2017 EFC AGM It started with a leak


#543

Thats a bit naive don’t you think HM?

I would assume the board is a democratic system. We have no idea whom voted for Jame’s removal, if at all. Whom stood up and protested. Or whom stood up and demanded his head.

What I do know is if someone voted to keep him and was outvoted by the majority, there is little more you can do but keep up appearances as a united board. You move onto the next battle of ideas and strategies. The last thing the club and members would have wanted was a fractured and embarrassingly dysfunctional board.

To vote for or against an individual candidate because of a democratic board decision is frankly crazy.

I’ll base my vote on the character of the person, the sincerity of what they stand for, whether they achieve it or not. All I need to know is they tried to achieve it. I also base my vote on where the club was and where they are now. If we are in a better spot than before, then something is working.


#544

You do have the pom poms out Darli.


#545

We know that the decision to remove Hird was unanimous. Little etc made it very clear at the time.


#546

EVERY board says that HM.

When was the last time you heard a board say, “Yep, decisions made…but Frank, the buggar couldn’t be swayed”. You will NEVER hear an AFL board not vote “unanimous”.

Boards debate, vote. The winning vote then becomes “Unanimous”. Vote announced.


#547

Certainly some Chairs, managers etc do blatantly lie and suggest ‘their’ decision was everyone’s decision. When challenged they are sometimes forced to back down from that assertion. We should never accept such dishonesty as being acceptable.
The more enlightened approach is to acknowledge that difference and debate are inevitable and healthy in a democracy where we value freedom of speech.**

**regardless as to whether the naysayers were taken out the back and shot or not.


#548

And I thought James Hird resigned for the good of the Club !

Reckon it would be in the best interests of all Board Members to tell us the farking truth. Come on Mr Tanner, fess up !


#549

I don’t think that happened in this case (and i suspect it happens a lot less routinely than you claim)

Board confidentiality is a real thing, but organisations rarely trumpet ‘unanimous’ as loudly and proactively as the club did at the deHirdification press conference. Normally ir’s just ‘the board has decided …’ with no further elaboration.

If Paul or Katie (who, once again, ran on the entire platform of not succumbing to pressure to scapegoat Hird) genuinely believed that their position was being misrepresented by the ‘unanimous’ statement, they had the option (and i believe the obligation) to resign.


#550

you’re talking about the club with weekly open letters from the chairman…


#551

And wouldn’t the press taken to that kindly…Things aren’t always as black and white as that. We as members called for unity, we wanted the players to stick together, we wanted the the club to stick together, but yea, ■■■■ it, lets have the board split and have us look like a rabble. Sometimes the look of unity is more important than a voting decision, no matter what the unpleasant outcome. This isn’t a primary school’s PTA meeting. These members are responsible for a multi-million dollar organisation, and on top of that, decisions are emotionally scrutinised unlike any other corporation has to deal with.

I certainly would hope as voters we don’t waste our vote on a board member that has a hissy fit if a vote doesn’t go their way and resign. And that we are not voting for candidates based on one issue alone. Do you think if board members, no matter whom they are or what decision that was voted on split because of a bad call, that we’d be where we are right now. Do you think with chaos at the top, players like Hooker and Hurley would have come back? They we’d be landing the three S’s now? That we’d return a 5+ million dollar profit?

Finally, we have NO idea what was going on behind the scenes at that time outside of the board. What role did the coaching panel have, the players, club welfare personal, all these may have being contributing factors in a decision the board acted on, perhaps had to act on for the sake of those involved.

Now it’s Sunday…I’d like to go a lay on my couch now and get fatter. So lets agree to disagree.


#552

I do hope it was not Board unity when there was obvious leaking to Caroline Wilson


#553

James was sacked. James has to much class to run for the Board


#554

That’s not going happen, you know that don’t you?


#555

Reality bites !

Why is it though at the Board cannot tell the truth ?


#556

Need to know basis. Mantra is “moving on or moved on.”


#557

I am one of the world greatest at moving on; done it regularly.

But I will never"move on" from the travesty afforded James Hird.


#558

If James Hird wanted to be on the board he can nominate. I highly doubt he wouldn’t be voted in.


#559

Great post.
I am 100% in the same way of thinking.
Last time I voted for both Katie and Paul because they both said they would stand by Hird .

They completely dishonored that once elected and I felt they played us on a break just to get our votes.

I will say I have been impressed with the way they interact with fans online but again this has spiked again during election time.

Still undecided on my vote except for Wellman.


#560

Sorry but the Paul and Katie sacking Hird nonsense drives me nuts. Are we going to forget the 100 point losses with some players in tears walking off grounds. I cant say everything i want too which is frustrating but Hird did a decent act knowing players got to a point that something had to break. Its completely unjust but it had to be done and Hird though not wanting to leave was honourable knowing he needed too. It was an incredibly sad but brave day byJames. James has every right to be hurt and angry by events in 2013 by then CEO, President and AFL but late 2015 is quite seperate.

I know i will get disagreement but i have talked to enough people in the know and not just management to understand players welfare concerns at the time and how critical it was for some release of pressure on them.


#561

Is that you Mr Tanner ?


#562

Not posting to impugn Catherine or Paul, but, to get the timelines factually correct, well before the 100 point losses, Hird was being destabilised by some on the Board who were leaking to Caroline Wilson.
Bomber was misled into making that statement at the Crichton ( the one Hird was not invited to).
So, it was not just the 2013 Board.