We Get A Right To Vote

[Country Member]

At last - a thread with some well-considered and thoughtful comments. A couple of observations:
- JF Bay 22: if you want to develop footy in NSW, join the NSW/ACT Commission and/or conduct a few junior clinics. The primary job of the Swans (like Collingwood, Carlton et al) IS TOO TRY AND WIN THE PREMIERSHIP.
- current developments in this area are NOTHING to do with SSI, a noisy minority, or current management: this issue has been on the agenda ever since the Colless group came in. The rules are governed by the constitution with the AFL having control. Any changes need AFL approval.
- I agree with many contributors to this discussion that voting rights for "members" will not achieve anything: just look at Richmond and Hawthorn at the moment, Brad Cooper at Collingwood etc.
- SSI (and the dog) had nothing to do with the appointment of the current coach. A certain media person with political aspirations promoted those clowns way above their rightful station;
- an AGM and proper annual report with a Q and A session with the Board is the most sensible outcome from this process. I have contact from time to time with Board members at games and functions, and anyone who thinks they do not act in the best interests of the Club and bleed for the joint has got rocks in their head; and
- it is worth remembering that "members" are nothing of the sort: they are club-subsidised season ticket holders who don't pay full tote-odds at the gate. Harsh but true. They are hardly the only stakeholder in the club, and even partial representation on the Board may be too disruptive. This club "belongs" to ALL who support it, past, present and future.

[Maestro2]

Country Member - well said. Let's take this thread down to the club and get the conclusions rubber-stamped by the powers that be!! Over and out from the Maestro.

[JF_Bay22_SCG]

Originally posted by Bart
You are a very condescending person JF. You paint yourself as the man on the inside and treat the rest of us like fools.

Well with the constant negativity and whinging we have seen on RWO whenever this issue has been brought up, it does tend to get on one's nerves. Bron hasn't bothered putting up SSI's media statements anymore because of all the people who sit here on RWO not knowing about what we have acheived and how often we have been in contact with the club. Have any of you ever bothered to attend an SSI meeting to see what we do with an open mind, No?
Have any of you ever seen the amount of written material that has been forwarded between the club and the SSI committee, no?!

NOT THAT IT MATTERS, the club is now to be onside and is actively in agreemence with us that member voting rights is the way forward for the club.

All I can say is that once that comes around, the better. Because it is getting VERY tiresome having to field instantly abusive questions from people who are negative at the outset and are trying to paint people like myself as having some sinister motives behind my actions.

I just cannot understand for the life of me why a vocal group of people seem so petrified at the thought of member voting rights. All very strange to me.

JF

[Country Member]

On of the reasons is that blokes who can't spell might get elected to the Board and have the RESPONSIBILITY for running the club.

[robbieando]

Originally posted by Country Member
On of the reasons is that blokes who can't spell might get elected to the Board and have the RESPONSIBILITY for running the club.

Has that been a problem at any other club?? No
Will it be a problem at this club?? No
Why won't it be a problem?? Because I give our members more credabilty than clearly some of you do.

If members are given the vote I think most will be capable of doing the right thing and voting for a person or ticket that has the ablity to run a football club.

[Tooth Fairy]

Originally posted by Damien
Do NOT comment on what I know or do NOT know about thanks JF.

Didn't realise you needed to be apart of SSI to give a damn or make a difference in this club, or have an idea about what is going on.


LOAD OF CRAP.

Fair comment

[Country Member]

Robbieando - I think your views on team selections, list management and general knowledge of football matters is quite good. Why don't you stick to that, and leave running the club to the ones who have the commitment and expertise.
Some of this sanctimonious crap is so naive it defies belief.

[Tooth Fairy]

Originally posted by Maestro2
I'll need some convincing that this is a good idea.

Personally, I think the arguments for the vote are rather selfish and self-serving. The arguments do not reflect on what is best for the club (or if they do, it is in a rather trite manner), but what is best for supporters as individuals.

If these individuals had the best interests of the club in mind, they would recognise AFL clubs are commercial, legal, and regulatory beasts that have evolved into entities quite different from the local bowling club (example I have seen recently used).

I have yet to see an argument about how this proposal can advance the club. It will not secure a single additional member in Sydney. It will not secure the signature of a creative outside midfielder or key position defender.

I am very disappointed that the AFL/ club has succumbed to the views of a very vocal, noisy minority.

Thoroughly and wholeheartedly agree. Member voting creates factions, and factions can lead a club to turmoil. Is this what we want for our club?

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by monopoly19
I think it's scary that the future of this club is partly in our hands. Who am I to say who should be on the board? I've got NFI!

This is the problem with members voting for board members. Let's be honest - how many of us really know enough about the qualifications of each board member and the inner workings of the club to have an informed say as to which should be elected and what should be happening? It's not like we interview each one or see them in a range of meetings and presentations - it's hardly the same as a political election. It's not like we get detailed reports on what is happening and how the club is being run and how they plan to run it.

I think more than anything else, it makes some members feel happy that they feel like they have a greater involvement in running the club rather than actually producing anything meaningful.

It's like electing board members of a public company. The shareholders vote on them, but they don't really have much say in who is elected. Generally speaking the voting at the AGM is a formality. Let's also remember that footy club members are not in the same position as shareholders - the latter own the company through investment of their capital - the former simply attend football matches!

As Peter says, whether SSI had any influence on this is unknown and is not particularly relevant as it was going to happen at some point anyway.

The only real advantage I see from the vote is Floppinab's point about accountability. However, on the other hand we don't necessarily see a lot of accountability in some of the Melbourne clubs. Also accountability only works if the people voting are fully aware of all the details and facts behind the events, which in many cases they might not be.

[Doctor J.]

Originally posted by robbieando
If members are given the vote I think most will be capable of doing the right thing and voting for a person or ticket that has the ablity to run a football club.

Yeah we could vote in a group like "The New Magpies" Wouldn't that be just the best thing for us right now. And spare me the piece about that was only stupid Collingwood supporters voting. It could happen amongst our supporter base just as easily, some would say even easier.

Seriously, the history of the VFL/AFL is full of egos wanting to stand on club Boards. Its a meal ticket for most Club Directors.

The current system is working fine as I see it, much better than any democratic process we as a club has had in the past. Hell in a former life we were very democratic, and what did it get us. Bankruptcy and a move interstate, followed sustained instability. Is this what people want?

In the entire history of this club I cannot think of a more stable and productive off field era than the past 10 years has produced, and now people want to go and stuff it all up by letting democracy rule. Please spare me, save democracy for the local CWA. We are trying to run a multi million dollar business here.

[Bart]

Originally posted by JF_Bay22_SCG
NOT THAT IT MATTERS, the club is now to be onside and is actively in agreemence with us that member voting rights is the way forward for the club.

So you now believe the club is ONSIDE with SSI. Laughable. Just like the club got ONSIDE with SSI and decided to choose Roos.

[desredandwhite]

Is there any chance we can keep this thread relatively civil? Argue the topic all you like, but there's no need for personal attacks and name-calling.

Bloody politics.

[Damien]

Originally posted by Doctor J.
Yeah we could vote in a group like "The New Magpies" Wouldn't that be just the best thing for us right now. And spare me the piece about that was only stupid Collingwood supporters voting. It could happen amongst our supporter base just as easily, some would say even easier.

Seriously, the history of the VFL/AFL is full of egos wanting to stand on club Boards. Its a meal ticket for most Club Directors.

The current system is working fine as I see it, much better than any democratic process we as a club has had in the past. Hell in a former life we were very democratic, and what did it get us. Bankruptcy and a move interstate, followed sustained instability. Is this what people want?

In the entire history of this club I cannot think of a more stable and productive off field era than the past 10 years has produced, and now people want to go and stuff it all up by letting democracy rule. Please spare me, save democracy for the local CWA. We are trying to run a multi million dollar business here.

Wonderful post. The past decade has been the most stable period in a very very long time - "socialism" has been working very well for us.

Who says we have to have the same management and board structure as every other club? We are a very unique club in the most unique of cities (AFL Speaking )

Originally posted JF_Bay22_SCG
Bron hasn't bothered putting up SSI's media statements anymore because of all the people who sit here on RWO not knowing about what we have acheived and how often we have been in contact with the club. Have any of you ever bothered to attend an SSI meeting to see what we do with an open mind, No?
Have any of you ever seen the amount of written material that has been forwarded between the club and the SSI committee, no?!

No I haven't seen them - and really, if SSI members are working for the interests of Swans members across Australia, why the hell would it matter how heated it got here? SSI should be on here selling their vision for our club. Not running away because a few of us are anti it.....Just reinforces my thoughts on the "credentials" of SSI.

It is sure to get a lot more heated at an AGM when SSI members are trying to get on the board of OUR club and the "why" questions start from members who have no respect for them.

[Bron]

Sorry, I appear to have double posted for some reason. I have deleted the first verson.

[Bron]

Originally posted by Damien No I haven't seen them - and really, if SSI members are working for the interests of Swans members across Australia, why the hell would it matter how heated it got here? SSI should be on here selling their vision for our club. Not running away because a few of us are anti it.....Just reinforces my thoughts on the "credentials" of SSI.
[/B]

SSI is not "running away". It seems pointless to post here and have the usual tirades about 3 men and a dog (was that a movie? ). Several people from here have attended meetings of SSI and gone away with their opinions changed (for the better!). The frenzy that happens here is miles away from the reality of SSI's ongoing discussions with the Club.

SSI is not the "be all and end all", however it is a stakeholder that has been acknowledged by the Club and involved with the discussion re membership election of board members (as have other stakeholders such as the Redbacks and sponsors). SSI has had more communications and air time than the Redbacks (I know this for a fact, being involved with the executive of both). Personally, I think this is wrong - the Redbacks contribute more to the Club, but SSI appears to be more effective in getting a voice heard at exec level (although it has improved with the appointment of Myles B-H).

SSI has a list that far exceeds that of RWO. Many on the list have never heard of RWO. This is not a negative, just an indication that there is a vast untapped mass out there that responds to diffferent stimuli. The SSI list came from the Choose Roos campaign. Whatever opinion you have about the effectiveness of that, it is true that it mobilised numbers of people that were staggering to the Club and put what became SSI into a position as a stakeholder.

Having spoken to many people at games (whether as a representative of SSI or not), I have been struck by the number of people who feel that the Board needs accountability and the general support for election of members to the Board. For many of those who care about the "Club", as opposed to seeing it as an entertainment transaction ($ for entertainment), this is an important issue. It's fair to say that there are just as many (maybe more) who don't see it as an issue. That's their right.

I share the concerns about "ratbags" (my words) on the Board. Just look at the NRMA! If it were up to me, everyone would have to have adequate qualifications (whether formal or experiential) to stand (whatever these are), but then, I reckon that politicians should have qualifications too, and you shouldn't put someone in charge of a portfolio without prior acceptance of expertise. I see too much incompetence in business to be generous on this one!