News ROTHSCHILD AND POWELL JOIN RICHMOND BOARD

[1980]

If you truly believe change is necessary,

This ^^^^ LMAO

No I believe that finishing 13th requires no change whatsoever

 

[Tiger71]

Why would anyone trust us campaigners on board selection
As a collective we're idiots, we'd select the next Trump

DrMike, I promised ill build a wall around Punt road! I thought you were keen to vote me .

 

[Tiger71]

I voted

I pleaded constantly with people on here to vote

I helped my old man vote from os to make sure his vote was done in time

I attended the agm

I participated unlike over 40k of our members who couldnt be ******

If they vote in support of you, landside for your ticket

Where were they?

Did the board ban them from voting? Lock their net access? Lock them in a batcave?

Your issue is with the people who agree with you, but did nothing. Stop whining and do something about it. Run for the board or even better trigger an egm. You only need a couple of hundred like minded people to agree with you, and you can spill the entire board. Whats stopping you?

THIS.

If you are a member and did not bother to vote and are now whining, then seriously take a good long look at yourself.

 

[Helen Wheels]

Does anyone in the know, know exactly what they gain from being on the board as they do not get paid?

A warm inner glow. Plus, they get to meet new people and make new friends.

 

[Rodney Dangerfield]

I'm not sure what they were thinking.
Did they not think to seek approval in here?
Just start the footy for **** sake.

 

[wegetpumped]

I am getting it, they are board appointed board members who were hand picked by the board.

My point is that their spots should have been put up for election and let us the members have the chance to vote in the people we want to run our club. As I said name the last board member to be voted in by the members directly.

It appears that board members are allowed to walk, granted Chadwick had a medical issue, partway through their terms because the club can simply appoint who they want to replace them without the members having any say, then by time they people do front up for election the majority just stick with the incumbent as they are too scared of change unless there is a big enough reason to vote for change.

The rules they have created were enforced and 74 is right. Even if they resigned last year whoever replaced them would run the rest of their terms. Than they go to members vote.
I know it's harsh and it looks like mates for mates but the rules allow them to do that and i know to some it stinks but unless they change the rules it will still be the same.
If you also look on the other side whats the point of putting it to members which again i point to 74 been right when no one can't be stuffed to spend 5 minutes of there time to vote?

 

[wegetpumped]

BUT the question has to be asked. If Rothschild and Poiwell were so keen to join our board, why did they not avail themselves for an election?
I like Keilor Tiger have little faith in the democratic system, as I have seen governments both conservative and Labor pull this short of crap continually, stacking boards with former pollies, powerbrokers, supporters etc. It's the way of the world.
Sadly, our club operates the same way.
Our current regime will continue stacking the board with their mates just as governments do ... it's just the way it goes.

Because they already knew what was going to happen they didn't need to do anything.
Democracy was invented for people free speech and rights but like anything over the history of the world the powers be tend to somehow find ways around that to suit themselves and the lesser people like you me and other's will spend times debating crying while they sit in the high places and laugh at us.
When you put corporation's big business politicians together you don't get democracy you get corruption.

 

[blaisee]

I voted

I pleaded constantly with people on here to vote

I helped my old man vote from os to make sure his vote was done in time

I attended the agm

I participated unlike over 40k of our members who couldnt be ******

If they vote in support of you, landside for your ticket

Where were they?

Did the board ban them from voting? Lock their net access? Lock them in a batcave?

Your issue is with the people who agree with you, but did nothing. Stop whining and do something about it. Run for the board or even better trigger an egm. You only need a couple of hundred like minded people to agree with you, and you can spill the entire board. Whats stopping you?

not sure why there are only 2 options.

1. Bend over and get completely manipulated by the board by being shoved board members down our throats that we didn't want, weren't asked about, have no idea who they are, and who have never introduced themselves to us the members.
2. Call an EGM

What about option 3

The board propose a new system where all board positions should be voted on by members and members only. This way we the members would actually feel as though what we want actually matters. The way the clubs board is being stacked by the boards mates is a complete disgrace.

 

[KiwiTiger]

BUT the question has to be asked. If Rothschild and Poiwell were so keen to join our board, why did they not avail themselves for an election?
I like Keilor Tiger have little faith in the democratic system, as I have seen governments both conservative and Labor pull this short of crap continually, stacking boards with former pollies, powerbrokers, supporters etc. It's the way of the world.
Sadly, our club operates the same way.
Our current regime will continue stacking the board with their mates just as governments do ... it's just the way it goes.

Just out of interest, can someone give me the facts on which RFC Board members are mates with whom?

I'd be interested to know.

Haere Ra

 

[wegetpumped]

And I am of the opinion that I'd prefer people who have a better knowledge of the applicants, their careers, what they will bring to the table and what is required at the table to make those decisions...
Not 4K people who (for the majority) have no idea about any of these people apart from what the club tells them in a 200 word bio.

So at election time do you go to the polls and ask yourself i believe the libs or what lab are going to do and vote for one or the other or do you just vote the same every time? Like most people we all know they lie but we are forced to vote or we will get a fine.
I think you will find that if you don't need to vote most would take the option not too, hence with member voting been low cause just like politics you don't know who to believe.

 

[wegetpumped]

What makes a member of the Migration Council such an outstanding applicant?

Will be able to improve out recruiting dept through the right channels.

 

[wegetpumped]

Just out of interest, can someone give me the facts on which RFC Board members are mates with whom?

I'd be interested to know.

Haere Ra

You're mates with everyone at the club Kiwi i thing you are better placed to answer your own question?

 

[KiwiTiger]

You're mates with everyone at the club Kiwi i thing you are better placed to answer your own question?

Just interested to understand on what basis posters are commenting that the Board is just appointing their mates.

Haere Ra

 

[wegetpumped]

So you answer is 1 board member out of the 12 has been elected by the members without getting the board gifting them a seat and endorsing them ?

The board is treating the members as fools, which we are of course. There will be less members this year than last year, and when they have to pay out the coach when they are forced to sack him, the vultures will circle, and I for one cant blame them.

It is a disgrace, and so are you for being so blatantly bias.

Dude we are fool's as 74 keeps pointing out we had a chance to do something but we couldn't be stuffed whats the point of whinging about members this and that?
74 points to the facts and rules and regulations and we all pounce on him even though his correct.
Accept what happens and what we have and cheer for the team because members don't care politically wise they just want a team that is successful and we only whinge when things aren't going right but we don't dare to express our feelings when it counts.

 

[wegetpumped]

Just interested to understand on what basis posters are commenting that the Board is just appointing their mates.

Haere Ra

Like anything in life people just make assumptions even if they don't have facts. Even if they have facts they avoid them and come up with there own.

 

[wegetpumped]

not sure why there are only 2 options.

1. Bend over and get completely manipulated by the board by being shoved board members down our throats that we didn't want, weren't asked about, have no idea who they are, and who have never introduced themselves to us the members.
2. Call an EGM

What about option 3

The board propose a new system where all board positions should be voted on by members and members only. This way we the members would actually feel as though what we want actually matters. The way the clubs board is being stacked by the boards mates is a complete disgrace.

Again Members don't give a rats arse about politics as what proven by the last election so stop bringing up members this and that we simply don't care enough to even spend five minutes thinking about it and doing something.

 

[Livonski]

Why didn't either of these two contest?

Because the less painful route is the one they have taken. They didn't need to.

I sort of agree with you on the optics, but don't really care because I think the quality of the appointee is probably better when it's done in a calm calculated way.

In the end I also don't care that much either way as the board is doing an ok job. More interested in no 18s hamstring.

 

[Livonski]

He had a way with words ole Paul

Hardwick gave us the recession we had to have.

 

[tigs2010]

Yes

More honest than this whole process

 

[Ned_Flanders]

not sure why there are only 2 options.

1. Bend over and get completely manipulated by the board by being shoved board members down our throats that we didn't want, weren't asked about, have no idea who they are, and who have never introduced themselves to us the members.
2. Call an EGM

What about option 3

The board propose a new system where all board positions should be voted on by members and members only. This way we the members would actually feel as though what we want actually matters. The way the clubs board is being stacked by the boards mates is a complete disgrace.

Three reasons

1) every election costs $50k. We would have been down the hole for $150k this year. If a board member resigns effective immediately, there is nothing we can do to stop it, and under your model each resignation needs a fresh election unless the timings all coincide.

2) the reason we created the noms committee was that quality candidates were declining to run for the board. Thats how mithen and free got on there in the first place.

3) the members voted in the board nominated candidate. The members voted in the noms committee. The members have had multiple chances to effect change, and they did nothing. The only issue the members have protected is tbe 250 member egm trigger. That tells me the members frankly are happy to have someone else filter and nominate board applicants, unless they retain a veto right


I personally am someone who is passionate about exercising your rights and ensuring that they are heard. Most members dont give a **** however, and im over it. If we were getting 20k voting every year, and multiple people challenging every year, id say make your ideas happen.

We dont though. Most years no one challenges. No one. Not even looney "voice of the members" candidates.

We need a mechanism to search for and vett the best quality candidates, and for decades the agm failed to.do this.

Your anger should be with the members

 

[Bobby Sands]

Just interested to understand on what basis posters are commenting that the Board is just appointing their mates.

Haere Ra

Is it not just a matter of not following due process?

I don't mind, they seem highly competent.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Also if people wonder why good candidates are reluctant to face the members cold, look at the rex retirement thread. An independant candidate who was retiring due to ill health, was accused of lying, of corruption, and of not even being sick by some.

And hes one we picked against the board recommendation - we was "our" candidate as some here refer to it

The treatment of him was pathetic. A good servant of the club slandered by no name randoms on the net. What message did that send to people considering running??

 

[blaisee]

Three reasons

1) every election costs $50k. We would have been down the hole for $150k this year. If a board member resigns effective immediately, there is nothing we can do to stop it, and under your model each resignation needs a fresh election unless the timings all coincide.

the cost issue is a very poor example and a very poor reason. For an organisation turning over $50 million a year, and that is at real risk of paying out $1 million in sacking the coach, and that has been completely derelict in their duty in finding a naming sponsor for punt road for over 2 years now, you are going to have to come up with a much better reason than "it will cost $50k for an election". This is just rubbish and you know it.

2) the reason we created the noms committee was that quality candidates were declining to run for the board. Thats how mithen and free got on there in the first place.

Mithen and free, where pathetic board members. Free owned a boost juice shop for gods sake, give me a break.The noms committee des not represent the members, and never has. It is a vetting mechanism for the board to ensure it does not place board members on the board that will not vote the existing board members out. The members are not consulted on who is being vetted, nor have they ever been told what skillsets they are actually looking for. It is a joke, a closed shop boys and girls club and its only purpose is to act as a survival mechanism for the existing board.

3) the members voted in the board nominated candidate. The members voted in the noms committee. The members have had multiple chances to effect change, and they did nothing. The only issue the members have protected is tbe 250 member egm trigger. That tells me the members frankly are happy to have someone else filter and nominate board applicants, unless they retain a veto right




I personally am someone who is passionate about exercising your rights and ensuring that they are heard. Most members dont give a **** however, and im over it. If we were getting 20k voting every year, and multiple people challenging every year, id say make your ideas happen.

We dont though. Most years no one challenges. No one. Not even looney "voice of the members" candidates.

We need a mechanism to search for and vett the best quality candidates, and for decades the agm failed to.do this.

Your anger should be with the members

you are right about this, but this has been helped and managed and manipulated by the board to ensure it takes place. On the rare occasions that members do get a chance to vote Endorsed candidates are given preferential treatment. The Richmond football club board is completely unrepresentative of the members, and this is getting worse and worse every year, and we just accepting is as the norm. I will not, and nor should you.[/QUOTE]

 

[KiwiTiger]

Is it not just a matter of not following due process?

I don't mind, they seem highly competent.

Absolutely, and it has as rfctiger74 has outlined.

Just keen to know how those who've said that the appointments are mates of other board members, how did they arrive at that?

Haere Ra

 

[Ned_Flanders]

1) we are barely breaking even, revenue means shit. We are not rich enough that $50k per whack multiple times a.year is cool. Also we barely get 5k off a highly publicized agm ticket. Imagine how few vote if we have three in a year, featuring similar names - each costing $50k

2) members voted in the changes. End of story

3) the board is representative of the members. Most have simply declined to participate. You seem to blame the board for members not running and members not voting. Five minutes online - thats all it took, - and most members every time say "sorry, cant be ****ed and do not care"

We have the board we choose