The OFFICIAL 2011 Board Election Thread

[gokangas]

Is anyone else nominating?

Right now its lawyer v lawyer v marketing gun.

Is be so immensely pissed if we somehow went through this and lost a skillset the board has been gagging for for years - marketing.

I think Mark Brayshaw ticks the marketing box too. Marketing at Port and Freo from memory.

 

[Tas]

I'll back Eugene and JB and support the ticket that was put forward.

There isn't any other ticket. Nobody is challenging the chairman.

As much as I admire the achievements of the Northerners, it's a bit rich to attribute the work of the coterie and committee to just Caroline!! Caroline did not return a record profit, the Northerners did!

I don't believe she ever took sole credit for what the Northerners achieved.

Caroline is also a control freak and has been posturing for this board seat for some time!

Most successful business people are control freaks.

Her husband magically became a die hard North supporter this year after a lifetime supporting the Swans. Cynical, I know but that timing is just too coincidental!

Has no relevance, why are you making personal attacks?

Also, a birdie tells me that Caroline was livid about not being nominated to be North's first female board member! This nomination appears to be more about Caroline than North Melbourne!

More personal attacks, that is quite poor.

JB engineered the smaller board with select people. I'm going to keep my trust in the man that trusted us to keep our club in Melbourne.

The change of board size had nothing to do with him hand picking the board members.

JB will have my eternal gratitude but only an idiot gives unconditional support.

JB was only a part of the group that helped save our club and he assassinated PDR last year who played a bigger part in saving the club, actually refusing to sell his shares to the AFL along with Ansett.

I am not completely comfortable with how JB handled that. I am also not comfortable with the board positions being influenced greatly by the chairman. This is the kind of shit Aylett did and it lead us nowhere in a hurry.

I dunno, perhaps it is best we don't have a board full of yes men the next time JB decides to commit three quarters of our home games to Tasmania and abandon North Ballarat. We were played for fools and insulted on top of it. JB has my support but he should not be beyond assessment for his continued performance as chairman.

We just can't afford to get it wrong, we need to nail the off-field area or the AFL is going to come at us again. As much as I want JB to get us to where we need to go, just can't afford giving anyone unconditional control of our club.

If he can't work with board members we elect then to me that is a major problem.

 

[RoyalBlue]

I think Mark Brayshaw ticks the marketing box too. Marketing at Port and Freo from memory.

Mate frankly I think the suggestion that Mark Brayshaw ticks a marketing box because he floated through a couple of jobs in the footy industry that has marketing tacked onto them to explain away the wage is bullshit.

NMFC has been crying out for fresh, non footy marketing eyes looking at our branding and message since forever. Laycock looks like the real deal.

If I were Caro id be coming at Houghton.

 

[MaddAdam]

I like the way we spend 11 months a year on this board talking up what the JB and Arocca administration has done for the club, like save it from relocation, get Arden St redeveloped, get us a gun coach, put shitloads into the footy dept, turn profits.

Then, every November, somebody with a Colgate smile and clickable shoes turns up (always preceded by an entirely innocent and in no way primary school tuck shop Machiavellian thread from GoKangas) and suddenly JB and Arocca, JB especially, are some sort of evil Mum and dad who won't let us text our mates at the dinner table.

There's an old adage in life which says if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

I'd like to know what exactly is wrong with the direction we're travelling in, all things considered.

Why precisely a challenge is required. Even to one spot.

Also, I'd like to know why these glaring faults weren't identified by said poster who identified them, in one of the other 11 months of the year.

Finally, I'd like to know to know why Caroline Carnegie is the person to solve this, because I asked her for three simple ideas to help on debt reduction a week or so ago and got corporate gobbledegook bullshit in return.

I have nothing against Caroline Carnegie. I'm sure she loves the club just asmuch as the rest of us.

But I'm yet to see a compelling reason why we should upset a very successful board and administration to get her on board.

If someone, Caroline included, can tell me in three lines of BF text why she should go on, I'll listen.

 

[Wednesday]

Can you let us all know how Julie Laycock answered the same questions you've repeated demanded Caroline Carnegie answer to your satisfaction?

 

[MaddAdam]

Can you let us all know how Julie Laycock answered the same questions you've repeated demanded Caroline Carnegie answer to your satisfaction?

Julie is yet to appear on BF. Be assured if she does, I will ask her too.

 

[LT Smash]

Changing tack just a little, I'd like to comment on my one personal interaction I've had with one of the candidates - the QC, Will Houghton.

Opposing the company I work for in a civil law suit, this son-of-a-***** cost us millions of dollars and wasted 10 months of my life through his Andrew Fraser-like legal shenanigans.*

For this, I'd say I have more reason to hold a grudge against him than any other NMFC member. So would I vote for him? ****en oath I would. The man is a legal genius.

I can fully understand why Caroline mentions above that she is not running for the board as a lawyer.


* Andrew Fraser is of course, the lawyer who successfully defended the Walsh St cop killers, whose life has been dramatised in the TV1 mini series "Killing Time". Fraser also unsuccessfully defended Jimmy Krakouer. It's possible that if Houghton defended Jimmy, as he has done for several high profile AFL related legal cases, then maybe, just maybe, Jimmy would not have served time.

 

[MaddAdam]

Changing tack just a little, I'd like to comment on my one personal interaction I've had with one of the candidates - the QC, Will Houghton.

Opposing the company I work for in a civil law suit, this son-of-a-***** cost us millions of dollars and wasted 10 months of my life through his Andrew Fraser-like legal shenanigans.*

For this, I'd say I have more reason to hold a grudge against him than any other NMFC member. So would I vote for him? ****en oath I would. The man is a legal genius.

I can fully understand why Caroline mentions above that she is not running for the board as a lawyer.


* Andrew Fraser is of course, the lawyer who successfully defended the Walsh St cop killers, whose life has been dramatised in the TV1 mini series "Killing Time". Fraser also unsuccessfully defended Jimmy Krakouer. It's possible that if Houghton defended Jimmy, as he has done for several high profile AFL related legal cases, then maybe, just maybe, Jimmy would not have served time.

One of the better posts I've ever read on BF. Defamatory, illogical, but ultimately correct.

(If he successfully defended the Walsh Street guys, they can't be cop killers.)

 

[LT Smash]

One of the better posts I've ever read on BF. Defamatory, illogical, but ultimately correct.

(If he successfully defended the Walsh Street guys, they can't be cop killers.)

I think we will find the legal/political system will redress that oversight very shortly. Especially as one of the only surviving accused has apparently admitted to the crime under the assumption that he would be safe due to the soon to be abolished double jeopardy law. Thus any suggestion of defamation would not hold due to aforementioned admission of guilt.

 

[Ghostwriter]

Comparing Fraser to Will Houghton is a disgrace, you should be ashamed of yourself.

 

[MaddAdam]

I think we will find the legal/political system will redress that oversight very shortly. Especially as one of the only surviving accused has apparently admitted to the crime under the assumption that he would be safe due to the soon to be abolished double jeopardy law. Thus any suggestion of defamation would not hold due to aforementioned admission of guilt.

Actually, the defamatory comment related to your comparison of Houghton's legal tactics with those of Fraser.

As for the overturning of double jeopardy in order to attempt to secure convictions in Tynan/Eyre matter, I think Peter Ryan (who hasn't exactly been covering himself in glory of late) may find it is a lot more difficult in practise than theory.

Prosecution would struggle to find any reliable witnesses. And Benji Veniamin didn't help their efforts at all.

 

[LT Smash]

Comparing Fraser to Will Houghton is a disgrace, you should be ashamed of yourself.

They're all lawyers to me. Some are just great at what they do. Fraser and Houghton both fall in to that category.

Having said that, and for the sake of clarity in this election, perhaps I should explain further - the "legal shenanigans" as I referred to them, allowed this tool that Houghton was representing a stay of execution in a civil case in which he didn't have a leg to stand on. Eventually we won the case as we were always going to. But Houghton's job was just to delay, and send the case to another jurisdiction, which he unfortunately did spectacularly well. Respect for the man's skills, but like Fraser, I wish he had a better class of client, at least on that occasion.

 

[Kimbo]

I like the way we spend 11 months a year on this board talking up what the JB and Arocca administration has done for the club, like save it from relocation, get Arden St redeveloped, get us a gun coach, put shitloads into the footy dept, turn profits.

Then, every November, somebody with a Colgate smile and clickable shoes turns up (always preceded by an entirely innocent and in no way primary school tuck shop Machiavellian thread from GoKangas) and suddenly JB and Arocca, JB especially, are some sort of evil Mum and dad who won't let us text our mates at the dinner table.

There's an old adage in life which says if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

I'd like to know what exactly is wrong with the direction we're travelling in, all things considered.

Why precisely a challenge is required. Even to one spot.

Also, I'd like to know why these glaring faults weren't identified by said poster who identified them, in one of the other 11 months of the year.

Finally, I'd like to know to know why Caroline Carnegie is the person to solve this, because I asked her for three simple ideas to help on debt reduction a week or so ago and got corporate gobbledegook bullshit in return.

I have nothing against Caroline Carnegie. I'm sure she loves the club just asmuch as the rest of us.

But I'm yet to see a compelling reason why we should upset a very successful board and administration to get her on board.

If someone, Caroline included, can tell me in three lines of BF text why she should go on, I'll listen.

The fact that a committed and capable person is offering themselves as a candidate doesn't equate to something being 'wrong with the direction we're travelling in', in their eyes or others. It just means we've got an additional candidate who believes they've got something to offer to our Board.

Whether that's good enough is a separate issue. I get that you don't (so far, at least) believe Carnegie offers more than Houghton and Laycock. The comments about Houghton's legal abilities and Laycock's marketing acumen are interesting. It might be that Carnegie offers a fair bit of both elements, but perhaps not the depth of either?

 

[MaddAdam]

Here's another question for Caroline:

You are running on a platform of marketing, membership and hospitality. Given your inner sanctum connections into the club, have you taken any ideas related to these areas to Euge or Dino before? What do you think needs improving, how would you improve it, and what was their response?'

 

[hilly]

In my view the President or chair of any board or committee is the person ultimately responsible for the successes or failures of that group. They certainly drive the results and deliver them together with their committee (and members), but the buck stops with them to ensure the desired results are achieved.

I couldn't disagree more. The entire Board has responsibilities at law and to whoever they represent, and deserves their fair share of praise and blame.

 

[LT Smash]

The comments about Houghton's legal abilities and Laycock's marketing acumen are interesting. It might be that Carnegie offers a fair bit of both elements, but perhaps not the depth of either?

Yeah that may well be the case. Or the choice we have before us.

Of course, we are basing opinions on Laycock's ability and committed-ness (yeah, it's a word) on faith and an admittedly fairly impressive looking CV at this stage. I look forward to seeing and hearing more from her, which does not necessarily mean popping up here on Big Footy.

As for an earlier suggestion that Mark Brayshaw ticks the box on marketing... I laughed so hard, I think I may have peed myself just a little.

 

[Wednesday]

Julie is yet to appear on BF. Be assured if she does, I will ask her too.

Being the voice of equality, impartiality and all that, yeah sure you will.

Just like last year, any member who has the audacity to exercise their right to stand for election against your 'mates' chosen candidate will be scrutinised by yourself in a way you would never subject an 'annointed' candidate to.

Also not sure why you see a member exercising their right to stand for the board as somehow being an attack on JB and the existing board? No one on here has been critical the current board's performance on any issue outside of the way they have handled elections, which in my opinion has been disgraceful and deserving of criticism. We are a member owned club and the board will be whoever the members decide it will be. If JB and the current admin don't like that then tough.

 

[RoyalBlue]

Good points by Wednesday, has anyone confirmed that Laycock has pharros approval? I can vote for her until she has it officially?

 

[Zondor]

No one on here has been critical the current board's performance on any issue outside of the way they have handled elections, which in my opinion has been disgraceful and deserving of criticism. We are a member owned club and the board will be whoever the members decide it will be. If JB and the current admin don't like that then tough.

Easy there Tiger. I was critical of the Brayshaws led board decision to put forward a proposal to play 8 of our home games in a interstate market. :stern look in a Wonder Woman get up

Now that concept was stupidity at its finest. :thumbs right up Brayshaws arse

 

[Zondor]

Anyway Guys, just vote for me. I'd sort out these turkeys on the board. :gobble, gobble, gobble

 

[Shagga is all Class]

JB has to put his big boy pants on and work with anyone the members vote in.

Please put your big boy pants on and tell us when JB committed 3/4 of our games to Tassie or the last time JB did this or the next time.

Until then get off this board cyber-hero!

 

[Zondor]

Please put your big boy pants on and tell us when JB committed 3/4 of our games to Tassie or the last time JB did this or the next time.

Until then get of this board cyber-hero!

Shags, Wonder Woman led a board that put forward a proposal to play 3/4 of our "home" games on the map. Thems the facts.

 

[Shagga is all Class]

Shags, Wonder Woman led a board that put forward a proposal to play 3/4 of our "home" games on the map. Thems the facts.

Must of missed the bit about an actual contract or the bits about the AFL contracted to play a certain number of games at the Docklands.

Sorry.

 

[Zondor]

Must of missed the bit about an actual contract or the bits about the AFL contracted to play a certain number of games at the Docklands.

Sorry.

Apology not accepted. :stern look

 

[roobear]

Zondor closer to getting my vote with every post.