is a great club and strong and united leadership is critical if we are to move beyond our current malaise,” Browne said.

“There is a growing wave of support from members for change and this change must begin with a refresh at board level.”

Should Browne’s takeover bid be rejected, his rebel group will sit back and wait for a group of members to force a spill of the board at an EGM.

“I am prepared to negotiate in good faith, which three members of the current board of directors are most suitable to contribute to a reconstituted board and some continuity of operational knowledge is desirable,” Browne said.

“The four new positions would include myself and three other high-quality candidates chosen specifically to provide the best overall mix and blend of skills and diversity. I would seek the endorsement of the new board to become the chairman and president.”

Browne said he had recently met with Korda seeking a position on the board, but the offer was rejected.

“In an effort to achieve change in the least disruptive manner, I intend to speak again with Mark Korda, to seek an immediate four vacancies on the board,” he said.

The chairman of investment bank Moelis Australia, Browne was the AFL’s external lawyer for almost two decades and is a close friend of ex-Magpies president Eddie McGuire.

His push for the Collingwood presidency gained momentum six weeks ago when player agent Craig Kelly, one of the most powerful figures in the game and a member of the club’s famous 1990 premiership team, publicly endorsed him as the right man to lead the Pies.

“I think Jeff Browne would be an outstanding president,” Kelly said.

“He knows footy, he sits on multiple boards and it’s a good balance after Ed (McGuire) and would be well received.


“Ed did amazing things for our club and the club needs to make sure that we get this sorted out quickly — and I believe Jeff would be a really good outcome.”

Korda last month insisted a board “coup” was “not in the best interests of the Collingwood Football Club” but pressure has continued to mount with the 16th placed Magpies registering just two wins from 11 games.

Since McGuire’s exit, the Pies have added Victoria Racing Club chairman Neil Wilson and former professional cyclist Bridie O’Donnell to the board.

Billionaire director Alex Waislitz quit his post as vice president last month.

Member David Hatley has already collected enough signatures to force a spill of the board.

 

[Markfs]

Wow.
Just wow.
What a disgusting comment.
This is how you judge people.
If I said anything about women or black people or transgender I would be banned before I knew it.
But to openly hate a person because they support Trump is totally acceptable.
This is not liberally minded, it is a facist attitude.
Liberally minded people accept differing thoughts vs accepting thoughts that are trendy.

omg i was disgusted too. Calling someone a trump supporter. Jmac needs to learn to be more sociable like Domie and call comments moronic....far nicer

 

[No SPIN]

Can those opposing Brown based on his close association with ED be specific about their concerns.

Ed ultimately fell on his sword, and his critics will rightly point out to unwise public statements being his biggest downfall.
Those issues aside, he has had a very positive influence as President.
So if Browne shares a vision for CFC, similar to the ED in respect of driving the club fwd as has occurred in the last 20 years, then where's the issue?

 

[MyManLynch]

No issue from me.
Assume some are scared that Ed will be the puppet master (smoke & shadows behind the window)

 

[Markfs]

The biggest problem with Maguire was that he thought that he knew all the answers...

Example number 1. to illustrate my point, think of hawthorn. Premiership coach with an assistant who is annointed as successor. Club doesnt try to force it, and allows hawthorn members to come to a point a view that maybe it's time to move on to a new coach...

Maguire's thinking is to bypass the wait because he knows better. He thinks he can cut out the downtime and just transition to a new coach and he doesnt even consider what the members are thinking. End result, a large part of the membership never accepts the decision.

Example number 2. Salary cap. Maguire never tells the membership that salary is being delayed to future years to assist in player retention. The crap hits the fan and everyone doesnt understand the original thinking. Another example of eddie knows best when he doesn't.

Example number 3. Eddie appoints board members and convinces members it's good for unity. Doesnt understand that members will lose connection to club. Another example of Eddie not showing empathy....

 

[peter9789]

The biggest problem with Maguire was that he thought that he knew all the answers...

Example number 1. to illustrate my point, think of hawthorn. Premiership coach with an assistant who is annointed as successor. Club doesnt try to force it, and allows hawthorn members to come to a point a view that maybe it's time to move on to a new coach...

Maguire's thinking is to bypass the wait because he knows better. He thinks he can cut out the downtime and just transition to a new coach and he doesnt even consider what the members are thinking. End result, a large part of the membership never accepts the decision.

Example number 2. Salary cap. Maguire never tells the membership that salary is being delayed to future years to assist in player retention. The crap hits the fan and everyone doesnt understand the original thinking. Another example of eddie knows best when he doesn't.

Example number 3. Eddie appoints board members and convinces members it's good for unity. Doesnt understand that members will lose connection to club. Another example of Eddie not showing empathy....

Some good points here.

We could write a book about Ed's failings, but his positive contributions still outweigh the negative.

The behaviours you describe above are a refelction on Ed (or any board member) being there for too long. They see the club as their 'plaything' to share with their inner circle.

I'm hoping when Brown gets on the board (not if, but when) he puts terms limits in place for the Presidents role at the very least

 

[jimmy35]

Here we go, let’s strap in for the ride. Keep your arms and legs inside at all times.

 

[swoop42]

You want the candidates to nominate whether there will be a change of coach....

Korda has already stated that he will defer to the recommendation of Wright on the coaching issue so we seemingly know where he stands.

Browne needs to clarify at the very least whether he will simply follow suit and make the decision based on the advice of Wright or whether he will listen to Wright but ultimately it will be him and the board that decides.

If it's the latter does Browne really need to tiptoe around the issue of Buckley any longer?

Browne has been involved within AFL circles for decades, Buckley is in his 10th season and our season is over at 2-9.

What more evidence does he need to gather before providing his opinion?

To me it's pretty simple and Browne will either re-sign Buckley despite the coach heading towards his worst season on record or he will use it as the catalyst for change.

I've already noticed that a lot of people frothing at the mouth at the thought of Browne are often also ones hoping for a change of coach.

To those people I say, what if Browne has no intention of even deferring to Wright and is determined to re-sign Buckley?

Would that change your opinion of him and vote? Most likely it would for those who hope Buckley continues as coach.

To me it seems clear that the decision on Buckley (whether for or against) will be at the forefront of peoples mind before casting their vote and if Browne were to state his intention is to retain Buckley prior to any EGM then the outcome might be much closer than he thinks. Hell if another candidate like Murphy or Licuria were to emerge and declare an intention to move Buckley on they might well beat all comers.

Personally I just feel the members can only be truly informed on who they're voting for if the candidates declare their intention on a decision that will ultimately impact the clubs medium term future more than any other.

Is that really to much to ask?

 

[mike123]

Ricotta cannoli

This guy gets it

 

[Carringbush2010]

Get rid of Eddie everybody said...what was the plan I ask those buffoons? We are in very dangerous waters as a result!

There should have been a plan and clear alternative.

Where we are is not a result of Ed leaving, it's a result of years of incompetence from the club at governance level. You'd be either naive or ignorant to believe this all of a sudden happened coz Ed left.

 

[Markfs]

Some good points here.

We could write a book about Ed's failings, but his positive contributions still outweigh the negative.

The behaviours you describe above are a refelction on Ed (or any board member) being there for too long. They see the club as their 'plaything' to share with their inner circle.

I'm hoping when Brown gets on the board (not if, but when) he puts terms limits in place for the Presidents role at the very least

While I dont disagree entirely with you, I think it's got more to do with Eddie thinking that he can make the right decisions for the club.... and he showed that right from the start. He didnt have to be there 10 or 20 years to show it.

Personally, I think it might be an advantage to have a president who has eddie onside... He has contacts and his support would be an assistance. As long as we dont have him speaking for the club....as per the guernsey episode.

 

[pietoon]

To say Browne is not suitable to lead us out of this mess, that Korda is partly responsible for putting us in, because he is mates with Eddie is nothing but Naive.

Browne is an astute inclusive operator with great business acumen, with a law degree, that the AFL commission used in their time of need, in fact so competent that a lot of Melbourne clubs where pushing for him to become a commissioner.

He is exactly what we need right now, and we will be very lucky to have him to lead us in this time of need, and I very much look forward to have him leading us back to where we belong, the greatest sporting franchise in Australia.

 

[Markfs]

Korda has already stated that he will defer to the recommendation of Wright on the coaching issue so we seemingly know where he stands.

Browne needs to clarify at the very least whether he will simply follow suit and make the decision based on the advice of Wright or whether he will listen to Wright but ultimately it will be him and the board that decides.

If it's the latter does Browne really need to tiptoe around the issue of Buckley any longer?

Browne has been involved within AFL circles for decades, Buckley is in his 10th season and our season is over at 2-9.

What more evidence does he need to gather before providing his opinion?

To me it's pretty simple and Browne will either re-sign Buckley despite the coach heading towards his worst season on record or he will use it as the catalyst for change.

I've already noticed that a lot of people frothing at the mouth at the thought of Browne are often also ones hoping for a change of coach.

To those people I say, what if Browne has no intention of even deferring to Wright and is determined to re-sign Buckley?

Would that change your opinion of him and vote? Most likely it would for those who hope Buckley continues as coach.

To me it seems clear that the decision on Buckley (whether for or against) will be at the forefront of peoples mind before casting their vote and if Browne were to state his intention is to retain Buckley prior to any EGM then the outcome might be much closer than he thinks. Hell if another candidate like Murphy or Licuria were to emerge and declare an intention to move Buckley on they might well beat all comers.

Personally I just feel the members can only be truly informed on who they're voting for if the candidates declare their intention on a decision that will ultimately impact the clubs medium term future more than any other.

Is that really to much to ask?

i agree with what you say about browne and the fact that he should state his methodology for determining the coach next year. In fact, it should be a methodology for all appointments. Something like

1. GW determines coach and goes to board for ratification
2. GW asssembles names and goes and presents to board and board determines
3. Board determines coach.
4. Browne asks Eddie

 

[Markfs]

The Age reporting that one of Browne’ team will be a women. If Sizer and Holgate remain, we will have a 4:3 split. Not bad.

We also need someone from the LGBTI community.

are you throwing your hat in the ring?.....(please excuse the phrase)

 

[jackcass]

Where we are is not a result of Ed leaving, it's a result of years of incompetence from the club at governance level. You'd be either naive or ignorant to believe this all of a sudden happened coz Ed left.

Exactly what were these incidents of "incompetence from the club at governance level" to which you allude?

 

[jmac70]

are you throwing your hat in the ring?.....(please excuse the phrase)

I’m a fat,white, heterosexual male. My diversity is already well represented.

 

[NMBB]

i agree with what you say about browne and the fact that he should state his methodology for determining the coach next year. In fact, it should be a methodology for all appointments. Something like

1. GW determines coach and goes to board for ratification
2. GW asssembles names and goes and presents to board and board determines
3. Board determines coach.
4. Browne asks Eddie

1 Eddie calls Toorak conference
2 Lattes all round
3 Attendees vote
4 Eddie counts votes
5 Votes not what Eddie wants
6 New vote
7 Dayne Beams runs workshop
8 Everyone leaves
9 Nathan arrives
10 Ed re-appoints Nathan for 15 years

 

[frizzle]

Can those opposing Brown based on his close association with ED be specific about their concerns.

Ed ultimately fell on his sword, and his critics will rightly point out to unwise public statements being his biggest downfall.
Those issues aside, he has had a very positive influence as President.
So if Browne shares a vision for CFC, similar to the ED in respect of driving the club fwd as has occurred in the last 20 years, then where's the issue?

The issue with Ed was he had a bit of a jobs for the boys policy. I think at one stage we had Lockyer, Pebbles & Burns all in the footy department.
Then Taz, Johnno & Presti working at the club in some form.
We have given them a wonderful opportunity as players at our club, but we don't owe them anything afterwards. Get the best people available.
If Browne is just like Ed, then I'm sure Pendles will be our head coach within 3 or 4 years after doing being an assistant at the pies as well. Because that's our form under Ed.

I understand Ed's need to help former pies & it's a noble trait for sure. But it can't be at the expense of the club moving forward with the best people that we can bring to the club. I don't want more of that. We need to be independent, bold & bring the best coaches from wherever they are in the country. Look outside the box & not inside the heart.

 

[barrackers]

A lot of pondering, but nonetheless an interesting article. One piece of news though is that the current board is united in rejecting Browne's proposal.

All we know about Jeff Browne’s Pies coup is that he wants to be in charge

Jeff Browne’s only public declaration so far is that he wants the top job, but not what he will do if he is voted in. It is a glaring omission.

www.theage.com.au

In what he has crafted as an olive branch to the current board to try to avoid a bloody election, Browne has said he would wish to keep a few of the current board and bring in just a few of his own people.

The board will on Wednesday unanimously reject this proposal in a declaration signed by each member.

Browne will then be forced to find not just three fellow board members but an entire ticket. He may already have a ticket ready to go and is waiting on their response before declaring who is on his ticket. But he has not said so. There is much he has yet to say.

 

[Carringbush2010]

This is a moot discussion because we won’t get a say regardless of the policies, IMO. Playing it out though are you angling towards the posters or candidates?

If it’s the candidates both should be building their platform on a basis of strong governance, connection to head office and their vision for the future. Where they differ is Korda should be preaching stability at a time when there’s already been a lot of movement and Browne should be proclaiming himself as an agent of change. I suspect on the basis of those two policies there’s wiggle room for both to have a sack or keep the coach stance once this is all said and done. If I were them I wouldn’t be commenting on the coaching position publicly because it’s a fools gambit and I think they’re both smart enough to not reveal their true intentions on that front.

In regards to posters wanting to hear that well that says more about them than the candidates. I don’t want ours to be a club where the members can decide the future of the senior coach. I mean have you seen the quality of football IQ on here?...

If either of them are smart, which I suspect they are, they'll publicly state that any football matters will be decided on the advice of the footy boss GW. Not bluntly 'I'll sack / retain Nathan'.

That would give the voting members and the broader fan base much confidence in their preferred prez. As a side note on the Buckley call, IMV the numbers are against an extension for Buckley as far as the fan base is concerned. So on that my money is whoever retains their position on the board will go on the recommendations of GW for footy matters.

My guess is that GW will not be recommending an extension, if he does then there is absolutely no alternative and a successful rebuild is unlikely going on history of Bucks's tenure.

 

[HFF]

If they reject this proposal, perfect--they can all go.
EGM it is

 

[Billys Back]

This guy gets it

in fact can't think of anything more representative of diversity as a cannoli. Choc filled one half, ricotta the other with a sprinkling of peeled candied fruit running through it.
Covering black/white and non-binary/fluid etc. All in the one cannoli.

 

[jackcass]

If either of them are smart, which I suspect they are, they'll publicly state that any football matters will be decided on the advice of the footy boss GW. Not bluntly 'I'll sack / retain Nathan'.

That would give the voting members and the broader fan base much confidence in their preferred prez. As a side note on the Buckley call, IMV the numbers are against an extension for Buckley as far as the fan base is concerned. So on that my money is whoever retains their position on the board will go on the recommendations of GW for footy matters.

My guess is that GW will not be recommending an extension, if he does then there is absolutely no alternative and a successful rebuild is unlikely going on history of Bucks's tenure.

Korda has already said as much.