Swans elected board

[floppinab]

Ok - clearly I've got it wrong then. I understand now.

All the good decisions were made by everyone else and Colless had nothing to do with any of them.

All the bad decisions were made by Colless only, acting alone.

Well it was you who appeared to want to credit him with everything positive that has happened to the Club in the last 10 years. He's had a lot less direct influence in those issues you pointed out than you are suggesting.

Try this then.

In a lengthy interview in the Weekend edition of the Telegraph following Eade getting the message and walking last year, Colless was directly quoted as saying we would have some type of elected representation on the Board by the end of this year.
Why state it if you know damn well it's not going to happen.

[i'm-uninformed2]

Originally posted by i'm-uninformed2
Whatever we do - we have to keep Richard Colless on there. He is a man who could be doing anything but puts his life into the Swans because he wants them to succeed and has shown nothing but honour and commitment to the club. Think about it - are we better off as a club since he has been involved or not?

Here's my original post - I don't see where I'm challenging your argument rather than merely advocating a case for his ongoing value.

So I'll ask again - just to be clear - who is your alternative chairman?

[DST]

Originally posted by floppinab
I'll have a crack at these one by one



Colless had little to do with Eade's selection at the time, although Joseph had departed prior to Eade's appointment he had a far more significant hand in getting Eade to Sydney



Joseph again



This one takes the cake, was one of the main reasons of Eades falling out with Colless



Maybe but to date the Club has been losing money every year from this deal. He sure as hell could have brokered a far better deal for the Club



Again largely through the value of guys that have been around longer than Colless such as Basil Sellers, the Willesees, Craig Kimberley and so forth are the result of our better facilities and ability to hang on to out of towners

As Bron has mentioned earlier all I remember from Colless are his broken promises (the interview in the Tele last year took the cake) and hoo har over petty issues.

You can argue the case either way Floppy, all the above is correct but in the end a club strength comes from all it's collective people of which Richard Colles is but one.

But I will say this, the club has had to deal with an Olympics and a Rugby World Cup in the short space of three years and has still managed to drag itself through at near break even piont.

Could you have said that about our club before Richard Colles took over, I for one think that it may have been a totally differrent story otherwise and credit must be given to the president for the circumstances we find our selves in at present.

DST

[knownothing]

for me Colless seems to ignore the clubs rich history - those who put so much into the team over the years. For instance, whatever happened to the couple who got married on the scg at half time during the Eldelstien era. Colless never mentions them.

[floppinab]

You can argue the case either way Floppy

Sure can, and will continue to

all the above is correct but in the end a club strength comes from all it's collective people of which Richard Colles is but one

of the weakest

But I will say this, the club has had to deal with an Olympics and a Rugby World Cup in the short space of three years and has still managed to drag itself through at near break even piont.

Which makes you think, as others have said, how much of a better position we should be. We've had solid long term sponsorship, reasonable if not brilliant core membership, some huge money come in to improve player facilities. You point out challenges yes but we should be in a better position.

[i'm-uninformed2]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by floppinab
[B]Sure can, and will continue to

of the weakest


on what basis of relative merit is this judgement made? C'mon, I was attacked on the basis of my facts. What is the factual basis of this statement or are we back to the "we don't like richard colless because he doesn't do things like blindly appoint the coach we as fans want without due process" argument

[floppinab]

I've posted two already,

The committment to some form of elected Board representation by the end of this year.

The Stadium Australia deal, which was the primary cause for the mid-year financial crises,
which in turn has appeared to be no more than a bad case of crying wolf!!

[DST]

Originally posted by floppinab
Which makes you think, as others have said, how much of a better position we should be. We've had solid long term sponsorship, reasonable if not brilliant core membership, some huge money come in to improve player facilities. You point out challenges yes but we should be in a better position.

But that is exactly my point and supports my argument.

Companies don't throw money at sporting clubs if they feel they are badly run and or do not generate a return for sponsorhsip or are not of the image they want to promote.

Club patrons don't donate good money to improve facilities if they do not feel included and wanted by the club.

Membership has been stable despite a couple of years treading water results wise.

With forsight we now have a second home ground that can accomodate 81,000 and provide the club with a boosted revenue source in future years once the $3 Million debt is paid off.

We have had two of the three biggest sporting contests in the world in the last three years and are still standing without borrowing to keep ourselves a float and burdening future administrators of the club.

All this points to the fact that our club president while not delivering on a promise to have a member elected representatives on the board by next year has done a good job on what matters to the club now.

Hopefully Richard with the rugby world cup out of the way, Roos settled as coach and the team starting to play some exiting football can now take the club to the next phase which is returning it back to a member based structure.

DST

[i'm-uninformed2]

Originally posted by floppinab
I've posted two already,

The committment to some form of elected Board representation by the end of this year.

The Stadium Australia deal, which was the primary cause for the mid-year financial crises,
which in turn has appeared to be no more than a bad case of crying wolf!!

No, that's the glib answer. Why is it he is responsible for none of the good decisions but all of the bad ones?

And AGAIN - your alternative chairman is?

[DST]

Originally posted by floppinab
I've posted two already,

The committment to some form of elected Board representation by the end of this year.

The Stadium Australia deal, which was the primary cause for the mid-year financial crises,
which in turn has appeared to be no more than a bad case of crying wolf!!

The stadium Australia deal is and will continue to be an out and out success story for this club. Do you think we were going to be able to grow revenue and attract further supporters and sponsors by remaining at the SCG.

It was the SCG that was killing this club not the Telstra Stadium deal we have done.

How do you think both Essendon and Collingwood have come to get 40,000 members, strong sponsorship and boosted revenue? By playing constant big game blockbusters at the MCG, with it's capacity of 100,000, great transport and some of the best corporate facilities in Australia.

Colles, the board and thank god the AFL had the forsight to see that out club was only going to prosper if the Stadium Australia deal was done.

Can you beleive how it would look now if we did not configure the stadium to AFL, we would have been suffocated under the restrictive SCG.

DST

[Maestro]

As a solution to the considerable angst this topic appears to generate (though I am unsure why such disharmony arises on this matter), I would like to humbly offer myself as the Alternative Chairman of the club, as a way of peacefully resolving this debate.

My platform is simple - I will be the (barracking) voice of redandwhiteonline in the boardroom, the locker-room and sidelines. I will use my privileged position to pass on all your comments directly to the players concerned. I will immediately call for a review of the material used in our player's guerseys (cotton is a fabric with breathes).

Just as Bilbo senses the approach of the Sauron's Black Riders, so too must Richard Colless sense the sound of my hoofs as they gallop to the door of the Basil Sellers Centre, in a metaphorically mixed way.

But seriously, my great fear is that someone like me will get on the board and create havoc - we have a lot of great supporters but they may not be great board members. Personally, I'd like things to stay pretty much as is, but obtain member feedback more often and in a more broader and direct way; report it back to members, and convert that feedback into action plans.

End.

[i'm-uninformed2]

Originally posted by Maestro
[B I will immediately call for a review of the material used in our player's guerseys (cotton is a fabric with breathes).

.

End. [/B]

I'll vote for anyone who faintly resembles George Castanza's work at the Yankees

[floppinab]

The stadium Australia deal is and will continue to be an out and out success story for this club. Do you think .......

It was the SCG that was killing this club not the Telstra Stadium deal we have done.

How do you think both Essendon and Collingwood have come to get 40,000 members, strong sponsorship .......

Colles, the board and thank god the AFL had the forsight to see that out club was only going to prosper if the Stadium Australia deal was done.

That's very fair DST, you attack the issues rather than other things

I believe that given the situation the club was in when the deal was done (perenial 6 - 10thers) that we shouldn't have had to live through the short term pain we have been hit with these last two years and the AFL should have contributed more.
Going forward it had to be done I agree.

[floppinab]

And AGAIN - your alternative chairman is?

What's the point in proposing an alternative right now when there is no way I or any other lay member can back them in.

[i'm-uninformed2]

Originally posted by floppinab
What's the point in proposing an alternative right now when there is no way I or any other lay member can back them in.

because i thought you were trying to make a merit-based case for having members elected to the board