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

 

[jackcass]

The fact that he’s said “540-800K” means that somebody is guessing.

Besides, we’ll lose Greenwood, and probably Mayne and Cox ... would have thought that would clear it up

Coincidence that the upper end of that aligns with the Beams payout.... I think not.

 

[jackcass]

We were within the salary cap. If we weren’t we’d be in trouble with the AFL as per Adelaide with Tippett / Carlton’s brown paper bags.



That’s one way of looking at it.

Another way of looking at it is: We got within a kick of the 2018 Premiership. How do we get better so we can win it the next year? We’ve got a Premiership player, club captain who wants to come and play for us - but we need to juggle the finances to afford him (ie: backend Treloar’s contract).

Or do we take pick 17 in the draft? (+ 2020 first round pick into the draft). I didn’t see anybody at the time say that this was the better option and make it more likely to deliver immediate Premiership(s).



You think we shouldn’t have gone after the 2019 and 2020 Premierships? You think we should have just played it safe and taken players in the draft? You think we should just be a middling team, not take any risks?



The salary cap contracted due to COVID. Clubs didn’t have the cap space to be able to afford Treloar’s contract.

COVID made it a buyers market.

We took a punt and we lost. sh*t happens.

But that’s better than playing it safe and not taking a punt at all ... like I say, what the fans expect.

I did...

But I say the same about just about every potential trade.

 

[jackcass]

Geelong bought a much better player then Treloar. They even got 2 other good players.

Covid had nothing to do with our mis management. No other team gave away players for nothing.

And the retirements of Taylor, Ablett and Steven's freed up salary cap with to do it. There's always balance.

 

[76woodenspooners]

Covid had nothing to do with our mis management. No other team gave away players for nothing.

... yet.

Let’s see how things go this trade period

Geelong bought a much better player then Treloar. They even got 2 other good players.

Covid had nothing to do with our mis management. No other team gave away players for nothing.

Clearly as far as Moneyballing goes we didn’t do as well as some teams ... but that’s not the role of the board.

 

[makethat2]

... yet.

Let’s see how things go this trade period

So your really just guessing?

 

[MyManLynch]

So your really just guessing?

Does anyone know? Apart from the clubs.

 

[76woodenspooners]

So your really just guessing?

No.

I’m going the comments made by Ed last trade period ...

The AFL circulate to the clubs a de-identified list of the salary cap positions of every club. Clubs can’t know from it the state of every other club, but they do know where they stand relative to everybody else (because they know which number is their’s). IIRC Ed in defence of our trade period mentioned that we were in the fourth best position ...

(and in the process of that he would have outed to every other club and player manager exactly what Collingwood’s salary cap status was ... but I digress)

... but his point was that a lot of other clubs are in bad positions, and the chickens will come to roost next trade period. I know that the media rumour-mill is contradicting some of this (including article below). Let’s see what happens.

FWIW there is an Age article from back in March that discusses some of the detail around this ...

Salary cap score: the AFL clubs that do and don’t have room

At least five AFL clubs appear well-placed with their salary caps heading into 2022, but the bulk of clubs have relatively little space.

www.theage.com.au

 

[The Royal Sampler]

... yet.

Let’s see how things go this trade period



Clearly as far as Moneyballing goes we didn’t do as well as some teams ... but that’s not the role of the board.

I think we do quite well at moneyballing. Darcy Cameron, Roughie, Crisp… all of them cheap or essentially throw ins. It’s when we really open up the cheque book that everything goes to hell!

 

[makethat2]

No.

I’m going the comments made by Ed last trade period ...

The AFL circulate to the clubs a de-identified list of the salary cap positions of every club. Clubs can’t know from it the state of every other club, but they do know where they stand relative to everybody else (because they know which number is their’s). IIRC Ed in defence of our trade period mentioned that we were in the fourth best position ...

(and in the process of that he would have outed to every other club and player manager exactly what Collingwood’s salary cap status was ... but I digress)

... but his point was that a lot of other clubs are in bad positions, and the chickens will come to roost next trade period. I know that the media rumour-mill is contradicting some of this (including article below). Let’s see what happens.

FWIW there is an Age article from back in March that discusses some of the detail around this ...

Salary cap score: the AFL clubs that do and don’t have room

At least five AFL clubs appear well-placed with their salary caps heading into 2022, but the bulk of clubs have relatively little space.

www.theage.com.au

Appreciate the effort and attaching the article.

As far as Ed goes, I personally just saw that as spin. Hope to be proven wrong.

 

[Masked Magician]

The more and more I think about this, the more I believe we need to wait until the end of the season, see what is done RE the coaching situation.
I don't want to overthrow the board If Korda and co have Clarkson lined up all for that to be pissed away with the new board.

Wait until the end of the year and if the current board renew Buckley then EGM has to happen.

 

[jackcass]

The more and more I think about this, the more I believe we need to wait until the end of the season, see what is done RE the coaching situation.
I don't want to overthrow the board If Korda and co have Clarkson lined up all for that to be pissed away with the new board.

Wait until the end of the year and if the current board renew Buckley then EGM has to happen.

Get to the end of the year and call an EGM, by the time it's held it's essentially time for the AGM which therefore begs the question why do we need an EGM?

 

[The Royal Sampler]

Get to the end of the year and call an EGM, by the time it's held it's essentially time for the AGM which therefore begs the question why do we need an EGM?

All positions voted on versus new positions/those up for renewal being votes upon?

 

[jackcass]

All positions voted on versus new positions/those up for renewal being votes upon?

Can be done at an AGM can't it?

 

[The Royal Sampler]

Can be done at an AGM can't it?

I dunno. Not my thing.

 

[brockbruiser]

Unless the current board can put some context into their mistakes then I'm for a takeover.

My biggest grievances are the handling of our salary cap resulting in the moving of players last year. You just don't see the kind of issues we had with other clubs, from the outside it's incredible mismanagement and until further context is provided I'm partially blaming Korda, a man who comes from the finance world with his business KordaMentha, who should have the expertise to know better.

If they can provide context regarding why these decisions were made, I may be swayed, but it would want to be compelling which I guess will be unlikely.

 

[DaVe86]

I'd love to be able to sit down with the list management team and get some detailed answers to some of the decisions from the past 3 years.

I have absolutely no issue with taking a punt on Dayne Beams, and doing everything possible to retain quality players. We were a kick of a premiership, and the club decided it had to keep the list together and add one more gun midfielder.

The questions I have more relate to:

1. How much homework did we do on Dayne Beams and were his issues known? And if they weren't known, how did we miss it?
2. Did we panic by signing Grundy for 7 years and paying overs for guys like Tom Langdon, Mason Cox etc.

Good sides in recent history have let talent walk. Think about Geelong with Ablett and Tim Kelly, Hawthorn with Buddy, GWS with Shiel, Adelaide with Dangerfield (year before they made the GF). All the above teams made a grand final the year after those players departed.

I don't have an issue with trying to keep the list together, and perhaps mortgaging our future salary cap in the hope of short term success. But I also wonder if we could've been tougher with our cap management and ultimately put a cap on how far we were willing to go. If 5 years was the most we wanted to go with GRundy, why did we concede on 7. We would've got 2-3 first rounders for him at the time if he walked.

Whilst you can take punts, you also need to develop a culture where players stay for the enviroment and for team success. If they want to hold the club ransom, then you need to let them go and cash in on their maximum trade value.

It definitely needs explanation. Sometimes decisions turn out wrong, but they were correct at the time based on the information at hand. No point judging in hindsight. You need to look at what the decisions were based on.

 

[Doc1763]

Did a vegetarian prepare our celery cap spreadsheet?

That explains everything!!

 

[MyManLynch]

Can be done at an AGM can't it?

 

[MyManLynch]

The term in office is 3 years.
So I guess only directors with their 3 year term due would be subject to a vote, unless there is a challenge from Browne, a spill, then all would be up for grabs.

 

[76woodenspooners]

The term in office is 3 years.
So I guess only directors with their 3 year term due would be subject to a vote, unless there is a challenge from Browne, a spill, then all would be up for grabs.

By my calculations the three seats that are up next AGM are Murphy (Came in at the start of 2019), Holgate (Came in at the start of 2016) and O’Donnell (By virtue of her seat needing to be ratified by the members)

I’ve lost track of when Ed’s seat (Now taken by Wilson) is due. Also not sure about Korda’s, but given that there is no chatter about our contentious President being up for re-election, I’m assuming it’s not this coming AGM.

Sizer and Licuria were re-elected at the start of this year.

 

[PonsfordMagpie]

I’ve lost track of when Ed’s seat (Now taken by Wilson) is due. Also not sure about Korda’s, but given that there is no chatter about our contentious President being up for re-election, I’m assuming it’s not this coming AGM.

Ed was re-elected unopposed at the February 2020 AGM.

That seat will be up for re-election in 2023.

 

[barrackers]

Friday - Buckley backs Korda, Monday - after months of discussion a decision was finalised that Buckley would step down, Wednesday - Buckley's mutually agreed departure announced.

Although Anderson said it was a football decision, Buckley was big on saying that there's been a lot of change at Collingwood, new president, new footy manager, now new coach. Whether it was the driver or not I suspect part of Buckley's reasoning was it ensure a stable Collingwood.

 

[partypie]

Ed was re-elected unopposed at the February 2020 AGM.

That seat will be up for re-election in 2023.

The seat should be up for grabs in a by-election this year imo, given that the incumbent has been sacked by the rest of the board.

That's the problem with our board - always looking after itself and still (ab)using the casual vacancy loophole to make whatever moves they want to make.

 

[MyManLynch]

The seat should be up for grabs in a by-election this year imo, given that the incumbent has been sacked by the rest of the board.

That's the problem with our board - always looking after itself and still (ab)using the casual vacancy loophole to make whatever moves they want to make.

It wasn’t a loophole...it’s a clause in the Clubs constitution.
It’s been used before.
Sure other Clubs have similar Constitutions.

 

[swoop42]

Fair to say this just got a lot more interesting.

Has Korda just snookered Browne or has he fallen into a trap and done Browne's dirty work for him?