Tweet
Originally posted by Charlie
However, the Sydney Swans have, for a variety of reasons not limited to South, a very significant-sized supporter base here. The interests of those supporters should be represented on the board. It's not irrational, surely, to suggest that it should be Melbourne supporters that decide what is desirable for Melbourne supporters.
However, the Sydney Swans have, for a variety of reasons not limited to South, a very significant-sized supporter base here. The interests of those supporters should be represented on the board. It's not irrational, surely, to suggest that it should be Melbourne supporters that decide what is desirable for Melbourne supporters.
Firstly, there are probably only two significant decisions made by the board that affect what a "Melbourne" supporter gets:-
a) the committment of funds in the budget to a Melbourne office and, in particular, a resource like Tony Morwood; and
b) the appointment of a CEO who may or may not believe in a strong Melbourne operation (linked to a) above)
Factors like how many games in Melbourne the AFL allocates, where aftermatch functions are held, the price of Melbourne memberships, whether you get a cap or a scarf as part of your membership, who is on the inside cover of the membership brochure etc etc are not matters that the board will have much - if any - influence over. The first is largely an AFL decision while the rest are management decisions (and thus flow from a) and b) above).
Secondly, once someone is accepts a seat on a board, whether elected or appointed and regardless of who elected by, he has an obligation to act in the best interests of ALL stakeholders of the club. In the corporate world the interests of shareholders take precedence over most other stakeholders. In the case of an AFL club, since members are not financial members in the same sense that shareholders of a company are, the interests of a broader group of stakeholders need to be considered - the AFL, members, non-member supporters, future members and supporters, sponsors, players, the Sydney community, the NSW government etc etc
Thus, even if we did find ourselves in the position where there was one board member who was nominally elected just by Melbourne members, he would be derelict in his duties as a director if he pushed the interests of that constituency over and above the interests of all other stakeholders.
Finally, throughout all the discussions that have been had on this board where the Sydney vs Melbourne supporter issue has arisen, no concensus has emerged that Melbourne supporters as a group have a set of needs in common that are different from those of Sydney supporters. There have been as many different views posted within each of the two supposed factions as there have been between them.
Beyond the world of RWO I suspect there is even broader differentiation between what individuals look for from the club, regardless of location. The idea of a homogeneous Melbourne group is as much of a myth as the idea of such a Sydney group.
Comment