Sure made sure it couldn’t happen again, so I guess that’s an impact.
1 Like
I think you’re missing the point that they got us there in the first place… but sure I’ll bite… sorry @Hoffy and @saladin … maybe you guys can move this discussion to where it belongs …
Lol how long are clappers going to give the board and exec that excuse? That was 5 years ago, we were through that and had recovered on field and off by the end of 2017 - and then have completely ■■■■■■ up virtually every major decision since meaning the club is in a significantly worse position on and off field 4 years later.
Yes the saga sucked, yes the board and exec of the time did a great job to get through it, but that’s ancient history. If people are still clinging to the saga as an excuse to give the board and exec a pass today and ignore the laundry list of mistakes made in the past 4-5 years that have put the club where it is now, that is the definition of blind faith.
Xavier has been CEO since 2014, Paul Brasher a director since 2011, Simon Madden 2013, Dave Barham & Andrew Muir 2015, Wellman and Mel Green are already a year into their second terms, Katie Lio just finished after 6 years.
This board and exec are not new, and they’ve all had 4-5 years post saga in which they’ve managed to turn a club on the rise on and off field at the end of 2017 to a laughing stock of optics and deflection today and for the past 4 years.
Maybe you’re fine with that and think our board and exec should get infinite free passes on any mistakes made no matter how damaging for our once great club in the name of blind support.
I’m not.
10 Likes
And that’s the reason they want people to commit beforehand.
3 Likes
Does anyone know what number waterman was in the match sim highlights
1 Like
49 and then changed to 37 I believe
1 Like
I’m not denying members should always hold individual board members accountable but as a collective it’s very easy to say “the board” and by extension the executive have failed to achieve on field success yet as you articulated the individuals that make up the “board” have been constantly changing since 2012.
I’d doubt there’s been a single unanimous decision made in that time and without having been on a board I’d guess that the President and Vice-President typically hold the power votes.
Can imagine X was due to step aside after the Worsfold replacement was announced but with the uncertainty surrounding Covid and then the sacking of Richardson and the corresponding review into the football department I’d assume the board thought it prudent to stagger the appointments of key individuals to minimise overall club disruption.
To replace a President, Coach and Football Manager as well as a CEO all in the space of 12 months would be unprecedented I would imagine, particularly in a year such as 2020.
I tend to agree with you.
I will say though,whilst being a director.
Paul Brasher wasn’t able to exert the influence
and have the authority to take action,like he does
now. I will see this year how it goes.
I really do see Worsfolds extension as a major reason for such poor performances in the last couple years.
His ‘player driven’, opposed to ‘coach driven’ culture was the absolute worst thing to implement for the list,and it had nothing to do with talent.
Why?
Because the list had a bunch of post saga players that appeared at times to be gifted several games past where their performance justified being dropped.
I’d be a bit resentful if I was busting my butt of in the 2s and seeing a ‘leader’ playing poorly and still holding their spot.
We had a bunch of potentially elite under 22s coming through that needed guidance and leadership.
Who did it come from? The coach? Hurls,Hepp,Hooker,Zaka,Myers,J farkin D???.
Psychologically worn out post saga Boys,and a couple of boys like Stringer,Shiel,Saad and Smith who just arrived on the scene.
On field,we’ve had this disjointed looking game style which last year finally fell in a heap.
In trying to implement a game style where everyone had to buy in,and play for each other.
We displayed some of our worst footy for years.
Not sure it was so much learnings,as internally fractured relationships.
Only now do I see a genuine core of a group of boys that appear to be unified.
Thankfully they are under 22.
And they are a mighty talented bunch.
It’s the only hope I have atm.
2 Likes
This board and exec are not new, and they’ve all had 4-5 years post saga in which they’ve managed to turn a club on the rise on and off field at the end of 2017 to a laughing stock of optics and deflection today and for the past 4 years.
Maybe you’re fine with that and think our board and exec should get infinite free passes on any mistakes made no matter how damaging for our once great club in the name of blind support.
I’m not.
[/quote]
Think this is the key to the issue you raised regarding spin and deflection. In hindsight the rise you refer to heading into 2017 was clearly based on promise rather than substance but at the time you can’t blame the board and management for riding the wave of expectation that came with the relatively successful return of senior players post 2016 and the promising form of young players in their absence.
There are some obvious reasons we haven’t fulfilled that promise, ie. injury and significant drop off of form of senior players as well as poor coaching appointments and performance but to say individual board members and management in charge over that period haven’t been held accountable I don’t think is totally accurate.
Non members wanting the same access and benefits as members 
1 Like
Um, what??
The board gave Xavier a fat new contract and significant pay rise at the end of 2019.
He wasn’t ‘due to step aside’, the board begged him to stay and gave him a big pay rise to do so when the rumours emerged the AFL had offered him the job as CEO of Marvel Stadium, a job that incidentally I’m very reliably told the AFL had no intention of giving him.
It’s easily as big of a mistake as the Worsfold extension that everyone talks about on here, in truth significantly bigger as it further empowered the guy who’s responsible for most of our mistakes, including the Worsfold extension.
The suggestion that the board planned to move him on only for COVID to save him is not rooted in any sort of reality, in fact the opposite is true; the board trust him completely and view and pay him as a premier CEO in the comp.
1 Like
Back on training- Where’s the Team?!!!
And semi seriously, anyone know what playing conditions they’ve agreed on?
24 a side?
22 and swap in another, different, 4 players for the second half?
Will all of Big Sammy, Phillips & Bryan get a run?
Maybe easier to work out who won’t be playing;
McGrath Hurley Zaharakis McBride, Mozzie, Ambrose, Zerk, Stringer, Johnston
That’s 34 to choose from, plus Waterman & the other trialling players.
Brand, Eyre & Hird would have to be unlikely
Still some interesting decisions to be made
6 Likes
My bad found this link but for some reason had in my head it was an agreement to stay on to see out the Worsfold-Rutten transition not the long term extension referred to in the article.
Would expect X will be on thin ice should the team’s on field cohesiveness and tangible game style, which Brasher has hung his Presidency on, not improve significantly in the next 12 months.
Ah yes, the traditional members only practice match.
Pass the larks uvulas.
4 Likes
Yes this place is toxic sometimes
1 Like
It’s amazing how hard it is for certain people to understand…
I have given up.
1 Like
The fact the terms of his extension haven’t been made public let alone that it even happened at all is possibly an even bigger indictment on the Lindsay Tanner led board and any members still representing Brasher included. Thanks for the clarification 
Completely unreasonable to expect a civil and well articulated conversation on a fan forum I know. Thanks for your contribution.
Apologies to the OP and everyone present for hijacking the post
Replying to my own post in an attempt to get back to football;
Traditionally the first practice game has seen more young players, with senior players rested.
The second is closer to the predicted Round 1 side.
On the other hand, we’re clearly trying to bed down a revised backline, and figure out some options with the forwards.
So a backline with Heppell, Hind, and Cahill playing some match time seems likely.
Do they squeeze Laverde in?
Plus Francis Hooker Ridley Redman & Stewart
Seems one too many, even for a practice match with extended numbers.
Similarly 2MP and Jones seem monties for the forward line.
Does Perkins get a taste?
Again, for the sake of chemistry & systems Walla Smith, Snelling plus the resting mids take up most of the spots.
Figure Cox would have to be a near certainty
Edit - oh yeah - usually you’d expect to see Waterman get a run to audition for a list spot
8 Likes
You’ve made that abundantly clear multiple times, along with a swag of insinuations and criticisms about Xavier Campbell.
Apart from re-appointing your good friend @Paul_Cousins to the board, do you have any other solutions, or suggestions?
4 Likes