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

 

[PonsfordMagpie]

The Korda appointment still puzzles me. Until a week or two before the announcement, most people thought Murphy would be appointed. Korda appears to have been a late bolter. Did Christine Holgate have the casting vote? She was leading the selection panel.

Korda has been on the board a long time. So long in fact, that it is impossible for him not to be connected to recruiting, salary cap and race issues. Murphy is very well regarded both internally and externally and does not carry the baggage of long tenure on "Eddie's" board.

It sounds as if the board wasn't all that keen on Browne. He certainly wasn't sounded out from what I can gather. Perhaps too close to Eddie?
The fact that Craig Kelly and Peter Moore strongly supported Browne though, is the interesting bit. Why are they so strong? Perhaps they see Browne as a completely new broom. He's certainly known as a strong, well connected, AFL-respected and well credentialed businessman. He's also a footy man.

Browne wants to be involved and there is talk he wants to be president. Eddie though doesn't want a spill and presumably wants the club to stick with its decision.

Only 100 signatures are needed to force an EGM. I can't see it not happening to be honest. The way our season is going, perhaps a complete clean-out wouldn't be such a bad thing.

I would have preferred Murphy as well, but I'm willing to give Korda a chance first before completely writing him off.

Browne is a proxy for McGuire. Kelly (Buckley's manager) endorsing him raises alarm bells for me.

Not sure if it's 100 signatures. I've read elsewhere that you need 5% of social club member signatures to trigger an EGM. That roughly equates to 750 social club members out of 15,000 members in that category.

 

[swoop42]

Hard to believe Ed would be against an EGM if one of his best mates is the reason behind it.

Perhaps I'm jaded but it sounds like more a case of him setting up some plausible deniability and making himself appear impartial before questions are inevitably asked about Browne and his independence from McGuire in fulfilling any position.

 

[Markfs]

The Korda appointment still puzzles me. Until a week or two before the announcement, most people thought Murphy would be appointed. Korda appears to have been a late bolter. Did Christine Holgate have the casting vote? She was leading the selection panel.

Korda has been on the board a long time. So long in fact, that it is impossible for him not to be connected to recruiting, salary cap and race issues. Murphy is very well regarded both internally and externally and does not carry the baggage of long tenure on "Eddie's" board.

It sounds as if the board wasn't all that keen on Browne. He certainly wasn't sounded out from what I can gather. Perhaps too close to Eddie?
The fact that Craig Kelly and Peter Moore strongly supported Browne though, is the interesting bit. Why are they so strong? Perhaps they see Browne as a completely new broom. He's certainly known as a strong, well connected, AFL-respected and well credentialed businessman. He's also a footy man.

Browne wants to be involved and there is talk he wants to be president. Eddie though doesn't want a spill and presumably wants the club to stick with its decision.

Only 100 signatures are needed to force an EGM. I can't see it not happening to be honest. The way our season is going, perhaps a complete clean-out wouldn't be such a bad thing.

The worse thing that can happen is to have people on the board who are being dictated to by people outside of the board.

If Browne really wants to do it, I would think he should be pushing it to go for a members vote. if he can win the popularity contest, he will have something that not even Eddie has ever had - a win by an election. I dont think Korda can win a popular vote for a director's position.

The argument that browne is too close to eddie is ridiculous considering korda was placed on the board by eddie.

 

[Apples]

I think you'll find Eddie was elected by the members on 29 October 1998.

 

[Markfs]

I think you'll find Eddie was elected by the members on 29 October 1998.

i dont think he had anyone opposing him... or the rest of his ticket

 

[Markfs]

I think you'll find Eddie was elected by the members on 29 October 1998.

I think this indicates that he was gifted the board seats on the strength of the EGM. Interesting that the members had to change the rules to allow Waislitz on the board because he wasn't even a social club member.

15 years of Eddie

Collingwoodfc.com.au has compiled a series of notes, quotes and photos that celebrate Eddie McGuire's contribution to the Black and White.

www.collingwoodfc.com.au

“People will have to be accountable, but our main focus is the need to start winning games again, and some tough decisions have to be made and will be made. At the end of the day it doesn't matter if you've got the best marketing and the best sponsors, unless you win when you go out and play football,” – Eddie McGuire, 29 October 1998.

“From now on, let there be a clear message go out to the opposition and to us, that only the best from now on will be accepted at Collingwood. There will be no more mates' rates, or anything like that; people will be accountable and we are really going to start to make things happen off the ground,” - Eddie McGuire, 29 October 1998.

“The culture has got to be only the best for Collingwood. I reckon Collingwood accepts defeat far too easily and accepts mediocrity far too easily,” – Eddie McGuire, The Age, 29 October 1998.

“I don’t think that I have got all the answers, by any stretch of the imagination. My philosophy has always been that you get the best people around you and that gives you the best chance. I’ve been in the lucky situation for the last 15 years where I’ve not only been able to watch but to analyse everyone in football. I think I have a reasonable idea of who is alright. At the end of the say I think we’ve picked up a couple of gems. The next step is to pick up a few more who can play!” – Eddie McGuire, In Black and White Magazine, March 1999.

 

[Apples]

Quote from the Herald Sun a few weeks ago. Article written by Mick Warner

"The nuclear option to force an emergency general meeting via 100 member signatures remains a possibility, meaning the 90,000 paid-up Collingwood fans could yet get the chance to endorse a board and president of their own choice.

But Galbally says an EGM can be avoided if Korda and Co “see the light of day and realise we can’t keep going the way we have been going”.

“A number of board members need to resign and there needs to be a whole new group of people who can step up and go on the board as fresh faces. And absolutely Jeff Browne should lead that,” he says.

“If they don’t, then you’ll need members to speak out and continually speak out. And if it comes to an EGM, then it comes to an EGM.”

 

[76woodenspooners]

Gets his hands dirty ? as a board of director under the McGuire led administration, Korda as a glorified Chartered accountant with his field of so called speciality, where did he get the job done with our woeful salary cap mismanagement !

Salary cap management (or mismanagement) has nothing to do with the finance folks. That’s the job of the list management folks.

 

[Markfs]

Salary cap management (or mismanagement) has nothing to do with the finance folks. That’s the job of the list management folks.

You would think that the board knew of the strategy of retaining players at any cost, in order to keep alive our contention for a premiership. The board should have known about the back-ending of treloar's contract and the strategy to pay phillips which eventually ended up in him being overpaid..... they may not have made the decision to do it, but they should have at least been aware of it, and the risks involved. It had club wide implications. The sale of players was a likely outcome and the board should have known about it. I agree with the football manager being given the authority to run football as he sees fit, but it doesnt mean that the board just covers its eyes to the football side. I said this before. I think eddie was the only one on the board who was engaged with what was happening on the footy side. The rest just trusted in eddie because he was the one that installed them in their board positions

 

[Mike Olotripo]

Browne is definitely not an Eddie McGuire proxy but his own man who wants to see the fortunes of our football club change somewhat.

It is interesting to note that Jeff Browne was the man who helped orchestrate the move of both Peter Moore and Kelvin Templeton to Melbourne in 1983 as well.

 

[76woodenspooners]

You would think that the board knew of the strategy of retaining players at any cost, in order to keep alive our contention for a premiership.

I don’t think anybody has a problem with the strategy? If the strategy had delivered Premiership(s), nobody would be complaining?

The board should have known about the back-ending of treloar's contract and the strategy to pay phillips which eventually ended up in him being overpaid..... they may not have made the decision to do it, but they should have at least been aware of it, and the risks involved.

Sure, but what’s the problem? There are always risks involved in every footy decision from recruiting to training, to team selection, to game strategy.

It had club wide implications. The sale of players was a likely outcome and the board should have known about it.

Well, we couldn’t afford players under the salary cap anymore ... so we offloaded them. I don’t see the problem?

One thing our board wouldn’t have been able to see coming was the contraction of the salary cap by 9% due to Covid. That probably forced the issue. The club have told us that their actions has put Collingwood in a great position relative to other clubs In the coming years. Seems very plausible.

I agree with the football manager being given the authority to run football as he sees fit, but it doesnt mean that the board just covers its eyes to the football side. I said this before. I think eddie was the only one on the board who was engaged with what was happening on the footy side. The rest just trusted in eddie because he was the one that installed them in their board positions

Do you have evidence that Licuria didon’t know what was going on?

The rest probably stayed out of footy matters because they are smart and know better than as a board to get involved in operational decisions?

 

[Matrix10]

Salary cap management (or mismanagement) has nothing to do with the finance folks. That’s the job of the list management folks.

Yes I understand that 76, yet as a board director and chartered accountant with the reputation as one of the finest in the country , he would have had some basic idea of the happenings, or should have, with the over paying of new recruits and the current listed players with over inflated contract amounts and lengths, from what I understand, the General manager of Football, Geoff Walsh, reports to the board, and the board ratify the strategic direction of the organisation, so in finality , The board is responsible for the overall governance and has the ultimate accountability for it`s activity and performance.

 

[76woodenspooners]

Yes I understand that 76, yet as a board director and chartered accountant with the reputation as one of the finest in the country , he would have had some basic idea of the happenings, or should have, with the over paying of new recruits and the current listed players with over inflated contract amounts and lengths, from what I understand, the General manager of Football, Geoff Walsh, reports to the board, and the board ratify the strategic direction of the organisation, so in finality , The board is responsible for the overall governance and has the ultimate accountability for it`s activity and performance.

Given that the senior men’s team made it to a GF, a PF, and a SF, that implies that the board did alright? Add to that our AFLW team finally reaching finals, and a Premiership for our VFLW girls ... our club hasn’t been the total basket case that some folks seem to believe?

 

[unplugged]

I heard it was a female.

Holgate? Conflict of interest... is it out Tag Heuer sponsorship?

 

[Markfs]

I don’t think anybody has a problem with the strategy? If the strategy had delivered Premiership(s), nobody would be complaining?



Sure, but what’s the problem? There are always risks involved in every footy decision from recruiting to training, to team selection, to game strategy.



Well, we couldn’t afford players under the salary cap anymore ... so we offloaded them. I don’t see the problem?

One thing our board wouldn’t have been able to see coming was the contraction of the salary cap by 9% due to Covid. That probably forced the issue. The club have told us that their actions has put Collingwood in a great position relative to other clubs In the coming years. Seems very plausible.



Do you have evidence that Licuria didon’t know what was going on?

The rest probably stayed of of footy matters because they are smart and know better than as a board to get involved in operational decisions?

I dont disagree with what you're saying here. My post was about list management "having nothing to do with finance" and its implication that Korda would have nothing to do with it because of his job as a glorified accountant. And while there are risks associated with everything in the game, I would argue that the oversight of the footy decisions by directors who are supposed to be steering the longterm welfare of the club, was questionable. I'm not privy to how board level is supposed to interact with operational side at an AFL club, but I do wonder why we have a board, if the strategy is to load up bigtime and take the "all or nothing" approach to a premiership.

As for your comment about dealing with longterm salary cap issues, I've heard that one too. Excuse me if I dont believe anyone in public life these days except maybe for ash barty and the dalai lama...

 

[Markfs]

not about korda but about the man that he replaced, rupertnews has eddie wanting the blues to overpay tayla harris next year, on the basis of the promotion that she brings to the sport.

just another example of eddie having his finger in the pie of things that he doesnt have a stake in... in some ways, I think he might be trying to undermine carlton by stirring up issues with the rest of the carlton women's players.

we dont need someone like this as our next president.....we need steady as she goes...oversight of the club but let the football side run the footy.

 

[jackcass]

This is a good read.

How Collingwood fell from grand finalists to cellar-dwellers in three years

In 2018, Collingwood was a kick away from a premiership. In 2021, the Pies find themselves only one spot away from the bottom of the ladder. Cody Atkinson and Sean Lawson chart their dramatic slide.

www.abc.net.au

 

[jathanas]

This is a good read.

How Collingwood fell from grand finalists to cellar-dwellers in three years

In 2018, Collingwood was a kick away from a premiership. In 2021, the Pies find themselves only one spot away from the bottom of the ladder. Cody Atkinson and Sean Lawson chart their dramatic slide.

www.abc.net.au

But sack Buckley!!!

Apologies, I shouldn't be fuelling the fire. The article explains the situation and the journey ahead of the club. It has a mountain to climb.

 

[jackcass]

But sack Buckley!!!

Apologies, I shouldn't be fuelling the fire. The article explains the situation and the journey ahead of the club. It has a mountain to climb.

Determining who should steer the team through that is part of the climb.

 

[Markfs]

I didnt say earlier that it was a good move by korda to apologise to lumumba and treloar. He should probably apologise for the virus and global warming too. Eddie could never grasp the simple process of saying a few words of apology to make everyone feel better. I think it was his broady days. Words are cheap and if you practice a few times in the mirror, you can sound like you mean it. The problem, of course, is that the damage has been done and we've had the foxarazzi at the club's throat for the last year over both issues. If this board or the next one should learn, is the value of the apology.

 

[76woodenspooners]

My post was about list management "having nothing to do with finance" and its implication that Korda would have nothing to do with it because of his job as a glorified accountant.

But I don’t think list management has anything to do with finance?

It’s like comparing the concept of “money” to the concept of “value”. Finance folks deal with money ... cash flow, balance sheets, debt, loans, expenses, income. As for the specific value of what that money is spent on? They have no idea. And in Korda’s case he doesn’t even pretend to understand the value of footy players and the contracts that they’re on.

We wouldn’t expect the finance director to have any idea whether Grundy is worth a seven year contract (or not). So why are we blaming the finance guy for our salary cap situation? It doesn’t make any sense.

 

[Markfs]

But I don’t think list management has anything to do with finance?

It’s like comparing the concept of “money” to the concept of “value”. Finance folks deal with money ... cash flow, balance sheets, debt, loans, expenses, income. As for the specific value of what that money is spent on? They have no idea. And in Korda’s case he doesn’t even pretend to understand the value of footy players and the contracts that they’re on.

We wouldn’t expect the finance director to have any idea whether Grundy is worth a seven year contract (or not). So why are we blaming the finance guy for our salary cap situation? It doesn’t make any sense.

you missed my point. It's irrelevant that he's an accountant. He's on the board. It's their job to oversee the process. The news from the Age is that the board acutally pressured Ned to get beams and give the huge contract to grundy. Now we all know that means Ed, but Korda is a big boy.... he takes responsibility for the board meddling in the footy aspects.

 

[MarkT2]

I think you'll find Eddie was elected by the members on 29 October 1998.

And made sure he appointed every board member since, including Korda.

 

[MarkT2]

Salary cap management (or mismanagement) has nothing to do with the finance folks. That’s the job of the list management folks.

There are no vacumes. The board is responsible for the people in charge of making all the decisions, including the list manager even if only via the appointment of the footy department head if they don't do it directly.

In our case in particular we had a report telling us the salary cap was the number one priority. Not only did we not correct the situation we extended Treloar and Grundy and made it much worse. The board is ultimately accountable for allowing that.

In any event, just in a pure financial sense, on field performance is a huge driver of revenue so everything connected to lists and results is financial.

Bottom line is the board has failed dismally and none of them should be there 1 day longer.

 

[76woodenspooners]

There are no vacumes. The board is responsible for the people in charge of making all the decisions, including the list manager even if only via the appointment of the footy department head if they don't do it directly.

Agree

In our case in particular we had a report telling us the salary cap was the number one priority. Not only did we not correct the situation we extended Treloar and Grundy and made it much worse. The board is ultimately accountable for allowing that.

That salary cap thing was at a board presentation of the Murphy / Walsh report at the end of 2017.

Now if you could magically go back in time to that board meeting at the end of 2017 and a make recommendations with the benefit of hindsight ...

... the “You really need to get on top of the salary cap” wouldn’t be in your top 3, probably wouldn’t even be in your top 20.