PDA

View Full Version : Lions just done what we cannot



floppinab
25th February 2003, 09:59 AM
Yep, I'm resurrecting this one again :p

http://www.couriermail.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,6034705%255E10389,00.html

Maybe those on this board who have had the time and are a little closer to the coterie/cocktail/Arunas groups might have heard something more about, what I believe was the majority view on this board following last years debate, a desire for AGM's & a democratic Board.

I've been doing what I generally don't like to do, peppering the Swans front office with questions about what might be going on with this issue. So far I have had no joy, plenty of we'll get back to you responses but nothing else.

We've had the financials issued

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/02/04/1044318608864.html

but as usual not distributed to members where their merits or otherwise could be openly debated. The only way to get 'em is to come up with hard earned to ASIC.

Even if an AGM is held at some point this year any reasonable debate on the financials would be pretty pointless given they are published now not in conjunction with any AGM held a long way down the track.

Last year the Chairman issued a statement confirming the intention to begin a democratic Board in 2003. I hope he is a man of his word.

Rizzo
25th February 2003, 01:34 PM
Lets keep the pressure up. The theme for the club this year is Evolution. We need it at the boardroom level as well as on the park.

Bron
25th February 2003, 07:12 PM
Swans Supporters Inc did flyer hand outs at NSO. Couldn't do so because of legalities at Stad Oz. One of the group's objectives is to get voting rights for members. Not for all board spots, but to make a start and get one or two elected members. There is currently a membership drive. Many people are supportive of the aim. Please click here (http://www.swanssupporters.org ) for more information. The more members with SSI, the stronger the voice is. A united front has greater credibility with the Club then voices in isolation.

Having said that, on the last occasion that I heard Colin Seery speak he restated that this was on the agenda for this year ... but there are still 10 1/2 months left in the year! Organising such a thing will be a pretty significant exercise and I can see no signs of activity.

Charlie
25th February 2003, 07:15 PM
I just had a thought. Won't a fully-elected board be too fan-heavy? Possibly without enough specialist expertise?

Maybe the best way to do is a mirror of the US government executive branch. The members elect the Chairman and dep. chairman, and then they choose the other members of the board.

Bart
25th February 2003, 09:45 PM
Originally posted by Bron
One of the group's objectives is to get voting rights for members. Not for all board spots, but to make a start and get one or two elected members.


"Members of SSI were instrumental in the 'Choose Roos' campaign" the brochure said. I'd be amazed if this was true

Why doesn't Carlos come on this board. He has been invited to this board on several occasions. Why does everything have to be so cloak and dagger.

Charlie
25th February 2003, 10:14 PM
Originally posted by Bart
"Members of SSI were instrumental in the 'Choose Roos' campaign" the brochure said. I'd be amazed if this was true

Why doesn't Carlos come on this board. He has been invited to this board on several occasions. Why does everything have to be so cloak and dagger.

It would certainly be alot easier to trust the guy if we were able to talk to him!

Bron - if you ever want to get general support on RWO, I would say you need to convince ACB to poke his head out.

Bron
26th February 2003, 08:34 AM
SSI is more than one person. Arunas has been the most visible from a media perspective, but others are involved, just as actively.

However, if you want to post some questions here, I can pass them on to get some responses. Not everyone wants to visit internet forums on a daily basis :) to keep up with discussions and answer questions.

Bart
26th February 2003, 08:46 AM
What about in the chat room on a Thursday night ?

floppinab
26th February 2003, 09:46 AM
Having said that, on the last occasion that I heard Colin Seery speak he restated that this was on the agenda for this year ... but there are still 10 1/2 months left in the year! Organising such a thing will be a pretty significant exercise and I can see no signs of activity.

This is a concern Bron, and as I said even if it held this year apart from the issue of hopefully having some sort of elections (whatever or however form they might take) the possibly to debate the accounts is lost given the Swans usually prepare them in the Nov. Dec. timeframe and publish in Jan/Feb.

My guess is the earliest we see action now is Jan/Feb. next year, a little disappointing given the stated Chairman's comments.


I just had a thought. Won't a fully-elected board be too fan-heavy? Possibly without enough specialist expertise?

Well Charlie, one way or another, I'm sure you could classify the current board as fans. I guess when you look around the current group of Swans members you and I may know, it could be easy to conclude that they would generally lack enough expertise. However I have no doubt that among the current Swans membership base there will be no shortage of people having the requisite or greater expertise (and more than likely a much fresher outlook) than the current Board to stand for a position.

CureTheSane
26th February 2003, 10:28 AM
I am still very anti having an elected board.

And as for this SSI thing, I have very grave reservations about that.

Just my opinion, but I am very happy with the members past and present that have represented the Swans on the board, and I see no reason for change.
It seems like change for changes sake to me.

Rizzo
26th February 2003, 02:33 PM
Hang on a sec, why the assumption that an elected board would have less of a skill set or be made up of fans? Or Charlie, are you referring to the skill set of the voters?

I can't see why an elected board would rule out candidates with a professional football, sporting club or financial background.

I'd vote for the best person for the job based on the skills they bring to the board and on the platform they stood for election on.

CTS - The change to an elected board has nothing to do with the performance of boards part and present, it's about giving the club's financial members a democratic voice and a chance to be more involved with the club beyond supporting the team. It would also provide transparency in the appointment process.

Charlie - After studying the American political system for a semester an Uni, I couldn't go anywhere near replicating something they do!

Charlie
26th February 2003, 04:02 PM
Rizzo - my concern is that an elected board would most likely not have the right mix of skills.

I have no doubt that at least a majority of Swans fans would be careful in who they vote for. However, I have a vision of our board being made up of former players, a couple of businessmen and.... well.... not a lot of other, specialised talent that may be less visibly important.

Say for instance, an advertising/marketing professional would be a huge asset on our board, but the role they play isn't visible like that of the chairman, or the former player who oversees the football department, or the high-profile businessman who is instrumental in securing sponsorship.

I'd much prefer to be able to choose one or two people, who then appoint a good mix of boardroom ability.

floppinab
26th February 2003, 04:12 PM
but I am very happy with the members past and present that have represented the Swans on the board

That you are happy with them is great CTS, but this is not the issue I believe. This issue is that if you were not happy with them, what could you do about it. The answer to that is of course there is nothing you can do.
Under a democratic scenario if you are happy with them, and enough other members agree with you then they will stay on and good luck to them.

And of course if they are screwing up, got their noses in the footy dept. too much, dragging the Club into too much debt, whatever, and enough members think the same then they'll be out on their ear.

CureTheSane
26th February 2003, 06:09 PM
Originally posted by Rizzo
I'd vote for the best person for the job based on the skills they bring to the board and on the platform they stood for election on.


Perhaps you would.
How much time would you put into the reasearch of the candidates?

Here's an example of just one potential problem.

Paul Kelly running for the board.
Now maybe Paul has every single skill and attribute rquired to make the best board member ever, maybe not.
The point is that THAT doesn't matter, he would be voted onto the board in a landslide.

And then we have the potential division within the supporters and coups and the like.

The only potential I see is a big mess.
And I swear to God, if that dude from this SSI runs, I will run for a spot on the board under the slogan
"if you're gonna vote for THAT no name unqualified person, why not vote for me"

LondonSwan
26th February 2003, 09:07 PM
Originally posted by CureTheSane
[B
The only potential I see is a big mess.
And I swear to God, if that dude from this SSI runs, I will run for a spot on the board under the slogan
"if you're gonna vote for THAT no name unqualified person, why not vote for me" [/B]

What is the SSI and how do I contact them.

Rizzo
27th February 2003, 11:09 AM
Have a look at the Carlton Board -

http://carltonfc.com.au/default.asp?pg=directors

Not a bad mix of skills, diverse backgounds, former players and life long supporters.

The club has hit rock bottom and the members vented their anger and booted Elliot (let's face it, his time was up). Imagine if their was no mechanism to do so?

Silvagni ran for this first time last year and is now on the board. Is he the right guy for the job? Dunno, but he ran because he believed changes needed to be made and, without question, has the clubs best interests at heart.

I can't see our PK running for election in the short term, but if he did, I'd hope that he would do it because he believed he had something to add rather than running just 'cause he's a shoo in.

I said in some posts last year, democracy is a double edged sword. Yes, we will have candidates running who we don't like and yes, stupid people are Swans members too. However, I'd rather have the choice in the members hands than being shut out of the process entirely.

Also, just because you have the option to vote, doesn't mean you have to exercise it. If you don't have time to research candidates or don't care, don't vote or give your proxy to the Chairman.

CureTheSane
27th February 2003, 11:53 AM
Originally posted by Rizzo
Have a look at the Carlton Board -

Probably one of the main reasons I am NOT in favour of this occuring for the Swans.
I would be ashamed to be a Blues supporter, with all the in fighting etc


Not a bad mix of skills, diverse backgounds, former players and life long supporters.

As the Swans have right now


Silvagni ran for this first time last year and is now on the board. Is he the right guy for the job? Dunno, but he ran because he believed changes needed to be made and, without question, has the clubs best interests at heart.


That scares the hell out of me.
Silvagni is a footbell player.
What skills does he bring to the table?
He has a role at the club, but on the board?
I thing there would be much more qualified people around, and they could be headhunter by the board if they didn't have to wait for the supporters to vote on it.



I can't see our PK running for election in the short term, but if he did, I'd hope that he would do it because he believed he had something to add rather than running just 'cause he's a shoo in.

I'm sure that HE would think he has a lot to offer the club, but would he really?
How would we gauge that?
Do we all sit down ans analyse his attributes, statements and promises?
Some supporters would but they would be in the very small %


I said in some posts last year, democracy is a double edged sword. Yes, we will have candidates running who we don't like and yes, stupid people are Swans members too. However, I'd rather have the choice in the members hands than being shut out of the process entirely.

I am not advocating a dictatorship as such, I but THEY are the ones who really know what skills and attributes need to be brought to the board, and THET BOARD are the best ones to go out and get them, so I'd prefer not to see a show of hands.


Also, just because you have the option to vote, doesn't mean you have to exercise it. If you don't have time to research candidates or don't care, don't vote or give your proxy to the Chairman.

If everyone thought like that, there most likely woudn't be a problem.

Rizzo, you are a great supporter, and I have no doubt that the whole process would work really well with you.
And tehre are mony others who would submit their vote in a mature and thoughtful way, too, but be very wary of people who have their own agenda.
And by that I mean simply people who think that the club will be more 'theirs' because they can vote, to the people who will look on this process in an opportunistic way.

Rizzo
27th February 2003, 02:52 PM
CTS - I'm not going to argue with you on this one as I can't guarantee your fears won't be realised, just as I can't guarantee our next PM won't be as much as a mug as Howard. I will say this, however, and that is a Sydney Swans football club that elects the board will only reflect the type of club we have in terms of the membership it attracts.

I think Carlton has as much infighting as Sydney, it's just more public because the processes are transparent.

The argument for 'experts' against 'popular' rulers is an old one and most thinkers is this field believe the best form of government is a benign dictator. Of course, once in power all bets are off and the people have no way to change things. Democracy is about participation and accountability. I agree it opens the doors for 'politicians' but it's up to us as active members to argue the pros and cons and weed these people out. Who's to say Silvangni wouldn't have got there through the backdoor anyway? Does he have less skills than some of our board members?

I don't know what line of business your in so I may be telling you how to suck eggs, but it's worth seeing a few company AGMs in the flesh to witness how ugly things can get on the floor for directors of big respectable companies. Shareholders these days are much more willing to stick it to boards that aren't performing and ask the tough questions. This is a fact of life people who put themselves in places of authority have to face every day.

I see the ability to vote for the board as an exciting opportunity to be involved at a grass roots level with the club. I'm not one to bail up players or administrators for a chat but in an open forum where club issues are discussed I'd be more than willing to put my hand up to ask questions and express my opinion.

There are risks to democracy but I see them as no more prevalent than the status quo. As I said, it's not just about outcomes it about process.

CureTheSane
27th February 2003, 03:18 PM
Originally posted by Rizzo
I don't know what line of business your in so I may be telling you how to suck eggs,

I currently work as a board member for the Sydney Swans ;)
lol

In the end, what will be will be.
The Swans seem to favour an elected board at the moment, so in a way I suppose I am beating a dead horse, so to speak.

One thing that WILL irritate me is when this SSI claim it was them who brought it about.

As far as the government goes, well, don't even get me started on the electoral system :lol
Suffice to say, I didn't vote little Johnny in, but I am a bit of a fan at the moment.

Hopefully whatever the Swans DO do, doesn't send parts of teh club to the ****ter, and we'll never have to talk about it again :)

I understand your POV and pray that it is realised fully if/when an elected board becomes a reality :)

CureTheSane
27th February 2003, 03:18 PM
the swear filters work :)

NMWBloods
27th February 2003, 03:22 PM
I agree with CtS that voting former players onto the Board is fraught with danger. Most of them have little experience in running a business, and that is what is required. I had a friend who worked at Hawthorn for a while, and many of the staff and board were ex-players. It was so badly run that he had to leave through frustration. The risk is that with an elected Board, it will chock full of ex-players. Let's say Paul Kelly did run - he would easily be voted in by supporters. But what does he know about running a football club?

floppinab
27th February 2003, 04:19 PM
Can't fault Rizzo's thoughts. I could not have put it better myself.

Overloading with ex-players is a danger, including the possibility that they end up lackeys to the Chairman or other senior members.
But having a few under a genuinely independent Chair, would bring an important perspective in as well.

If this does come about I'm confident the membership of the club will bring about a better situation than exists today. I believe the balance of evils and advantages lies with the alternative to the current situation, the problems of which we have already seen played out.

Bron
27th February 2003, 05:07 PM
SSI website (http://www.swanssupporters.org)

SWANSBEST
27th February 2003, 05:40 PM
Bron

How many members does SSI have at present?

Bron
28th February 2003, 05:08 PM
I'm not sure, sorry.

SSI
28th February 2003, 05:32 PM
Please see our post seeking your questions.

Ajn
1st March 2003, 11:04 AM
why do topics always drift like this?

Charlie
1st March 2003, 11:28 AM
Originally posted by Ajn
why do topics always drift like this?

I don't really know... but I sure wish it would stop raining here in Melbourne...

And it is my opinion that coke is better than pepsi.

;)

Cheer Cheer
1st March 2003, 01:41 PM
Originally posted by Charlie
... but I sure wish it would stop raining here in Melbourne...


Tell me about it! Hows it up your way?
Down on the mornington peninsula I think we got enough rain to fix the drought! The amount of hail we got covered the streets down here, it really looked like snow.
Anyway kept it coming, we bloody need it.