The Footy Community's obsession with "the truth"

[thejester]

Why is Lyon untrustworthy?

He negotiated with a rival behind the back of both his employer and his manager. Did he act in his own best interest? Absolutely. But for mine in pursuing that self interest so nakedly and against all the norms of the industry, he established that he's not trustworthy - although I guess that depends on how you define trust within a corporate context.

So you don't believe that clubs act in the best interests of their shareholders (members)?

But even that proves my point. The 'best interest' of supporters is defined as winning a golden cup annually, not creating profit. Clubs can turn profits in the millions, but supporters are not satisfied unless they win the cup. It's fundamentally irrational from a commercial perspective - hence the limits of the 'but it's a business!' argument.

The decision to delist players at the end of each season is no different to going through a process of range rationalization as a manufacturer. Where is the loyalty to these delisted players?

It's a false equivalency to put delisted players next to Boak, Cloke, Goddard and Ablett et al. Is there loyalty to delisted players? No, but equally if a talented youngster like (say) Ivan Maric goes 'I want to go elsewhere for greater opportunity' no one labels them mercenaries. Guys like Cloke and Ablett anger fans because they're already established, handsomely rewarded players.

 

[The Dodger]

Inevitably you get one. Money talks.

As has been proven. But the way players get money is through the sport they are playing being popular. Which is that the average Joe on the street is will ing to fork out hard earned to buy a membership, buy a jumper with the players number and / or pay for a ticket to the game.
For that player then to leave and already good wage for a bit more at another club.

 

[Brown Bottle]

He negotiated with a rival behind the back of both his employer and his manager. Did he act in his own best interest? Absolutely. But for mine in pursuing that self interest so nakedly and against all the norms of the industry, he established that he's not trustworthy - although I guess that depends on how you define trust within a corporate context.

In the eye of the beholder I guess. I've seen enough people get blindsided in corporate life to understand why Lyon ensured that discretion was assured on his part. I think it speaks to the integrity of the parties involved that it never leaked. How many genuine surprises do we get in Footy?

But even that proves my point. The 'best interest' of supporters is defined as winning a golden cup annually, not creating profit. Clubs can turn profits in the millions, but supporters are not satisfied unless they win the cup. It's fundamentally irrational from a commercial perspective - hence the limits of the 'but it's a business!' argument.

Tell that to supporters of the late Fitzroy FC. Without profit there is no FC. Didn't this become a commercial reality for many clubs in the 80s and 90s? Now we have clubs that are financially sound (like mine) still rattling tins so that they can compete in the arms race created by spending on football departments.

It's a false equivalency to put delisted players next to Boak, Cloke, Goddard and Ablett et al. Is there loyalty to delisted players? No, but equally if a talented youngster like (say) Ivan Maric goes 'I want to go elsewhere for greater opportunity' no one labels them mercenaries. Guys like Cloke and Ablett anger fans because they're already established, handsomely rewarded players.

If you could secure your long-term future on the back of a 5 year contract today if it meant leaving your place of employment where you had strong personal bonds, would you? How much would it take to convince you to move?

 

[Brown Bottle]

As has been proven. But the way players get money is through the sport they are playing being popular. Which is that the average Joe on the street is will ing to fork out hard earned to buy a membership, buy a jumper with the players number and / or pay for a ticket to the game.
For that player then to leave and already good wage for a bit more at another club.

Should players reciprocate the feelings we have for them as fans? We're talking about their livelihood, in a career that will last for 10-15 years if they're really lucky. As I said previously, I understand the concept of loyalty. I also understand how our loyalty can be tested. I once left a really good employer whom I'd worked with for 10 years because someone else offered me a 20% increase in salary. They didn't do anything wrong... but should I have not taken the cash?

 

[Hawker55]

Not to the general public perhaps, but you are required to be honest and open with your shareholders. In a very real sense people who purchase memberships are investing in their clubs. On that level can you understand why some Carlton members are unhappy with how Ratten was treated?

Members are not shareholders. We are consumers - we pay money for a product (watching games and the extra stuff clubs throw at us). We have no legal ownership of any part of the club and don't derive any benefit apart from emotional from the success of the club. So your analogy is false.

Clubs know this and know that they have a captive market - If the Hawks do something I don't like then I'm not going to go off and support Richmond for example, and most fans are in a similar position.

 

[big_e]

He negotiated with a rival behind the back of both his employer and his manager. Did he act in his own best interest? Absolutely. But for mine in pursuing that self interest so nakedly and against all the norms of the industry, he established that he's not trustworthy - although I guess that depends on how you define trust within a corporate context.


But even that proves my point. The 'best interest' of supporters is defined as winning a golden cup annually, not creating profit. Clubs can turn profits in the millions, but supporters are not satisfied unless they win the cup. It's fundamentally irrational from a commercial perspective - hence the limits of the 'but it's a business!' argument.


It's a false equivalency to put delisted players next to Boak, Cloke, Goddard and Ablett et al. Is there loyalty to delisted players? No, but equally if a talented youngster like (say) Ivan Maric goes 'I want to go elsewhere for greater opportunity' no one labels them mercenaries. Guys like Cloke and Ablett anger fans because they're already established, handsomely rewarded players.

Actually it's a silver cup. You'd think a Geelong supporter would have seen enough of them lately to know that.