This place amazes me.
Hird tells you how it was. He's spinning it for the sake of the club.
The CEO tells you the same as Hird. He's spinning it too.
The chairman tells you the same thing. He to is spinning it.
The entire board tells you the same thing. They are spinning it as well.
A board member actually bothers to come here, but he tells you the same thing, so he's spinning it too.
Maybe it's about time some people had a look at the possibility that it is them doing the spinning, not Hird and the club.
Seems many have a predetermined position that regardless of anything they are told, will not change.
Seems to be lots of anger justification happening.
Lot's of classic Caro.
Not a matter of a predetermined position and not a matter of “classic Caro”. It’s a matter of already being completely ■■■■■■ off with a board that showed zero support for Hird while he was away, presided over the Crichton medal fiasco when he came back, and expects us to believe their confected spin now.
As I said before, about time the board stopped treating the members like idiots, producing inane media releases that say nothing. I don’t trust any of them to tell truth nor to be honest about anything. The really sad part is I think I there are a lot of others who hold the board in the same low regard. Not good for our club, anyway you look at it.
Zero support for Hird while he was away…well apart from paying his salary, and his school fees
Chrichton Medal Debacle - no argument from me there…except maybe debacle isn’t a strong enough word
It's a strong word.
PL: Little bit of history. Mark agreed to take on the job for 12 months. There was a clear internal and external perception that Mark’s role was one year. We also had an agreement with Mark that we wanted him to stay and we would create a role. We had been in attempted communication with Bomber for a number of weeks about fine-tuning the role, but what was happening unbeknown to us was Mark was transitioning from wanting just a role to wanting the role. That’s OK, too. He’s excellent at it, he had a taste of it, and all those things were happening with Mark. Mark’s declaration at the Crichton Medal that he would find it very hard to play with the second XVIII, that he wanted stay with the First XVIII as a figure of speech, really took us all by surprise. Not only had we not been able to catch up with Mark to talk about the lesser role, Mark had gone public and said he wanted a top role.
MR: Do you think he was advertising himself for the top role at Essendon?
PL: No, I think he was making himself available to anyone.
MR: Shocked at his comments?
PL: Yes, good word “shocked”. I didn’t see it coming.
MR: My understanding is Bomber was led to believe he would be coaching Essendon in 2015. Was he offered the job?
PL: You can’t offer the job if it’s not there to be offered.
Paul, do you think James felt he had nothing more to offer as coach of Essendon?
Do you believe it was James’ preference to not be coach of Essendon?
Do you believe that by accepting his resignation you were just complying with what James wanted?
This place amazes me.
Hird tells you how it was. He's spinning it for the sake of the club.
The CEO tells you the same as Hird. He's spinning it too.
The chairman tells you the same thing. He to is spinning it.
The entire board tells you the same thing. They are spinning it as well.
A board member actually bothers to come here, but he tells you the same thing, so he's spinning it too.
Maybe it's about time some people had a look at the possibility that it is them doing the spinning, not Hird and the club.
Seems many have a predetermined position that regardless of anything they are told, will not change.
Seems to be lots of anger justification happening.
Lot's of classic Caro.
Not a matter of a predetermined position and not a matter of “classic Caro”. It’s a matter of already being completely ■■■■■■ off with a board that showed zero support for Hird while he was away, presided over the Crichton medal fiasco when he came back, and expects us to believe their confected spin now.
As I said before, about time the board stopped treating the members like idiots, producing inane media releases that say nothing. I don’t trust any of them to tell truth nor to be honest about anything. The really sad part is I think I there are a lot of others who hold the board in the same low regard. Not good for our club, anyway you look at it.
Zero support for Hird while he was away…well apart from paying his salary, and his school fees
Chrichton Medal Debacle - no argument from me there…except maybe debacle isn’t a strong enough word
It's a strong word.
PL: Little bit of history. Mark agreed to take on the job for 12 months. There was a clear internal and external perception that Mark’s role was one year. We also had an agreement with Mark that we wanted him to stay and we would create a role. We had been in attempted communication with Bomber for a number of weeks about fine-tuning the role, but what was happening unbeknown to us was Mark was transitioning from wanting just a role to wanting the role. That’s OK, too. He’s excellent at it, he had a taste of it, and all those things were happening with Mark. Mark’s declaration at the Crichton Medal that he would find it very hard to play with the second XVIII, that he wanted stay with the First XVIII as a figure of speech, really took us all by surprise. Not only had we not been able to catch up with Mark to talk about the lesser role, Mark had gone public and said he wanted a top role.
MR: Do you think he was advertising himself for the top role at Essendon?
PL: No, I think he was making himself available to anyone.
MR: Shocked at his comments?
PL: Yes, good word “shocked”. I didn’t see it coming.
MR: My understanding is Bomber was led to believe he would be coaching Essendon in 2015. Was he offered the job?
PL: You can’t offer the job if it’s not there to be offered.
Paying Hirds salary and school fees while he is away isn’t different to many executive packages both in the private and public sectors.
The communication from the club over the past three years have been abysmal as you well know Darli. A coherent message would have been a start. Proactive communication, getting on the front foot would have helped. Problem is failing that they weren’t even reactive. They were non existent and allowed the MSM to ride roughshod over the club.
I wouldn’t have accepted Hirds resignation. I would have asked him to stay on to complete his contract to the end of 2016.
No idea what the impediments of the afl are, but like a lot of what the afl does any impediments may well be illegal.
Confidentiality in any decision making process is important, but not the be all and end all. I would be more concerned with director obligation under the relevant legislation.
Commercial in confidence applies to discussions that are commercial in confidence. There is no way they should apply as a blanket to all discussions at board level.
This place amazes me.
Hird tells you how it was. He's spinning it for the sake of the club.
The CEO tells you the same as Hird. He's spinning it too.
The chairman tells you the same thing. He to is spinning it.
The entire board tells you the same thing. They are spinning it as well.
A board member actually bothers to come here, but he tells you the same thing, so he's spinning it too.
Maybe it's about time some people had a look at the possibility that it is them doing the spinning, not Hird and the club.
Seems many have a predetermined position that regardless of anything they are told, will not change.
Seems to be lots of anger justification happening.
Lot's of classic Caro.
Not a matter of a predetermined position and not a matter of “classic Caro”. It’s a matter of already being completely ■■■■■■ off with a board that showed zero support for Hird while he was away, presided over the Crichton medal fiasco when he came back, and expects us to believe their confected spin now.
As I said before, about time the board stopped treating the members like idiots, producing inane media releases that say nothing. I don’t trust any of them to tell truth nor to be honest about anything. The really sad part is I think I there are a lot of others who hold the board in the same low regard. Not good for our club, anyway you look at it.
Zero support for Hird while he was away…well apart from paying his salary, and his school fees
Chrichton Medal Debacle - no argument from me there…except maybe debacle isn’t a strong enough word
It's a strong word.
PL: Little bit of history. Mark agreed to take on the job for 12 months. There was a clear internal and external perception that Mark’s role was one year. We also had an agreement with Mark that we wanted him to stay and we would create a role. We had been in attempted communication with Bomber for a number of weeks about fine-tuning the role, but what was happening unbeknown to us was Mark was transitioning from wanting just a role to wanting the role. That’s OK, too. He’s excellent at it, he had a taste of it, and all those things were happening with Mark. Mark’s declaration at the Crichton Medal that he would find it very hard to play with the second XVIII, that he wanted stay with the First XVIII as a figure of speech, really took us all by surprise. Not only had we not been able to catch up with Mark to talk about the lesser role, Mark had gone public and said he wanted a top role.
MR: Do you think he was advertising himself for the top role at Essendon?
PL: No, I think he was making himself available to anyone.
MR: Shocked at his comments?
PL: Yes, good word “shocked”. I didn’t see it coming.
MR: My understanding is Bomber was led to believe he would be coaching Essendon in 2015. Was he offered the job?
PL: You can’t offer the job if it’s not there to be offered.
For me it’s not what Bomber Thompson said.
But more so how Hird didn’t attend and wasn’t even mentioned.
I don’t understand how any board can allow such a thing to happen. There should have been 5 minutes dedicated to what to look forward to. Instead it was ignored.
The upcoming B&F will be solely about the future. Although I’d love it if Hird turned up.
All through the ASAGA Hird has had to deal with “duress, threats and inducements” from both inside and outside the club. For example…
"James AFL have said they will not do EFC deal unless we stand you down. Your decision not to take 12 months is going to impact the total club. This dispute is about to get very messy because you won’t take another 6 months ie a total of 12. If you really want to do what’s in the best interest of the club & its players take 12 months. Anything else will be selfish. Paul.”
Maybe a HISTORY of backroom deals (glossed over with carefully constructed PR narratives) is the reason some of us are sceptical of the ‘Hird chose to resign, board unanimously accepts resignation’ fairy tale.
This place amazes me.
Hird tells you how it was. He's spinning it for the sake of the club.
The CEO tells you the same as Hird. He's spinning it too.
The chairman tells you the same thing. He to is spinning it.
The entire board tells you the same thing. They are spinning it as well.
A board member actually bothers to come here, but he tells you the same thing, so he's spinning it too.
Maybe it's about time some people had a look at the possibility that it is them doing the spinning, not Hird and the club.
Seems many have a predetermined position that regardless of anything they are told, will not change.
Seems to be lots of anger justification happening.
Lot's of classic Caro.
Not a matter of a predetermined position and not a matter of “classic Caro”. It’s a matter of already being completely ■■■■■■ off with a board that showed zero support for Hird while he was away, presided over the Crichton medal fiasco when he came back, and expects us to believe their confected spin now.
As I said before, about time the board stopped treating the members like idiots, producing inane media releases that say nothing. I don’t trust any of them to tell truth nor to be honest about anything. The really sad part is I think I there are a lot of others who hold the board in the same low regard. Not good for our club, anyway you look at it.
Zero support for Hird while he was away…well apart from paying his salary, and his school fees
Chrichton Medal Debacle - no argument from me there…except maybe debacle isn’t a strong enough word
It's a strong word.
PL: Little bit of history. Mark agreed to take on the job for 12 months. There was a clear internal and external perception that Mark’s role was one year. We also had an agreement with Mark that we wanted him to stay and we would create a role. We had been in attempted communication with Bomber for a number of weeks about fine-tuning the role, but what was happening unbeknown to us was Mark was transitioning from wanting just a role to wanting the role. That’s OK, too. He’s excellent at it, he had a taste of it, and all those things were happening with Mark. Mark’s declaration at the Crichton Medal that he would find it very hard to play with the second XVIII, that he wanted stay with the First XVIII as a figure of speech, really took us all by surprise. Not only had we not been able to catch up with Mark to talk about the lesser role, Mark had gone public and said he wanted a top role.
MR: Do you think he was advertising himself for the top role at Essendon?
PL: No, I think he was making himself available to anyone.
MR: Shocked at his comments?
PL: Yes, good word “shocked”. I didn’t see it coming.
MR: My understanding is Bomber was led to believe he would be coaching Essendon in 2015. Was he offered the job?
PL: You can’t offer the job if it’s not there to be offered.
“Is it possible that given the Board was endeavouring to sack Hird before he had the chance to return in 2015 and this was known by Bomba, that Bomba’s awkward commentary at the Crichton was to give supporters some confidence that at least he would remain available to continue coaching should Hird be sidelined?”
This place amazes me.
Hird tells you how it was. He's spinning it for the sake of the club.
The CEO tells you the same as Hird. He's spinning it too.
The chairman tells you the same thing. He to is spinning it.
The entire board tells you the same thing. They are spinning it as well.
A board member actually bothers to come here, but he tells you the same thing, so he's spinning it too.
Maybe it's about time some people had a look at the possibility that it is them doing the spinning, not Hird and the club.
Seems many have a predetermined position that regardless of anything they are told, will not change.
Seems to be lots of anger justification happening.
Lot's of classic Caro.
Paying Hirds salary and school fees while he is away isn't different to many executive packages both in the private and public sectors.
1. The communication from the club over the past three years have been abysmal as you well know Darli. A coherent message would have been a start. Proactive communication, I getting on the front foot would have helped. Problem is failing that they weren't even reactive. They were non existent and allowed the MSM to ride roughshod over the club.
2. I wouldn't have accepted Hirds resignation. I would have asked him to stay on to complete his contract to the end of 2016.
3. No idea what the impediments of the afl are, but like a lot of what the afl does any impediments may well be illegal.
4. Confidentiality in any decision making process is important, but not the be all and end all. I would be more concerned with director obligation under the relevant legislation.
5. Commercial in confidence applies to discussions that are commercial in confidence. There is no way they should apply as a blanket to all discussions at board level.
True re the salary etc…but still a level of support
1 Yep I know…it’s why I asked the question…I’ve asked it of myself Many times…hard to offer a coherent message when the goalposts keep changing but agree they could have and should have done much better. But I didn’t ask you what they’ve done wrong, we all know that, I asked hat you would have done differently.
Under any circumstances?
Then if you’ve no idea it’s probably best not to comment or criticise until you do
What are these Director obligations and which act do they fall under
Yes, I know what the term means, as I’m sure you know that much discussed at Board level would fall under this category. I was asking how you would reconcile this with your policy of openness and transparency
Okay, I’ll throw this further than Paul.
To the connected.
Reboot, Riolio, anyone else who ‘hears things’ and doesn’t understand people’s scepticism.
Do you think James felt he had nothing more to offer as coach of Essendon?
Do you believe it was James’ preference to not be coach of Essendon?
Do you believe that by accepting his resignation you were just complying with what James wanted?
Give me three yes’s and I swear I’ll take your word for it.
But like a lot of other people here, I’m not going to cop statements framed just so.
Or, you know, don’t.
But if not then stop with the whole ‘I can’t understand it…’ garbage.
I'm sick of hearing about what a legend of the club James Hird is.
No ■■■■ I'm a paid up member and have been for as long as I can remember and as such know how much of a legend he is.
What I want to hear is how our football club could let down such a legend?
The players let down Hird not the board imo. Could the whole situation been handled better, of course.
If you are happy to blame the board, why arent all of you putting the same amount of blame on the players. They let him down badly on the field this year plain and simple.
This is not specificaly a go at you Sammy, but a go at all the people that are getting stuck into the board over Hird no longer being coach.
Okay, I'll throw this further than Paul.
To the connected.
Reboot, Riolio, anyone else who 'hears things' and doesn't understand people's scepticism.
Do you think James felt he had nothing more to offer as coach of Essendon?
Do you believe it was James’ preference to not be coach of Essendon?
Do you believe that by accepting his resignation you were just complying with what James wanted?
Give me three yes’s and I swear I’ll take your word for it.
But like a lot of other people here, I’m not going to cop statements framed just so.
Or, you know, don’t.
But if not then stop with the whole ‘I can’t understand it…’ garbage.
Wimmera1 is clearly not an idiot, and knows that no matter how hard you try to dress up a piece of poo, its still a piece of poo.
I have always thought Riolio and Reboot were in that territory as well, which is I am having a hard time truly believing their meek acceptance of what took place with HIrd.
But to be fair you framed the questions in a way that no other response is possible
In return I have a question…
Do you believe this decision making process was more complex than ‘what the coach wants’
Which question is there no other response possible, did Hird resign?
Why won’t you believe us when we say ‘Nothing to do with us?’
That we supported James all the way, it’s just what he thought was best?
Was the decision more complex than that?
From how it looks like to me, yes and no.
Yes it was, no it never had to be.
Edit: But i do thank you for your honest appraisal.
Paying Hirds salary and school fees while he is away isn't different to many executive packages both in the private and public sectors.
1. The communication from the club over the past three years have been abysmal as you well know Darli. A coherent message would have been a start. Proactive communication, I getting on the front foot would have helped. Problem is failing that they weren't even reactive. They were non existent and allowed the MSM to ride roughshod over the club.
2. I wouldn't have accepted Hirds resignation. I would have asked him to stay on to complete his contract to the end of 2016.
3. No idea what the impediments of the afl are, but like a lot of what the afl does any impediments may well be illegal.
4. Confidentiality in any decision making process is important, but not the be all and end all. I would be more concerned with director obligation under the relevant legislation.
5. Commercial in confidence applies to discussions that are commercial in confidence. There is no way they should apply as a blanket to all discussions at board level.
True re the salary etc…but still a level of support
1 Yep I know…it’s why I asked the question…I’ve asked it of myself Many times…hard to offer a coherent message when the goalposts keep changing but agree they could have and should have done much better. But I didn’t ask you what they’ve done wrong, we all know that, I asked hat you would have done differently.
Under any circumstances?
Then if you’ve no idea it’s probably best not to comment or criticise until you do
What are these Director obligations and which act do they fall under
Yes, I know what the term means, as I’m sure you know that much discussed at Board level would fall under this category. I was asking how you would reconcile this with your policy of openness and transparency
I can’t be bothered going on and on with this but
Consistent message, proactive messaging. Support for all EFC employees. Not allowing the clubs brand to be trashed by logo manipulation
I would have provided support for him to continue.
I havent commented or criticised the afl impediments. And I am free to comment or criticise anything I like
There are various director obligations under the companies act.
I have answered this, either commercial in confidence or it’s not.
Paying Hirds salary and school fees while he is away isn't different to many executive packages both in the private and public sectors.
1. The communication from the club over the past three years have been abysmal as you well know Darli. A coherent message would have been a start. Proactive communication, I getting on the front foot would have helped. Problem is failing that they weren't even reactive. They were non existent and allowed the MSM to ride roughshod over the club.
2. I wouldn't have accepted Hirds resignation. I would have asked him to stay on to complete his contract to the end of 2016.
3. No idea what the impediments of the afl are, but like a lot of what the afl does any impediments may well be illegal.
4. Confidentiality in any decision making process is important, but not the be all and end all. I would be more concerned with director obligation under the relevant legislation.
5. Commercial in confidence applies to discussions that are commercial in confidence. There is no way they should apply as a blanket to all discussions at board level.
True re the salary etc…but still a level of support
1 Yep I know…it’s why I asked the question…I’ve asked it of myself Many times…hard to offer a coherent message when the goalposts keep changing but agree they could have and should have done much better. But I didn’t ask you what they’ve done wrong, we all know that, I asked hat you would have done differently.
Under any circumstances?
Then if you’ve no idea it’s probably best not to comment or criticise until you do
What are these Director obligations and which act do they fall under
Yes, I know what the term means, as I’m sure you know that much discussed at Board level would fall under this category. I was asking how you would reconcile this with your policy of openness and transparency
I can’t be bothered going on and on with this but
Consistent message, proactive messaging. Support for all EFC employees. Not allowing the clubs brand to be trashed by logo manipulation
I would have provided support for him to continue.
I havent commented or criticised the afl impediments. And I am free to comment or criticise anything I like
There are various director obligations under the companies act.
I have answered this, either commercial in confidence or it’s not.
Okies, I just thought with you being so vocal you would welcome this kind of proactive discussion.
But to be fair you framed the questions in a way that no other response is possible
In return I have a question…
Do you believe this decision making process was more complex than ‘what the coach wants’
Which question is there no other response possible, did Hird resign?
Why won’t you believe us when we say ‘Nothing to do with us?’
That we supported James all the way, it’s just what he thought was best?
Was the decision more complex than that?
From how it looks like to me, yes and no.
Yes it was, no it never had to be.
Edit: But i do thank you for your honest appraisal.
Ummm I may be going mad but are those are completely different questions to the ones you originally asked?
But to be fair you framed the questions in a way that no other response is possible
In return I have a question…
Do you believe this decision making process was more complex than ‘what the coach wants’
Which question is there no other response possible, did Hird resign?
Why won’t you believe us when we say ‘Nothing to do with us?’
That we supported James all the way, it’s just what he thought was best?
Was the decision more complex than that?
From how it looks like to me, yes and no.
Yes it was, no it never had to be.
Edit: But i do thank you for your honest appraisal.
Ummm I may be going mad but are those are completely different questions to the ones you originally asked?
Possibly you’re going mad, because they are the same questions reframed.
Sorry Reboot, I respect the hell out of your posting but you clearly haven’t worked in HR.
I have been involved (unfortunately) in the ‘downsizing’ or around 1000 positions over my career and about 900 of them will be listed as ‘resignations’… when in reality about 20 were.
You sit an employee down (after not supporting them in their role for about 6 months) and tell them that they can ‘resign’, get a pay out and receive a good reference OR they can be fired, get no reference and get less payout. 99.9999999% of the time… they take the ‘resignation’ option.
So I’m sorry but it is not that I am calling anyone at the club liars (although they all have been lying to us for 3+ years now) BUT I know how these things work.
Step A: Support for Hird removed (evidence includes no BF last year, push for Thompson to stay, Little offering inducements to step down)
Step B: Make role tougher (evidence includes putting 3 ‘over managers’ above him to stifle all productivity, remove public support)
Step C: Plant seeds of doubt (evidence includes notable high profile EFC people ‘leaking’ about the lack of clean air with Hird around)
Step D: Move in for the Kill (wait for Hird to talk to you about what is best for the club, then politely tell him that you do not believe he is the best man for the job, that the club will never have clear air whilst he is there and that it would be best he leaves)
Step E: Make it look pretty (Allow Hird to tender his ‘resignation’ and spin the shit out it)
So I absolutely believe that Hird tendered his resignation, I have no doubt that it was him at the press conference speaking honestly from the heart and I have no doubt that he tried to make the best of a bad situation.
That does not mean that he wasn’t forced out of his position over the last 2 years through lies, manipulation and back room deals with the AFL, media and others.
Sacked, resigned, retrenched… whatever… Hird is gone because Little wanted him gone, the AFL wanted him gone and the AFL Media wanted him gone. Hird did not suddenly wake up one day and say “I do not want to coach the EFC anymore”