2018 EFC AGM on 17 December - including proposed constitutional changes


I was struggling to see what the issue was.


It’s seeming like less and less of one if recent posters are fully across it.


Is this a Thing??

  • Yes
  • No

0 voters


Just to clarify here, removing the seat reserved for the CEO wouldn’t in reality be reducing the board size as you’re suggesting here as the CEO doesn’t currently sit on the board and I struggle to foresee a situation where that would ever happen again.
This proposed change does however have the likely consequence of increasing the size of the board from its current 9 (as it has been since at least I first got involved with the club) with 3 appointed directors (as current) to 10 with 4 appointed directors.

I won’t offer a view, but feel that’s an important clarification on the points you’ve made. If members are going to vote on these things it’s important they’re clear what they’re voting on IMO.


Thanks for clarifying. I missed Noonan’s post earlier about the exec role being ex-officio. I didn’t know that, just assumed they were a voting member.


No worries.

I think, but could be mistaken here, that Ian Robson was the last EFC CEO to sit on the board and thus be an Executive Director. I know Peter Jackson did, but certainly Xavier hasn’t and as I said I really can’t see a situation where another CEO would going forward thus making that clause IMO obsolete. But that’s a view clouded by my opinion that it’s a decent sized conflict to have the CEO sit on the very board that they are accountable to. Others may disagree.

In essence this change is removing an empty seat that was (IMO) never likely to be used again and replacing it with another appointed seat, thus potentially growing both the board and appointed Directors by 1 - I say potentially because the board could choose not to fill the new appointed seat for a period of time of course.


I think that’s entirely my point, you’re a lawyer yet didn’t fully understand the changes.

Also I would rather not have a President and Vice President. If you want gender neutral language simply Chair and Deputy Chair.

And I’m still not across what happened in the election ( or non election) this year and that makes me nervous.

I know to most these are little things… the club is flying and it’s easy to get caught up in that and miss the things that raise alarm bells.

I won’t ever do that again.


Sorry, … what’s not gender neutral about those titles?? :face_with_raised_eyebrow:


Lol nothing.
Currently we have a Chaiman and and a deputy Chairman, they’re proposing to move to the gender neutral President. I don’t see the point.

It blurs the lines and creates confusion with the CEO.


Ahhh. gotcha.

But is the CEO President?? Isn’t Eddie twin chinz “President”?? And others, in fact most others for that matter?

I don;t see any problem with that.


Does it? I’ve never seen Collingwood have that issue.

Edit: BSD beat me to it.


Probably best to quit while you’re not too far behind.


What happened?


Lindsay announced mid year in an article - https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/tanner-to-lead-the-bombers-until-2021-20180802-p4zv30.html - that he would be running for election as his current appointed seat term was coming to an end.

After some discussion Paul Brasher requested to run for an elected seat also - he did this in 2016 as well - as he wanted members to have their say on whether he stayed or not. Dave Barham was placed into Lindsay’s appointed seat so both Lindsay and Paul could nominate for election.

No one else nominated for the board this year, so there was no election.

edit: it’s worth noting about Brasher that there is always discussions about him being moved to an appointed seat as he is the Finance Director - a skill that would be a heavy loss on the board. This is the second time since I have been on the board that he has requested to go to election instead, relying on his work in the role to do the talking for him. Good man.


New Media component for the EFC website Katie.

“The Buzz” with Irving, … wait no, … Mozzie works better.


Thanks for the summary

@Darli what’s the issue?


I dare say the issue is that the reasoning was not summarised like that, perhaps.


You haven’t? That’s interesting.


Thanks Katie, it’s a good summary.

I remember the article and having this same discussion at the time.

So if I can summarise your summary…

  1. Paul Brasher and Dave Barham were due to run for election this year

  2. Lindsay Tanner’s appointed term was up thus he had to stand for election

  3. Dave Barham was moved from an elected seat to an appointed one to facilitate Lindsey Tanner running for election

  4. Paul Brasher, the logical choice for an appointed seat because of his unique skill set, chose not to accept one.

  5. Absolutely noone nominated for the board this year.



Pretty much nailed it.

edit: saved some $$s too!


I wonder if it would be helpful if the club in future, in the Annual Report (the Board Member bio bit) was very clear as to whether a Board Member was elected or appointed and when that last occurred. In trying to work out who was who in past years, it seemed that the words elected, appointed and joined were used interchangeably.