Our club: the Board, corporate structure and governance

[barry]

Agree with bloodspirit, there is a lot to be gained with a broader range of experience amongst the board, and we seem to have the AFL and business connections well covered.

We need the best possible connections to the AFL, they aren't strong enough in my opinion. How many years have we been screwed or surprised AFL policy changes.

[The Runner]

If we connections to the AFL, they aren't strong enough in my opinion. How many years have we been screwed or surprised AFL policy changes.

Other than the trading ban, what else is there?
We get a great ride with the academies.

[stevoswan]

Other than the trading ban, what else is there?
We get a great ride with the academies.

The COLA ban and AFL umpiring....we had a premiership stolen from us.

'A great ride with the academies'.....which we started ourselves, which cost the AFL nothing, increase the overall talent pool for the entire league and help ensure the future of the game in NSW. We are doing the AFL a favour.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

As someone that works in the wholely owned local subsidiary of a multinational - I have given up the on the number of times we've been wrong footed by sudden, inexplicable changes by head office.
It's just the nature of external ownership.

If I translate myself into their situation, I'd consider that

The loss of COLA was probably inevitable, but that we hastened the event. We should have seen it coming, and quite possibly did so, viewing Buddy as a last bite of the cherry.

The trade ban had no actual effect at all, and did no real damage. On the other hand looking affronted and hurt by it, helped convince many that we were being punished - and have been punished enough.

Compared to earlier boards who failed to get home finals, failed to block exclusive Swans access to NSW talent, failed to block the ejection of the Rams from the TAC cup and the establishment of the NSW Scholarship scheme. I think we're doing pretty well.

In fact I'd be trying to keep the status quo for as long as possible. Stay as unobtrusive as possible to head office (the AFL in the Swans case). While at the same time ensuring we keep our eyes and ears open and maintain our store of ammunition/information/favors in case of any attempt to derail the Northern Academies - they are far too important for the development of the game north of the Barassi, and frankly we are making out like bandits.

To this end I regard our silence on the next gen academy rorting was a very smart move.
If they get pared back by the AFL, then great, but we mustn't get involved, it would help link the next gen t the northern academies.
I also think it's essential we don't allow our academy to be uncoupled from the other Northern Acadmies. As long as all the Northern clubs don't make the finals we should be safe. But it'd be better if at least one of the northern clubs could look like a basket case - perhaps we should hope GWS do the right thing by us and implode, cos it looks like the Lions and GC have their stuff together.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

AFL umpiring....we had a premiership stolen from us.

The ongoing umpiring against the Swans has been going on for decades, I don't think the AFL can do anything about it. Certainly not while it remains a Victorian boys club - I think Razor Ray was the last NSW umpire wasn't he?

Likewise, playing the Granny in Melbourne is not going to change.

Useful stuff when demonstrated how hard done we are, but as areas where change can be made - I think them non-starters.

Similarly the loss of both 06 and 16 (and the way the club refrained from going off like a load of rotten prawns in the sun) are helpful when in need of sympathy.

. . . costs the AFL nothing, increases the overall talent pool for the entire league and help ensure the future of the game in NSW.

Absolutely, nice script, exactly the case we shall continue to make when needed.

[bloodspirit]

Incisive posts, RnR.

[The Runner]

Ugh, does any fan of any club believe they get the positive umpire bias? Logically, if we feel hardly done by, there should be someone benefiting. Claiming a sustained bias over decades is ridiculous.

You could mount an argument that we were ahead with COLA.

Regardless, we've been blessed with a fantastic board and corporate leadership for a long time.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

Ugh, does any fan of any club believe they get the positive umpire bias? Logically, if we feel hardly done by, there should be someone benefiting. Claiming a sustained bias over decades is ridiculous.

I thought pretty much the same thing when the suggestion was first raised.
It smacks of poor sportsmanship. Only the most most rabid and one eyed supporters could believe the umpires were biased against their team. More than that it's almost paranoiac - a conspiracy theory etc. etc.

So I completely understand at a deeply visceral level, and sympathise with your response;
The problem however, is that the Swans have been on the wrong end of the free kick count for decades. It may be ridiculous but it's also seems to be statistically verified.
Here is a link with the most recent RWO thread on the subject: Swans chat UMPIRES - FREE KICKS

If you're really keen you could grind through the afltables.com website

You could mount an argument that we were ahead with COLA.

Erm I thought I did, that's what I meant by us taking the last bite of the cherry

Incisive posts, RnR.

Thankyou, my brain seems to be functioning OK today

[The Runner]

I thought pretty much the same thing when the suggestion was first raised.
It smacks of poor sportsmanship. Only the most most rabid and one eyed supporters could believe the umpires were biased against their team. More than that it's almost paranoiac - a conspiracy theory etc. etc.

So I completely understand at a deeply visceral level, and sympathise with your response;
The problem however, is that the Swans have been on the wrong end of the free kick count for decades. It may be ridiculous but it's also seems to be statistically verified.
Here is a link with the most recent RWO thread on the subject: Swans chat UMPIRES - FREE KICKS

If you're really keen you could grind through the afltables.com website


Erm I did, that's what was meant by us taking the last bite of the cherry

Sorry, was in reference to someone else calling out the COLA ban further up the page

[sharp9]

I distinctly recall about a year ago someone posted a chart of free kicks for the last 30 years. Eagles were first at +900 and we were last at -800. Just sayin’ that (IMO) that’s not possible with competent, unbiased umpires

[neilfws]

Maybe this will be the season when I convince some of you that the free kick differential is not especially important or influential and you should pay less attention to it. There must be a chart that will win people over

How about the free kick differential for the premiers in 3 of the previous 4 seasons?

[Ruck'n'Roll]

Maybe this will be the season when I convince some of you that the free kick differential is not especially important or influential and you should pay less attention to it. There must be a chart that will win people over

Maybe, graphs are quiet effective that way.

It'd be good to see the graph with the top 4 clubs not grey'ed out. At the moment all it says is
1) You can win a flag with a negative free kick differential, but
2) The more negative the differential is, the less likely you are to win a flag.

Likewise it'd be good to see the Hawthorn graph for 2013-15.

[chalbilto]

The following is from the AFL site and it shows the most matches missed through suspension since 2010 and our club has the least number of suspensions. A great achievement.


62 Geelong
57 Richmond
56 Hawthorn
53 West Coast
52 St Kilda
51 Essendon
50 Melbourne
46 Fremantle
43 North Melbourne
40 Brisbane, Port Adelaide
36 Carlton
35 Gold Coast
29 Greater Western Sydney
28 Collingwood
26 Western Bulldogs
22 Adelaide
18 Sydney

[Markwebbos]

Good to see that the Swans have put COLA back in the agenda.

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/massive-problem-pridham-wants-housing-allowance-for-swans-gws-staff-20210324-p57dkq.html

Sydney chairman Andrew Pridham has called for the Swans and Giants to be given an additional “housing allowance” for football staff and coaches as part of the soft cap on football spending.

Pridham said the Swans had an issue with retaining football staff, such as assistant coaches, and that the higher cost of housing in Sydney compared with Melbourne and other capital cities was “a massive problem” for the club.

He reckons its 30% more expensive in Sydney.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

He also pushed for an independent review of the whole AFL competition back in October. The AFL decided to conduct the review in-house anyway, but I don't reckon it won him any friends at AFL HQ.

Pridham seems to be swinging hard, I wonder what he's trying to achieve?

I can't see how he expects to see a return of COLA, such an allowance is completely justified but I just can't see it being reinstated - too unpopular south of the border.

Maybe he's raising it as a unpalatable alternative (stalking horse) to allowing the Sydney Academy to continue to supply the Swans with local talent?

Or maybe, it's nothing more than him simply saying what is best for the game - consequences be damned. A bit unlikely for a merchant banker but you never know.