WANM SAYS ‘LET MEMBERS DECIDE’

[Grogg]

That's three thumbs, MR.

 

[King Corey]

Aside from the moral bankruptcy of pillaging the most vulnerable members of society, poker machines have been a black hole for the NMFC in the past. Forget poker machines. The issue of selling games interstate needs to be considered in its own right. I am happy to agree to this proposal of WANM, I don't want to allow relocation by stealth, but if you are going to introduce polarising and irrelevant issues like poker machines as an alternative, then I would change my vote. You derail the argument onto another issue and you divide support for the original premise.

I agree you wouldn't approach the constitution change from this angle. However Tas has inferred a certain cause and effect and quite frankly he has a point.

 

[winalotroos]

I would never vote to play more then 4 games outside of Vic, but would not mind playing 2 in Ballarat, (port or GC)
Having said that I have not seen anything that tells me that JB will try and screw the members.

 

[sammie]

I would never vote to play more then 4 games outside of Vic, but would not mind playing 2 in Ballarat, (port or GC)
Having said that I have not seen anything that tells me that JB will try and screw the members.

Port Adelaide & Adelaide should be played in Ballarat. It's a 6 hour drive city to city. If it was marketed properly, I could imagine it get get a cult road trip following from the SA fans. It would be a massive boon for Ballarat.

 

[Luke72]

Port Adelaide & Adelaide should be played in Ballarat. It's a 6 hour drive city to city. If it was marketed properly, I could imagine it get get a cult road trip following from the SA fans. It would be a massive boon for Ballarat.

If it keeps the South Australians out of Melbourne I'm all for it

 

[winalotroos]

Port Adelaide & Adelaide should be played in Ballarat. It's a 6 hour drive city to city. If it was marketed properly, I could imagine it get get a cult road trip following from the SA fans. It would be a massive boon for Ballarat.

Won't work their moccasin would fall off.

 

[Tas]

Aside from the moral bankruptcy of pillaging the most vulnerable members of society, poker machines have been a black hole for the NMFC in the past. Forget poker machines. The issue of selling games interstate needs to be considered in its own right. I am happy to agree to this proposal of WANM, I don't want to allow relocation by stealth, but if you are going to introduce polarising and irrelevant issues like poker machines as an alternative, then I would change my vote. You derail the argument onto another issue and you divide support for the original premise.

You do not have to use them as a means to rip North melbourne people off. Hawks are dumping their gambling pleasuredome in the middle of the Bulldogs territory. We could get machines in a different state, people are putting their life savings in them all over the country.

As I said, I would prefer we didn't have to get into pokies.

However, if the club feels they want the freedom to be able to sell off a large portion of our home games to make ends meet without member approval then why are we not looking at all options that would minimise the need to sell our games.

I don't want us to get involved with pokies, but my personal preference is irrelevant. If people are in position to be the CEO or President/Chairman or Board Member then their responsibility is to do everything in their power to ensure the club survives and prospers, even if it goes down a path that is not a personal preference.

Our epitaph shouldn't read, "We died being the only good guy."

I want us to live, but it seems our needs are conditional based on if someone approves of a venture or not. You don't peddle your own agenda in these roles, they have a duty to look after the club, first and foremost.

JB got it in his head 5 years ago that we needed a Hawthorn model and that was true 5 years ago. A lot has changed since he came into power, I want him to be ahead of the curve, not stuck in the past. We don't need white knights, we don't need an old Hawthorn model.

 

[Saintly31]

This reminds me of the republic referendum where John Howard managed to drive a wedge between the republicans by forcing them to choose between 2 models rather than simply pitting the monarchy against a republic with details to be advised. The popular vote republicans refused to support the parliamentary republican position so the referendum was defeated by the monarchists, despite having less than 35% support overall. If people like Saintly 31 sell the club out to Tasmania because they can't be shagged getting off their arse and catching a train to Ballarat, I will spew.

Nice story, but im in Hobart........

Its in my self interest for Nth to relocate here - however unlike people like you I place the club first and want us to stay being North Melbourne. But yeah, I guess as long as you can still access games readily it doesnt matter if North Melbourne after all? So hypocritical its laughable....

 

[Zondor]

EFA based on the proposal.

I don't disagree otherwise in the slightest, its an excellent motion in terms of intention to stop relocation.

Its a no from me as we are a North Melbourne Kangaroos, and anything other than Melbourne would mean relocation no different to Tasmania.

Yes I've read your previous posts in relation to this topic. Ideally the motion should read "outside Melbourne" as opposed to "outside of the State of Victoria" but I ask you this. Should it read "Inner City Melbourne" or "Greater Metropolitan Melbourne"? :stern look

Anyways Ideally we shouldn't be relocating any games outside of Melbourne so should the motion read "...the NMFC Constitution be amended to require a membership vote on any actual or proposed obligation, contract, arrangement or understanding for purpose or outcome of which is to permit, allow or require the Club (whether permanent, temporarily or otherwise) to play or relocate any home games during any Premiership Season outside of the City of Melbourne of which is situated in the State of Victoria, the Country of Australia, the Planet of Earth, the Galaxy of the Milky Way and the Universe of which we currently exist in as opposed to all those alternate Universes out there."? :stern look

Do yah get it? Ideally I would have a 12 inch ****. This motion is a start. It is something. It is better than having nothing.

Even by your own admission you think it is an excellent motion in terms of its intention to stop relocation. So vote Yes and stop being silly. :stern look

 

[Zondor]

Just noticed that James Brayshaws cast a vote for No.

 

[Saintly31]

Yes I've read your previous posts in relation to this topic. Ideally the motion should read "outside Melbourne" as opposed to "outside of the State of Victoria" but I ask you this. Should it read "Inner City Melbourne" or "Greater Metropolitan Melbourne"? :stern look

Anyways Ideally we shouldn't be relocating any games outside of Melbourne so should the motion read "...the NMFC Constitution be amended to require a membership vote on any actual or proposed obligation, contract, arrangement or understanding for purpose or outcome of which is to permit, allow or require the Club (whether permanent, temporarily or otherwise) to play or relocate any home games during any Premiership Season outside of the City of Melbourne of which is situated in the State of Victoria, the Country of Australia, the Planet of Earth, the Galaxy of the Milky Way and the Universe of which we currently exist in as opposed to all those alternate Universes out there."? :stern look

Do yah get it? Ideally I would have a 12 inch ****. This motion is a start. It is something. It is better than having nothing.

Even by your own admission you think it is an excellent motion in terms of its intention to stop relocation. So vote Yes and stop being silly. :stern look

Yes, it is better than nothing.......but at the same time things should be done properly the first time, not amended as relocation 'threats' arise. If the proposal was fair dinkum about staying in Melb it would say so in a sensible description - but it appears Victoria is one and the same thing. News flash, it isnt.

Even so based on your pep talk I might indeed vote yes for the greater good....

 

[Tas]

Just noticed that James Brayshaws cast a vote for No.

As long as he doesn't take his bat and ball and go home if he doesn't get his way.

 

[Only Forwards]

Yes, it is better than nothing.......but at the same time things should be done properly the first time, not amended as relocation 'threats' arise. If the proposal was fair dinkum about staying in Melb it would say so in a sensible description - but it appears Victoria is one and the same thing. News flash, it isnt.

Even so based on your pep talk I might indeed vote yes for the greater good....

Are you saying that you see a legitmate threat that we would be moved from being a Melbourne side to being a Ballarat side?

No Melbourne and Victoria are not the same thing, but lets call a spade a spade here, the biggest regional center in Victoria is Geelong and they play what 5 games a year there?

Saintly I get the feeling this is a Hobart vs Ballarat thing. I acknowledge that we need to be respectful of the places that we go and set up bases. I believe that we need to foster a commitment to the city of Hobart that sees us play games there for years to come to really cultivate rusted on supporters.

I also believe that we need to continue to pursue Ballarat as a legitimate option. Not so that we can crap in the faces of the supporters we generate in Hobart. Its insurance. Insurance against the AFL having an agenda to push a side to another location. As I said above that location ain't going to be in Victoria its going to be interstate. If they try to push us anywhere its going to be Tassie.

We need to Learn from the past selling games interstate can be dicey business. Selling games within the same state while it runs the risk of disenfranchising some of our interstate supporter base, it carries less risk of us being undermined and pushed to another location.

JB saved the club, he also offered up a plan to play 7 games a year in Hobart, which is co-location.

How many of the 15k that rock up to Etihad to watch us play Port in a dead rubber game do you think go down to Hobart twice a year?

How many of those same supporters would travel the 2 hours up the road to Ballarat if we played there?

I reckon that the numbers would be dramatically different.

I would bet right now to a person on here if we could play games at Arden street week in week out and make the cash to compete, It'd be everyone's top choice and we would sell no games ever.

 

[Ghostwriter]

Port Adelaide & Adelaide should be played in Ballarat. It's a 6 hour drive city to city. If it was marketed properly, I could imagine it get get a cult road trip following from the SA fans. It would be a massive boon for Ballarat.

Probably the most ridiculous thing I have read on bigfooty in all my time here, Ballarat is a training ground, playing AFL games there is death by a thousand cuts.

 

[Saintly31]

Are you saying that you see a legitmate threat that we would be moved from being a Melbourne side to being a Ballarat side?

No Melbourne and Victoria are not the same thing, but lets call a spade a spade here, the biggest regional center in Victoria is Geelong and they play what 5 games a year there?

Saintly I get the feeling this is a Hobart vs Ballarat thing. I acknowledge that we need to be respectful of the places that we go and set up bases. I believe that we need to foster a commitment to the city of Hobart that sees us play games there for years to come to really cultivate rusted on supporters.

I also believe that we need to continue to pursue Ballarat as a legitimate option. Not so that we can crap in the faces of the supporters we generate in Hobart. Its insurance. Insurance against the AFL having an agenda to push a side to another location. As I said above that location ain't going to be in Victoria its going to be interstate. If they try to push us anywhere its going to be Tassie.

We need to Learn from the past selling games interstate can be dicey business. Selling games within the same state while it runs the risk of disenfranchising some of our interstate supporter base, it carries less risk of us being undermined and pushed to another location.

JB saved the club, he also offered up a plan to play 7 games a year in Hobart, which is co-location.

How many of the 15k that rock up to Etihad to watch us play Port in a dead rubber game do you think go down to Hobart twice a year?

How many of those same supporters would travel the 2 hours up the road to Ballarat if we played there?

I reckon that the numbers would be dramatically different.

I would bet right now to a person on here if we could play games at Arden street week in week out and make the cash to compete, It'd be everyone's top choice and we would sell no games ever.

Whilst I agree will all the second half of your post for sure, I certainly do not have any Hobart v Ballarat agenda regarding the proposal.

In previous discussions ive given my view that long term IMO Tas has more to offer than Ballarat as a partner yes, if it was to continue, but that is nothing to do with my posts in this thread.

I dont see Ballarat or anywhere else as a threat in the short term or even long term, but I consider that irrelevant. If playing more than 4 games interstate is seen as important enough to require ratification from members even if the board thinks it the best interests of the club, then it should follow for any other place in Vict other than Melb should require the same ratification on the same principle.

 

[Limerick]

AGM notice is on the website. Motion needs 75% YES to pass. We (WANM) will need to get out into the broader media to get this up. This has commenced.

 

[Mr Reliable]

AGM notice is on the website. Motion needs 75% YES to pass. We (WANM) will need to get out into the broader media to get this up. This has commenced.

Good luck, Limerick. I'll watch out for your half time interview tonight. You might cop Gerald or Drain.

 

[Mr Reliable]

Yes, it is better than nothing.......but at the same time things should be done properly the first time, not amended as relocation 'threats' arise. If the proposal was fair dinkum about staying in Melb it would say so in a sensible description - but it appears Victoria is one and the same thing. News flash, it isnt.

Even so based on your pep talk I might indeed vote yes for the greater good....

That's the ticket.

 

[Saintly31]

That's the ticket.

I would never vote no to what is a good cause Mr R.

I just thought I could use a strong counter viewpoint to change it so it would be less insulting to those outside Vict........it failed.......

 

[sammie]

Probably the most ridiculous thing I have read on bigfooty in all my time here, Ballarat is a training ground, playing AFL games there is death by a thousand cuts.

They'd have to touch up the ground for sure.
But when playing low crowd games, better to make money at Ballarat than lose it at Etihad. Still close enough for Melbourne fans & may pick up a few extra from Ballarat.

 

[Mr Reliable]

I would never vote no to what is a good cause Mr R.

I just thought I could use a strong counter viewpoint to change it so it would be less insulting to those outside Vict........it failed.......

I thought you made your point quite well.