Peter Schwab was a visionary

[hawker39]

You can complain about Schwab as coach/selector etc but Schwab was the first to understand and apply the Value of Trading and Drafting.

It was Peter Schwab who traded Trent Croad from a team that finished Top 4 in 2001 because he realised that the Draft is the best way of improving your list. It has nothing to do with Picking Hodge it has all to do with Risk and Return.

He was prepared to risk a young KPP in a Top 4 team for an untried Player in a Draft. This is how clubs get better.

Bravo Peter Schwab you did want other clubs now recognise as the way to go.

[Mitchell Madness]

but hodge was very average under clarkson. After 2001, who is to sya if we had croad we would not have made the grandfinal?

[delirious1]

Its not the coaches job to organise trades ect.

[Back Pocket Rocket]

What about trading our 1st rounders for Everitt and Rehn. The guy was the king at topping up! Beaumont, Young I think. He was shit at list management! Hence 2004:thumbsd:

P.S I was gonna also add in the Croad trade but that has worked out great for us!

[PatientHawk]

Schwab's retirement or sacking was a great releif.
It was probably the best thing also for his health.

Schwab in my opinion didn't do much to progress us.

[bootsie16]

but hodge was very average under clarkson. After 2001, who is to sya if we had croad we would not have made the grandfinal?

Can't agree with this. Hodge has won a B&F and been All-Australian under Clarkson. His game this year in the final against Adelaide under duress was nothing short of outstanding. Hodge has been right up there with Sewell and Mitchell as our three most consistent players in the last three years under Clarko.

[flukeyluke]

I wouldnt be giving Schwab too much credit for where the Hawks are today:cool:

[Dixie Flatline]

Can't agree with this. Hodge has won a B&F and been All-Australian under Clarkson. His game this year in the final against Adelaide under duress was nothing short of outstanding. Hodge has been right up there with Sewell and Mitchell as our three most consistent players in the last three years under Clarko.

I think Mitchell Madness' fingers slipped as he/she typed. It was obviously meant to refer to "Schwab".

[Hawks 08]

You can complain about Schwab as coach/selector etc but Schwab was the first to understand and apply the Value of Trading and Drafting.

It was Peter Schwab who traded Trent Croad from a team that finished Top 4 in 2001 because he realised that the Draft is the best way of improving your list. It has nothing to do with Picking Hodge it has all to do with Risk and Return.

He was prepared to risk a young KPP in a Top 4 team for an untried Player in a Draft. This is how clubs get better.

Bravo Peter Schwab you did want other clubs now recognise as the way to go.

you dont know what u r talking about

[The Cryptkeeper]

Peter Schwab was a very nice man who happened to be a very poor football coach.

That is all.

[Hawks 08]

Peter Schwab was a very nice man who happened to be a very poor football coach.

That is all.

Our list wasnt great either

[Hawk43]

the only thing schwab and judge helped us to do was endure 15 years of pain.

[The Cryptkeeper]

Our list wasnt great either

We went from preliminary finalist to garbage in the twinkling of an eye.

Make no mistake, Peter Schwab was a godawful coach. His game plan was disgraceful, his list management poor and his motivational abilities questionable. Do not let the fact that he is a great guy cloud your judgement. If he was coaching Geelong in 2007 they would have missed the finals.

[Hodge2Franklin]

You can complain about Schwab as coach/selector etc but Schwab was the first to understand and apply the Value of Trading and Drafting.

It was Peter Schwab who traded Trent Croad from a team that finished Top 4 in 2001 because he realised that the Draft is the best way of improving your list. It has nothing to do with Picking Hodge it has all to do with Risk and Return.

He was prepared to risk a young KPP in a Top 4 team for an untried Player in a Draft. This is how clubs get better.

Bravo Peter Schwab you did want other clubs now recognise as the way to go.

Some people can be very loyal Hawks with the best of intentions. I am sure Schwab was one of them, as are you ...

However this does not change the fact that neither of you should be thinking about the game other than from the TV on the couch. You have got to be kidding.

Schwab was a disgraceful list manager, I still cringe at his decisions.

[noosa hawk mad]

You can complain about Schwab as coach/selector etc but Schwab was the first to understand and apply the Value of Trading and Drafting.

It was Peter Schwab who traded Trent Croad from a team that finished Top 4 in 2001 because he realised that the Draft is the best way of improving your list. It has nothing to do with Picking Hodge it has all to do with Risk and Return.

He was prepared to risk a young KPP in a Top 4 team for an untried Player in a Draft. This is how clubs get better.

Bravo Peter Schwab you did want other clubs now recognise as the way to go.I couldn't,t believe he traded Croad i was like many Hawthorn supporters that were shocked and disappointed.Loved Schwab as a player but not as a coach:eek:

[Tasmaniac]

Peter Schwab was a very nice man who happened to be a very poor football coach.

That is all.

Quoted for truth.

When I think of Peter Schwab the coach, I always remember the old saying about what position nice guys finish.

As an ex-director of umpires, I also used to think he coached us to play the rules the way he would like them to be interpreted, better coaches would have coached their players to maximise the benefit of exploiting the rules.

[RustyHawk]

Nice guy but shocking coach.

At the time I didnt mind him getting appointed as senior coach. But after 3 seasons he should never have been given another contract.

I was once a current senior player about Schwabby and said to him "You must have wanted to kill him for not playing you that much?" He laughed and really didnt make a comment other than to say his parents certainly felt that way.

He defended Schwab, to a degree anyway by saying he was under that much pressure to win that he would play an unfit Nick Holland and others to try and manufacture a win rather than play players who where fit and in form but only rookie or second year type players.

But Schwab as a visionary... No, no way.

[Big Ronnie]

Lovely man, Hawthorn heart, but did he take on an improving list, get one good year out of it, and then a mess. With the off field improvements made by club management, we should of had Ian Dicker as coach! After every quarter he'd come out and see the guys in tears, shit I would of gone out and played harder.

As for worst list manager. Who was coach when we brought in

Austin McCrabb
Ricky Nixon
Carig Trevelen
Chapman? from Brisbane (he even got number 1!)

If Schwabby was a star at the list he would have unloaded someone so we had pick 3 in the 2001 draft with pick 1. He might still be there!:D

[HappyHawk]

Schwabby may not have been the best coach around, but he did suffer from a lot of bad luck. Both our full forward (Barker) and CHF (Holland) were cut to pieces by injury and never recaptured their form. The team never recovered from these losses and it demoralised them.

Okay, we weren't premiership material imo, but along with Hay losing complete touch, there goes your spine. He couldn't weave a magic wand. At the end of the day, it meant starting from square one. Enter Clarkson - vision, courage, brains, adaptability. The works burger.:thumbsu:

[TylerDurden]

Schwab was horrendous.

2003-2004 nearly scarred me for life. The darkest period in my 30 years of watching this club. He was chiefly responsible....

[Chrissie90]

I like him. I met him once and he seemed like a nice guy. Cant really remember what he coached like.

My dad starts throwing things when his name is mentioned and says that he ruined the success culture, let the dud players run the club, stuffed the list, signed up old hacks for too long and had no idea how to coach. He rekons that schwabby set the club back for 10 or 15 years.

He reckons that Schwab has mucked up evry job he had done - from working at the hawks in the office, running the umpires and being a crap media commentator. He also reckons he stuffed up the match review panel coz it is soft on guys like Judd and isnt even consistent

He couldnt believe that Dicker and Dunstall gave him another 2 years in 2003. I think he went to Dickers office and told him so but he denies it happened.

[mulhollanddrive]

Dicker and Brereton more like it. JD was only appointed mid that year, and had little influence at the time. Nevertheless, glad that, that era is long gone, and be glad if you can't remember it.

[macdaddio]

schwab cryed at nearly every interview he did

he got rid of croad after we wre only 1 kick away from a gf

hodge was a good replacement now, but at the time we should have kept our list an croad and maybe would have played of in a gf the following year..

and to prove the fact that the croad trade debarcle was a waist then why did schwab take him back, coz he knew what a big mistake he had made...

he was the reason we were being called nancy boys.........

but clarko is the reason why we are being called soldiers........

[Brown Blood]

Schwabby may not have been the best coach around, but he did suffer from a lot of bad luck. Both our full forward (Barker) and CHF (Holland) were cut to pieces by injury and never recaptured their form. The team never recovered from these losses and it demoralised them.

Okay, we weren't premiership material imo, but along with Hay losing complete touch, there goes your spine. He couldn't weave a magic wand. At the end of the day, it meant starting from square one. Enter Clarkson - vision, courage, brains, adaptability. The works burger.:thumbsu:

Congratulations for being the only poster to provide a bit of perspective regarding schwabbs era as a coach.

While I was happy when he saw the light and resigned towards the end of the season I think a bit more balance is needed as he was still probably a better coach than judge and knights and got us to our highest ladder position that we achieved over the last 16 years (and apart from a cheating umpire we could have gone further).

He also was desperately unlucky in 2004 when the media leapt upon an unfortunate comment about our prospects and an incredibly bad run of injuries and reports.

It was in fact probably the worse run of injuries and reports that the club has had in any year I can remember.

Major injuries started before the season started and we lost many players for 5 or more games during the season.

They included Crawford, Hay, Holland, Thompson, Ladson, Bateman, Hodge, Mitchell, Jacobs, Barker, Dixon, Barlow, McCabe, Brennan, Greene & Boyle.

We also lost a number of players due to suspension - 2004 was the year of the infamous essendon brawl and a number of players missed multiple games - and we had other off field incidents that were totally outside his control but still affected the club: Scotts play for the board & other board issues, Thomo depression, Jacobs/Piccione drunk driving and the CEO resigned.

Any club going through these injuries and turmoil would have been in trouble.

I prefer to think Swabby's last year was the one we got Croad back, started to blood young players & promoted sewell from the rookie list.

[thatswhatimtalkinabout]

The thing is, if you don't remember your past and learn from your mistakes - you will make the same mistakes in your future.

In 2001 we had the spine that was the platform for many premierships - Hay, Rawlings, Crawford, Holland & Thompson was the envy of the competition. We needed a bit more strength around the midfield but it was generally accepted by the footballing community that we would be very prominent and dominant for many years.

The coach made mistakes - alot of them actually - and none bigger than giving the players the empowerment to take responsibilitiy for their game and make their own decisions - they just weren't ready. Ultimately some of them weren't mature enough to handle that responsibility at all and were pretty quick on the knife.

He was definately not our worst coach, far from it - but Clarko best learn from the past rather than the present if he wants to take this team to the top for a prolonged period.

[Mervyn Beasley]

It's hard to dislike Scwabby 1. because he bled for the club and played in 3 flags with limited ability, and 2, yes, because he is such a quality person.

He wasnt the greatest coach, and he didnt do nearly as well as he should have with his list, but he did get us to a prelim and also to a another finals series and his win loss was above 50%. So all in all, there have been, and will be a lot worse.

For what it's worth, I saw Schwabby and his kids at the Soccer on Sunday, and yes he oozes good bloke.

[apiro]

It looks like the general consensus of opinion here is that Schwabby was a nice guy but a lousy coach who also had a few things go against him. Kinda sums it up for me.

[Mitchell Madness]

I think Mitchell Madness' fingers slipped as he/she typed. It was obviously meant to refer to "Schwab".

it was, sorry. I was reading an old article on the Hun site about clarko, and i got mixed up, i did mean schwab

[FriarTuck]

You can complain about Schwab as coach/selector etc but Schwab was the first to understand and apply the Value of Trading and Drafting.
....
Bravo Peter Schwab you did want other clubs now recognise as the way to go.

The Croad for number 1 trade is arguably the greatest trade ever. Croadie was a young, emerging KPP it took a heap of guts to trade him. What would number 1 in the next superdraft be worth?

Fully agree that Schwabby's regime will not be remembered for making many other good decisions but this time he got it right.

[lickmerocks]

I couldn't,t believe he traded Croad i was like many Hawthorn supporters that were shocked and disappointed.Loved Schwab as a player but not as a coach:eek:


Noosa,

you are like my Dad. Always has his hawks glasses on and cannot see beyond the Brown and Gold.

McPharlin told the club he was returning to W.A. Freo said if you throw in Croad we will give you pick number 1 .....Luke Hodge.

Croad at the time was a spare parts man for us with no football brain. His commitments outside of football on the party scene and being a b.list celeb on the circuit were legendary.

Croads 2 years at Freo made him realise what he missed at Hawthorn and he returned to the Hawks 3 years later a more determined player.

I never liked Schwabby as a coach however the way he and Parkin managed to get us Luke hodge we will be forever in debt to the both of them.

Whenever we see Croad do something decent these days my dad looks at me to say i told you we should never have got rid of him however i remind him that everytime Luke Hodge rips a team apart that it was Craody that was used to get Hodgy in the brown and gold.

[The Kipster]

I wouldnt be giving Schwab too much credit for where the Hawks are today:cool:

Exactly him and Hook were the worst things the Hawks have seen for sometime...absolutely disgraceful list management :thumbsd: nice bloke though :)

[HappyHawk]

Congratulations for being the only poster to provide a bit of perspective regarding schwabbs era as a coach.

While I was happy when he saw the light and resigned towards the end of the season I think a bit more balance is needed as he was still probably a better coach than judge and knights and got us to our highest ladder position that we achieved over the last 16 years (and apart from a cheating umpire we could have gone further).

He also was desperately unlucky in 2004 when the media leapt upon an unfortunate comment about our prospects and an incredibly bad run of injuries and reports.

It was in fact probably the worse run of injuries and reports that the club has had in any year I can remember.

Major injuries started before the season started and we lost many players for 5 or more games during the season.

They included Crawford, Hay, Holland, Thompson, Ladson, Bateman, Hodge, Mitchell, Jacobs, Barker, Dixon, Barlow, McCabe, Brennan, Greene & Boyle.

We also lost a number of players due to suspension - 2004 was the year of the infamous essendon brawl and a number of players missed multiple games - and we had other off field incidents that were totally outside his control but still affected the club: Scotts play for the board & other board issues, Thomo depression, Jacobs/Piccione drunk driving and the CEO resigned.

Any club going through these injuries and turmoil would have been in trouble.

I prefer to think Swabby's last year was the one we got Croad back, started to blood young players & promoted sewell from the rookie list.

Thanks for congratulating me but this is clearly the best post on here. Well done - you've combined argument with truth, something that seems to have been replaced with emotionalism regarding the Schwab era.

My kids were on the news having suffered in a bad car accident. Schwabby and Crawf had them both in the rooms (with me:o) and we all had a great chat. It was at the praccy game vs the Kangaroos up the bush. A day I won't forget. After our chat we took photos with both kids, Crawf and Schwabby. Schwabby then asked if I wanted to be a photo with them and I declined because I didn't want them to think I had arranged it all for myself - what an IDIOT I was/am.:confused::eek::o:( and the rest.

Top blokes and Schwab was definitely better than Knights, Judge and some others too. He introduced Boyle in that game and many of us said, hey, this kid can play. Sadly even this player broke his leg, so Schwab had jacks chance of maintaining a stable side and had no Key position players and the rest, which you have clearly outlined. I believe any coach would find it hard to cope with that. Everything fell apart on him.

[Chrissie90]

Its good that we all agree that schwabby was a top bloke - but isnt it true that you make your own luck. He gave contracts to the old guys who got injured and he employed that Bowdan guy who had no idea. If he kept players disciplined maybe they wouldnt have got suspended either.

Even with bad luck, we were absolutely terrible in 2004 - it was the worst year of my life. I dont think u finish 15th from just luck. If it isnt schwabs fault, who does take the blame?

Also, i thought he was sacked and had his contract paid infull by Ian Dicker and that he didnt resign?

Does schwabby have much to do with the hawks these days?

[HappyHawk]

Its good that we all agree that schwabby was a top bloke - but isnt it true that you make your own luck. He gave contracts to the old guys who got injured and he employed that Bowdan guy who had no idea. If he kept players disciplined maybe they wouldnt have got suspended either.

Even with bad luck, we were absolutely terrible in 2004 - it was the worst year of my life. I dont think u finish 15th from just luck. If it isnt schwabs fault, who does take the blame?

Also, i thought he was sacked and had his contract paid infull by Ian Dicker and that he didnt resign?

Does schwabby have much to do with the hawks these days?

There is truth in what you say as well. However, has Clarkson got the discipline balance totally in control. That's a hard one to juggle. Aggression vs suspension risk.

Just go over Brown Blood's comments. There's enough evidence there to suggest he did cop it hard. When the injuries and suspensions were not too bad he nearly got us into a grand final. A lot of iffs but think back. It was close.

But yes, you're also right when you say you make your own luck too.

A question. Clarkson loses Franklin, Roughy and Croad next year. How do you honestly think we would go? I think we would struggle to make the 8.

[MHDKA]

Its good that we all agree that schwabby was a top bloke - but isnt it true that you make your own luck. He gave contracts to the old guys who got injured and he employed that Bowdan guy who had no idea. If he kept players disciplined maybe they wouldnt have got suspended either.

Even with bad luck, we were absolutely terrible in 2004 - it was the worst year of my life. I dont think u finish 15th from just luck. If it isnt schwabs fault, who does take the blame?

Also, i thought he was sacked and had his contract paid infull by Ian Dicker and that he didnt resign?

Does schwabby have much to do with the hawks these days?

Not quite as black and white as you make out Chrissie.

No team can ignore injuries and during 2004 I think few clubs have ever had a worse injury list and it wasn't just old guys, Mitchell broke a bone in his leg, Boyle broke his leg and missed the whole season, Crawf broke his arm and then it got infected and he had to go to hospital, Barlow did a knee, Jacobs broke a kneecap, Bateman hamstring injuries, Holland usual injuries etc etc etc. We ended up having to promote 2 rookies because of players on the long term injury list.

We also lost heaps of players to reports throughout the year (remember that scum game), Vanders got 6, Brown got 4, Picciani 4 and Beaumont also did a game.

And of course there were many off field issues hitting the club, all these affect on field performance. So while Schwab wasn't the greatest coach it was only a couple of years before that we could have got into a grand final and there is no doubt that few coaches could have done better with yus in 2004.

As far as whether he resigned or was sacked again this is not black and white as it was a bit of both. When he announced mid 2004 following lots of pressure he wouldn't be coaching for the last year of his contract in 2005 I think that signalled the end for him and I think it happened at a time when the club (Dicker and Dunstall) realised it would need to make a complete new start as we needed a new admin, playing and coaching staff. As a result he became a dead man walking and following discussions with Dermie and Dunstall decided to go with around 6 games to go.

As far as his contract goes I don't think HFC were obliged to pay it out but Dicker did it personally as a result of the respect he had for Schwaby.

[HappyHawk]

Dicker will go down as one of the greatest Clubmen we've ever had. And a true gentleman.:thumbsu:

[Binxy]

When Judge was our coach the same people were saying let's go after Schwabby.
I certainly wasn't.

I was trying to have him drafted into the French foreign leigon. Never before has my faith as a hawks supporter been so thoroughly tested.

[Scotland]

I've heard some Hawthorn fans say that 2001 was a bit of an over achievement, and that the results of 2002-3 were a better indication of where the list was really at at that time. If that is the case, then Schwab deserves some credit for building for the future picking up Hodge and Mitchell in the super draft.

Some Hawthorn fans say that trading Croad was a mistake, and the 2001 Hawthorn side could have gone on to win premierships. Either or, Hawthorn went from a preliminary final in 2001 to the bottom 2 in 2004, with basically two nothing years in between. If Schwab was a visionary, you would think he would have a plan beyond picking up Hodge and Mitchell in 2001. I don't know how he rated the list, or whether he thought 2002/3 would be top 4 years again or a time to blood youngsters, maybe someone here does. No 15th in 2004 = No Roughead and Franklin, = a much poorer list position at 2007, though, so does a dud coach get credit for that?

Given Ken Judge's extraordinary success at West Coast, I reckon he could have got you to 15th at least by 2003.;)

[HappyHawk]

I've heard some Hawthorn fans say that 2001 was a bit of an over achievement, and that the results of 2002-3 were a better indication of where the list was really at at that time. If that is the case, then Schwab deserves some credit for building for the future picking up Hodge and Mitchell in the super draft.

Some Hawthorn fans say that trading Croad was a mistake, and the 2001 Hawthorn side could have gone on to win premierships. Either or, Hawthorn went from a preliminary final in 2001 to the bottom 2 in 2004, with basically two nothing years in between. If Schwab was a visionary, you would think he would have a plan beyond picking up Hodge and Mitchell in 2001. I don't know how he rated the list, or whether he thought 2002/3 would be top 4 years again or a time to blood youngsters, maybe someone here does. No 15th in 2004 = No Roughead and Franklin, = a much poorer list position at 2007, though, so does a dud coach get credit for that?

Given Ken Judge's extraordinary success at West Coast, I reckon he could have got you to 15th at least by 2003.;)


Ha. It seems like our teams have more in common than having had Judgey coach us.;)

[Chrissie90]

Given Ken Judge's extraordinary success at West Coast, I reckon he could have got you to 15th at least by 2003.;)

I rekon I could have done better .We only won games against teams that were trying to lose at the end of the year. I dont remember our injuries being that bad and all teams have injuries.

[Brown Blood]

I rekon I could have done better .We only won games against teams that were trying to lose at the end of the year. I dont remember our injuries being that bad and all teams have injuries.

Are you denying there were massive injuries and reports in 2004?

If you do you either don't remember 2004 as well as you say or you simply have entrenched views.

If you would like to learn something about 2004 go to a website like Footy Goss:
http://www.footygoss.com/main/club_news/hawthorn/ or a similar site and search through news relating to HFC for the 2004 year.

If you do you will see what I and others have posted is correct about 2004.

[Chrissie90]

Are you denying there were massive injuries and reports in 2004?

If you do you either don't remember 2004 as well as you say or you simply have entrenched views.

If you would like to learn something about 2004 go to a website like Footy Goss:
http://www.footygoss.com/main/club_news/hawthorn/ or a similar site and search through news relating to HFC for the 2004 year.

If you do you will see what I and others have posted is correct about 2004.

Not denying at all. But I think reports are avoidable - and injuries are a bit as well, as I said earlier.

Just seems all a bit easy to me for no one to take some blame. You seem to think it was all ok and understandable and I dont think I agree. I dont think we can make excuses for finishing 15th when the coach said we could win the flag.

[Brown Blood]

Not denying at all. But I think reports are avoidable - and injuries are a bit as well, as I said earlier.

Just seems all a bit easy to me for no one to take some blame. You seem to think it was all ok and understandable and I dont think I agree. I dont think we can make excuses for finishing 15th when the coach said we could win the flag.

I was hoping your memory was a bit dim but it seems you have revealed yourself - your views are simply entrenched no matter what the facts.

And so you are not denying we had lost many players to reports or injuries in 2004 and probably don't dispute the club also faced many off field issues but you just want to blame someone (wouldn't life be easy if we could always find someone to blame) and so as schwab was coach you want to blame him.

Good for you :rolleyes:.

[Fabulous]

Peter Schwab was a visionary.:confused:

Peter Schwab should take the credit.:confused:

Peter Schwab should not be blamed.:confused:

[Blasé]

What about trading our 1st rounders for Everitt and Rehn. The guy was the king at topping up! Beaumont, Young I think. He was shit at list management! Hence 2004:thumbsd:

P.S I was gonna also add in the Croad trade but that has worked out great for us!

Yep, his whole philosophy and example to players was to look after no.1 and screw up his employer - the Hawthorn Football Club.

As a result TPP were ridiculous high for an underperforming team under a halfwit coach - but of course he was a great bloke.

Schwab had visions of being coach of a premier, and one could certainly say that he had delusions of grandeur. The best he could do in reality was take the club completely backwards to where Knights had us, and financially very strained.

The closest thing you could say about him being a visionary, is that perhaps he was an illusionist, who swindled a large sum of money from a club, and left with a reputation that gave him opportunity's still working with the AFL.

Illusionist II: Chris Connolly?

[Chrissie90]

I was hoping your memory was a bit dim but it seems you have revealed yourself - your views are simply entrenched no matter what the facts.

And so you are not denying we had lost many players to reports or injuries in 2004 and probably don't dispute the club also faced many off field issues but you just want to blame someone (wouldn't life be easy if we could always find someone to blame) and so as schwab was coach you want to blame him.

Good for you :rolleyes:.

If the coach doesnt take responsibility for how the team goes on the field, I am not sure who does - maybe u can tell me BB. It seems to me that u dont want anyone to be responsible for the bad times but u think that Clarkson and the currect guys should take credit now. As I stated earlier (u should actually read my posts if u wanna try to criticise), I think coaches should take some responsibility for injuries and reports for hte reasons I gave.

Anyway, go find someone else to try to argue with to make yrself feel like more of a man - I'm not playing. :confused::confused::confused:

[Brown Blood]

If the coach doesnt take responsibility for how the team goes on the field, I am not sure who does - maybe u can tell me BB. It seems to me that u dont want anyone to be responsible for the bad times but u think that Clarkson and the currect guys should take credit now. As I stated earlier (u should actually read my posts if u wanna try to criticise), I think coaches should take some responsibility for injuries and reports for hte reasons I gave.

Anyway, go find someone else to try to argue with to make yrself feel like more of a man - I'm not playing. :confused::confused::confused:

Chrissie, all I have tried to do with my posts is try to provide some balance to this thread by stating that schwab probably wasn't the worse coach we have had and it is a fact that 2004 our teams performance was affected by many factors including injuries, reports and off field issues.

Now some of these factors as you suggest he may have been able to influence but others he could not - the scum incident was a powder keg that had been building up for over 10 years for example - we ended up losing a number of players to multiple reports from that, but I don't think schwab was mainly responsible?

And I have never said he shouldn't take some responsibility what I have suggested is he shouldn't take full responsibility.

Further as far as ladder position goes he actually is our most successful coach of the last 16 years - most posters fail to appreciate this.

I do however find the fact that you obviously have such strong feelings about him perplexing considering in your first post on this thread you state you don't even remember schwab - you quote your dad.

Well I do remember him and well and as I posted in my first post I was happy when he resigned but as far as HFC coaches go he wasn't the worse coach we have had in the last 16 years and I did name 2 worse.

As far as clarko goes I have not mentioned him in this thread so don't understand why you have brought him up.

Lastly as far as finding someone else to argue with my first posts weren't in response to yours, I was actually agreeing with another posters post - then like yours I have posted in response to other posters comments, I have commented on some of your posts and you have on mine, and other posters have commented on yours - that is what you do on an internet forum with someone (usually) who has an opposing view.

As far as making me feel more a man I can't see how that is relevant at all and simply doesn't come into it. I couldn't care whether you are male or female or something in between :confused: and I don't get off from proving a point - I just wanted to bring some balance into the discussion because I do think schwab is a top bloke (whose career I have followed since his first game in 1980 & who has suffered terrible personal loss) and so as I stated it is very easy for some posters to look at the fact we finished 15th in 2004 without fully understanding some of the extenuating circumstances that affected our teams performance that year.

[HappyHawk]

BB your post is the most accurate I can recollect on this issue. Chrissie, you're a passionate Hawk loving person. Good stuff. Schwabby was also a great Hawk Premiership player. Let's rest up on this. The guy copped heaps from supporters back then. He's a wonderful bloke and BB is on the money here.

Doesn't mean you can't have your say. Keep saying it. It's good for the forum, but BB doesn't take cheap shots (as far as I can remember:o)

We are all united in our cause and exciting times are ahead.:thumbsu:

[andrew coombs]

The terrible, terrible season of 2004 was probably as Paul Keating once said something we " Had to have". In hindsight it brought to a head a number of crucial on and off field problems and forced changes on our club that we now deriving great benefit from. The clubs decision to sack PS was the first of these and arguably the most important. He had coached for his own survival for two years ( asking the Board how many wins he needed to keep his job...good grief! ) and had little or no long term plan. When it became obvious that the playing group was a mile away from challenging for a flag he refused to turn it over for fear of losing his position. It was no way for an AFL coach to operate and the boards decision, against the wishes of the President, was the first step out of the mess we found ourselves in.

[Fabulous]

He certainly has a vision for the VFL. He has appointed John Hook as his Operations Manager for the VFL and TAC.

[HappyHawk]

The terrible, terrible season of 2004 was probably as Paul Keating once said something we " Had to have". In hindsight it brought to a head a number of crucial on and off field problems and forced changes on our club that we now deriving great benefit from. The clubs decision to sack PS was the first of these and arguably the most important. He had coached for his own survival for two years ( asking the Board how many wins he needed to keep his job...good grief! ) and had little or no long term plan. When it became obvious that the playing group was a mile away from challenging for a flag he refused to turn it over for fear of losing his position. It was no way for an AFL coach to operate and the boards decision, against the wishes of the President, was the first step out of the mess we found ourselves in.
:thumbsu:

[Chrissie90]

Congratulations for being the only poster to provide a bit of perspective regarding schwabbs era as a coach.

While I was happy when he saw the light and resigned towards the end of the season I think a bit more balance is needed as he was still probably a better coach than judge and knights and got us to our highest ladder position that we achieved over the last 16 years (and apart from a cheating umpire we could have gone further).

He also was desperately unlucky in 2004 when the media leapt upon an unfortunate comment about our prospects and an incredibly bad run of injuries and reports.

It was in fact probably the worse run of injuries and reports that the club has had in any year I can remember.

Major injuries started before the season started and we lost many players for 5 or more games during the season.

They included Crawford, Hay, Holland, Thompson, Ladson, Bateman, Hodge, Mitchell, Jacobs, Barker, Dixon, Barlow, McCabe, Brennan, Greene & Boyle.

We also lost a number of players due to suspension - 2004 was the year of the infamous essendon brawl and a number of players missed multiple games - and we had other off field incidents that were totally outside his control but still affected the club: Scotts play for the board & other board issues, Thomo depression, Jacobs/Piccione drunk driving and the CEO resigned.

Any club going through these injuries and turmoil would have been in trouble.

I prefer to think Swabby's last year was the one we got Croad back, started to blood young players & promoted sewell from the rookie list.

Brown Blood supports Happyhawk...

[Chrissie90]

BB your post is the most accurate I can recollect on this issue. Chrissie, you're a passionate Hawk loving person. Good stuff. Schwabby was also a great Hawk Premiership player. Let's rest up on this. The guy copped heaps from supporters back then. He's a wonderful bloke and BB is on the money here.

Doesn't mean you can't have your say. Keep saying it. It's good for the forum, but BB doesn't take cheap shots (as far as I can remember:o)

We are all united in our cause and exciting times are ahead.:thumbsu:

And Happyhawk conventiently returns the favour.

Thats gold, happy, or BB or whatever your names are. Nice work.

Now look out for Chrissie 91, coming to a forum near u...

[Brown Blood]

And Happyhawk conventiently returns the favour.

Thats gold, happy, or BB or whatever your names are. Nice work.

Now look out for Chrissie 91, coming to a forum near u...


Pathetic :rolleyes:.

[Robber Baron]

Shcwab is in charge fo the VFL and John Hooks second in charge. Us Hawks are taking all the top positions because we know whats good for footy and weve got Langers on the AFL Comission and all the others. Looks like Shcwab learned footy with the Hawks and how to coach with us and now hes running VFL so may be there grooming him to take over from Demetruio this wouldnt surprise me and I recon Jeffs behind it to get us some Hawks running the AFL properly or may be move Ians Robsom to take over from Vlad. I woulnt be surprided and Shcwabby taking over from Robbo, that makes sense as well. Go HAWKS.

[Blasé]

The terrible, terrible season of 2004 was probably as Paul Keating once said something we " Had to have". In hindsight it brought to a head a number of crucial on and off field problems and forced changes on our club that we now deriving great benefit from. The clubs decision to sack PS was the first of these and arguably the most important. He had coached for his own survival for two years ( asking the Board how many wins he needed to keep his job...good grief! ) and had little or no long term plan. When it became obvious that the playing group was a mile away from challenging for a flag he refused to turn it over for fear of losing his position. It was no way for an AFL coach to operate and the boards decision, against the wishes of the President, was the first step out of the mess we found ourselves in.

I agree with you're overall sentiments.
However, saying it had to happen, whilst I agree that many lessons were learnt, that we're now benefitting from, it certainly was a painful lesson that I still believe could've been avoided. Afterall, we were in a very dire position, and took a brave Kennet and the new board to come in with some strong vision and willingness to rebuild from the ground up. Had it not been for this risky action, right now we could very well be on the brink of what is happening with north, considering that the tv deal honeymoon period is starting to wane.

I reiterate, as I've said many times on Schwab, there was a lot of evidence apart from injuries, from 2000 & 2001 that could've been acted on. Probably the finals performance overshadowed them, and it is understandably for supporters, yet for the club and it's employees to overlook, it's quite disastrous. It's still quite unbeilievable that Dicker didn't vote on his removal, and it's quite clear he let his emotions or pride overlook the logically decision.

[Beckers]

Schwab's retirement or sacking was a great releif.
It was probably the best thing also for his health.

Schwab in my opinion didn't do much to progress us.

Couldn't agree more! Thought he was going to explode once or twice :eek:Schwab is apparently a nice guy but he was a shocking coach. We should know about shocking coaches....see Judge, Knights and co!

[Brown Blood]

I agree with you're overall sentiments.
However, saying it had to happen, whilst I agree that many lessons were learnt, that we're now benefitting from, it certainly was a painful lesson that I still believe could've been avoided. Afterall, we were in a very dire position, and took a brave Kennet and the new board to come in with some strong vision and willingness to rebuild from the ground up. Had it not been for this risky action, right now we could very well be on the brink of what is happening with north, considering that the tv deal honeymoon period is starting to wane.



Kennett did basically nothing & the new board was put together by dicker who with dunstall were responsible for realizing the club required a total rebuilding following the disaster of 2004 on the field and a requirement for new admin and football related positions following a number of departures.

- It was dicker that tapped schwab on the shoulder so he resigned.

- Following steve leightons resignation as CEO it was dicker who appointed dunstall interim CEO.

- It was dicker who appointed ed harris to the board.

- It was dunstall who ran the process to appoint a new coach and when the dicker led board appointed clarkson it was dunstall with dicker next to him at the announcement who said the new coach fitted in with the clubs need to rebuild and to embark on a youth policy to set themselves up for 2010.

- It was then dunstall and clarkson who undertook the major review and restructure of the football dept for the 2005 season. And as a result there were a number of coaching personnel changes like crosisca and macdonald out, hardwick and viney in.

- It was dicker that eventually identified and appointed robson as the new CEO

- It was under dicker that mark evens (GM Football Operations) and pelchin (GM player personnel and strategy) were appointed.

- It was dicker that worked to create closer bonds with tasmania

- Vandenberg also replaced crawford as captain at this time

- It was under dicker that it was seen necessary to move tyhe club and the deal at waverly was negotiated (and also the compensation deal) to move the club from glenferrie - these were both major major decisions that has and will benefit our club for many years.

- And it was under dicker that kennett was identified as his successor - once all the hard decisions had been made and the foundations for success had been put in place on and off the field.


I would also say that without dicker and don scott we wouldn't even be a club in our own name. And as the above attests it was dicker that has been largely responsible either directly or through his appointments for every major decision the club has made over more than 10 years.

And as far as any success we have in the future through the rebuilding process goes we can thank dicker who understood once it became obvious that the process put in place by schwab wasn't working, who together with dunstall identified a courageous strategy to totally revamp the club.

As far as Kennett goes he is largely reeking the success of the hard decisions that was made by dicker - interesting as steve bracks largely did the same when he replaced kennett as premier of victoria.

[thatswhatimtalkinabout]

^^^^^ Tremendous post & POTY so far IMO Brown Blood.

It is easy for people to rewrite history to suit their own arguments or to denigrate particular personalities but the fact remains where it not for the foresight and hardwork of Ian Dicker and his ilk we would probably not have a club to support by now, let alone an organisation that is thriving.

History will judge him kindly and see him seated on the same pedestal as the great Dr. Sandy Ferguson as revered leaders and saviours of this club.

[Forrest Gump]

Kennett did basically nothing & the new board was put together by dicker who with dunstall were responsible for realizing the club required a total rebuilding following the disaster of 2004 on the field and a requirement for new admin and football related positions following a number of departures.

- It was dicker that tapped schwab on the shoulder so he resigned.

- Following steve leightons resignation as CEO it was dicker who appointed dunstall interim CEO.

- It was dicker who appointed ed harris to the board.

- It was dunstall who ran the process to appoint a new coach and when the dicker led board appointed clarkson it was dunstall with dicker next to him at the announcement who said the new coach fitted in with the clubs need to rebuild and to embark on a youth policy to set themselves up for 2010.

- It was then dunstall and clarkson who undertook the major review and restructure of the football dept for the 2005 season. And as a result there were a number of coaching personnel changes like crosisca and macdonald out, hardwick and viney in.

- It was dicker that eventually identified and appointed robson as the new CEO

- It was under dicker that mark evens (GM Football Operations) and pelchin (GM player personnel and strategy) were appointed.

- It was dicker that worked to create closer bonds with tasmania

- Vandenberg also replaced crawford as captain at this time

- It was under dicker that it was seen necessary to move tyhe club and the deal at waverly was negotiated (and also the compensation deal) to move the club from glenferrie - these were both major major decisions that has and will benefit our club for many years.

- And it was under dicker that kennett was identified as his successor - once all the hard decisions had been made and the foundations for success had been put in place on and off the field.


I would also say that without dicker and don scott we wouldn't even be a club in our own name. And as the above attests it was dicker that has been largely responsible either directly or through his appointments for every major decision the club has made over more than 10 years.

And as far as any success we have in the future through the rebuilding process goes we can thank dicker who understood once it became obvious that the process put in place by schwab wasn't working, who together with dunstall identified a courageous strategy to totally revamp the club.

As far as Kennett goes he is largely reeking the success of the hard decisions that was made by dicker - interesting as steve bracks largely did the same when he replaced kennett as premier of victoria.

I agree with the other guy. Definately post of the year. You have taken the mantle from Sunny Gavaskar as the greatest history revisionist in sport.

Whilst it is great that the club has such loyal fans as you, it is important that new members are not deceived by significant inaccuracies masquerading as facts. I would encourage you to retract these inaccuracies - of which there are many. If you are having difficulty with this, I am more than happy to assist.

[Brown Blood]

If you are having difficulty with this, I am more than happy to assist.

:) - back from holidays eh - I was wondering when you would pop up again.

Fire away if you think the facts I have stated above are so innaccurate.

Though I will expect you to address every point I have made!

[Forrest Gump]

:) - back from holidays eh - I was wondering when you would pop up again.

Fire away if you think the facts I have stated above are so innaccurate.

Though I will expect you to address every point I have made!


Can I please first clarify.... do you actually make all of these points seriously - or are they mainly in jest?

This is as good a time as any to retract the more ridiculous of these points...

[Brown Blood]

Can I please first clarify.... do you actually make all of these points seriously - or are they mainly in jest?

This is as good a time as any to retract the more ridiculous of these points...

As I posted - fire away if you think the facts I have stated above are so innaccurate.

Though I will expect you to address every point I have made!

[thatswhatimtalkinabout]

Can I please first clarify.... do you actually make all of these points seriously - or are they mainly in jest?

This is as good a time as any to retract the more ridiculous of these points...

BWHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Want a good laugh? Check out the 12 posts that this poster has made in his 3 and a bit years on Big Footy.

Every single one wrong and every single one anti-Hawthorn.

I'm all for everyone voicing their opinion but this poster is a troll of tremendous proportions.

Actually sort of makes me miss the other ForrrestGump - at least he doesn't try to pretend he is one of you whilst going on with his drivel.

[MHDKA]

I remember him and his mate Number 33 from HHQ and Mighty Hawks (I agree with you twita he does act like a troll).

Lets just say the less said the better, they always looked on the negative of everything by dragging every post down and I think as a result of the abuse they laid on posters may have been banned from those forums.

BTW I agree with posts about the contribution Dicker has made to our club. He has given up an enormious amount of his own time and money to help set up our future.

[Forrest Gump]

BB, you are as loyal and one eyed as your peers, Robber Baron and H2F. I would not want to criticise you, as it is blind loyalty from fans that helps to keep clubs going through the tough times, such as in 2004.

However, your interpretation of supposed facts into distorted opinions is a little unfortunate for all - and it is important that they do not misinform young readers.

The club hit rock bottom in 2004 - after following the wrong stragegy and implementing it poorly - something that Dicker must ultimately take responsibility for.

Almost all of these supposed achievements were in the latter stages of Dicker's time as president. General opinion is that he resisted many of the required changes - given that they were changes to strategies that he erroneously oversaw - such as the appointment and reappointment of Schwab, for example. Other changes occurred whilst he was nominally in charge yet was effectively powerless - and can hardly claim credit for.

If you had corporate experience at a senior (or even mid) level you would have seen the marginalised leader without board support resisting change until they were ultimately removed - as it is quite a common phenomenon.

Eventually, Dicker was clearly seen as part of the problem, not part of the solution. He was a figure head president for some time, whilst a replacement could be found to oversee a new direction. But to credit him with setting the new strategy is simply wrong - and very niaive.

[Brown Blood]

BB, you are as loyal and one eyed as your peers, Robber Baron and H2F. I would not want to criticise you, as it is blind loyalty from fans that helps to keep clubs going through the tough times, such as in 2004.

However, your interpretation of supposed facts into distorted opinions is a little unfortunate for all - and it is important that they do not misinform young readers.


Thanks for the patronising spiel – I would expect no less of you.

As always you promise a bit but then deliver so little – so where are your retorts to all the inaccuracies of what I posted – not one but just some general statement that doesn't really apply to anything I posted.

You stated in your post:

I would encourage you to retract these inaccuracies - of which there are many.

And still when encouraged haven't managed to retract one!



The club hit rock bottom in 2004 - after following the wrong stragegy and implementing it poorly - something that Dicker must ultimately take responsibility for.

Almost all of these supposed achievements were in the latter stages of Dicker's time as president. General opinion is that he resisted many of the required changes - given that they were changes to strategies that he erroneously oversaw - such as the appointment and reappointment of Schwab, for example. Other changes occurred whilst he was nominally in charge yet was effectively powerless - and can hardly claim credit for.


I don't think anyone has any doubt dicker supported schwab but when it became obvious it was not working – and that only really became apparent mid 04 then dicker too his credit worked in a way to try to minimize the loss of face to schwab as best he could knowing he wouldn't be reappointed – if he wasn’t as nice a guy he would have done far less.

As far as other changes that were made - if they weren't made or initiated by dicker who did do it? You hate dunstall so supposidly not him - scott and dermie was gone! - So who did these???

If you had corporate experience at a senior (or even mid) level you would have seen the marginalised leader without board support resisting change until they were ultimately removed - as it is quite a common phenomenon.


Funny you say that but I do.

What I see of the situation is he had board support but at the time there were some players (scott) with a lot of prestige who couldn’t work within the board so tried to move outside the board to work against him – as we know this did not work - for scott & so he resigned from the board.


Eventually, Dicker was clearly seen as part of the problem, not part of the solution. He was a figure head president for some time, whilst a replacement could be found to oversee a new direction. But to credit him with setting the new strategy is simply wrong - and very niaive.

Wrong again and as I thought you haven't produced much as far as my supposed inaccuracies :rolleyes: – Dicker once scott missed out, worked and put in place the right plan to set up our club (and I listed some of the innitiatives that were put in place) and the right succession plan (appointing kennett) so our club could grow & prosper.

And are you now trying to say the club is not in the strongest position that it has been for years to do just that!

[mulhollanddrive]

I'm not on either person's side, i would just say that the people here who are criticising Dicker I have seen posting on various places since 2003.

I am not saying that you anyone here is wrong or can't have an opinion, but I remember these people posting informed opinions at the time, that haven't changed since.

[Forrest Gump]

Kennett did basically nothing & the new board was put together by dicker who with dunstall were responsible for realizing the club required a total rebuilding following the disaster of 2004 on the field and a requirement for new admin and football related positions following a number of departures. OPINION, NOT FACT.

- It was dicker that tapped schwab on the shoulder so he resigned. INCORRECT. I UNDERSTAND SCHWAB WAS FORCED TO RESIGN BY THE BOARD AND DICKER DISAGREED. PLEASE PROVIDE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THIS SUPPOSED 'FACT'

- Following steve leightons resignation as CEO it was dicker who appointed dunstall interim CEO. PARTIALLY CORRECT. THIS WAS A BOARD APPOINTMENT, MADE NECESSARY AFTER ANOTHER CEO COULDNT WORK UNDER DICKER.

- It was dicker who appointed ed harris to the board. INCORRECT. PLEASE PROVIDE EVIDENCE. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT DICKER RESISTED HARRIS' APPOINTMENT.

- It was dunstall who ran the process to appoint a new coach and when the dicker led board appointed clarkson it was dunstall with dicker next to him at the announcement who said the new coach fitted in with the clubs need to rebuild and to embark on a youth policy to set themselves up for 2010. I UNDERSTAND DICKER HAD LITTLE INVOLVEMENT IN THE APPOINTMENT, YET YOUR POST APPEARS TO SUGGEST HE DID. PLEASE PROVIDE EVIDENCE.

- It was dicker that eventually identified and appointed robson as the new CEO PARTIALLY CORRECT. APPOINTED BY THE BOARD.

- It was under dicker that mark evens (GM Football Operations) and pelchin (GM player personnel and strategy) were appointed. IRRELEVANT. BOARD RATIFIED APPOINTMENTS BY NEW COACH CLARKSON WHO DICKER HAD MARGINAL INPUT IN APPOINTING

- It was dicker that worked to create closer bonds with tasmania PARTIALLY CORRECT. OTHERS SUCH AS PETER HUDSON DROVE THE PROCESS.

- It was under dicker that it was seen necessary to move tyhe club and the deal at waverly was negotiated (and also the compensation deal) to move the club from glenferrie - these were both major major decisions that has and will benefit our club for many years. PARTIALLY CORRECT. PROCESS AND NEGOTIONS DRIVEN BY OTHERS SUCH AS GROWCOTT

- And it was under dicker that kennett was identified as his successor - once all the hard decisions had been made and the foundations for success had been put in place on and off the field. OPINION. KENNETT WAS IDENTIFIED BY POWERFUL PEOPLE WHO DEEMED DICKER TO BE REQUIRING REPLACEMENT.


I would also say that without dicker and don scott we wouldn't even be a club in our own name. And as the above attests it was dicker that has been largely responsible either directly or through his appointments for every major decision the club has made over more than 10 years. OPINION BASED ON DISTORTIONS NOT FACTS.

And as far as any success we have in the future through the rebuilding process goes we can thank dicker who understood once it became obvious that the process put in place by schwab wasn't working, who together with dunstall identified a courageous strategy to totally revamp the club. OPINION UNSUPPORTED BY FACTS.

As far as Kennett goes he is largely reeking the success of the hard decisions that was made by dicker - interesting as steve bracks largely did the same when he replaced kennett as premier of victoria.OPINION UNSUPPORTED BY FACTS

Just to indulge you...

[medusala]

As far as Kennett goes he is largely reeking the success of the hard decisions that was made by dicker - interesting as steve bracks largely did the same when he replaced kennett as premier of victoria.

On what do you base that?

Compare the last year of Dickers reign vs Kennetts re profit. Kennett made a no of changes to personnel including getting Terry Dillon. The turnaround in profit was at least partly structural ie due to admin changes.

[Brown Blood]

Originally Posted by Brown Blood
Kennett did basically nothing & the new board was put together by dicker who with dunstall were responsible for realizing the club required a total rebuilding following the disaster of 2004 on the field and a requirement for new admin and football related positions following a number of departures. OPINION, NOT FACT.
BB: MORE THAN JUST OPINION AS THEY PUT IN PLACE A REBUILDING PLAN – DUNSTAL HAS FREQUENTLY SPOKEN ABOUT IT INCLUDING AT THE PRESS CONFERENCE WHEN CLARKSON WAS APPOINTED.

INTERESTINGLY KENNETT IN HIS MAIDEN SPEECH AS PRESIDENT AT THE 2005 AGM ALSO SPEAKS OF THE CHARTER GIVEN TO CLARKSON BY THE BOARD TO THE MISSON OF “YOUNGING” THE CLUB.

DICKER APPOINTED CLARKSON 2004 AND RESIGNED FROM THE BOARD AT THE END OF 2005 WITH THE REBUILDING PROCESS WELL STARTED.

- It was dicker that tapped schwab on the shoulder so he resigned. INCORRECT. I UNDERSTAND SCHWAB WAS FORCED TO RESIGN BY THE BOARD AND DICKER DISAGREED. PLEASE PROVIDE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THIS SUPPOSED 'FACT'
BB: IT IS WELL KNOWN DICKER FOUND IT DIFFICULT SACKING SCHWAB BUT AS PRESIDENT AND LEADER OF THE BOARD WHEN IT BECAME APPARENT SCHWAB WOULD NOT COACH IN 2005 HE AGREED TO THE DECISION TO TERMINATE SCHWAB MID SEASON.

- Following steve leightons resignation as CEO it was dicker who appointed dunstall interim CEO. PARTIALLY CORRECT. THIS WAS A BOARD APPOINTMENT, MADE NECESSARY AFTER ANOTHER CEO COULDNT WORK UNDER DICKER.
BB: AS PRESIDENT AND LEADER OF THE BOARD DICKER APPOINTED DUNSTALL – THAT IS THE CORRECT GOVERNANCE.

AS FAR AS LEIGHTEN LEAVING HE RESIGNED TO TAKE ON A MORE SENIOR POSITION WITH (I THINK) ERGON ENERGY - A MULTI MILLION $ ENERGY PROVIDER IN QLD.

- It was dicker who appointed ed harris to the board. INCORRECT. PLEASE PROVIDE EVIDENCE. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT DICKER RESISTED HARRIS' APPOINTMENT.
BB: BUT HARRIS WAS ALREADY KNOWN TO THE CLUB HAVING DONE WORK ON A NUMBER OF COMMITTEES – I THINK WITH THE SUPPORT OF DICKER. HE ALSO WASNT ON THE SCOTT “OPERATION RECOVERY” TICKET AND THE BOARD WERE UNITED AGAINST THAT ONCE SCOTT HAD RESIGNED (BTW WERE YOU PART OF THAT GUMP?).

- It was dunstall who ran the process to appoint a new coach and when the dicker led board appointed clarkson it was dunstall with dicker next to him at the announcement who said the new coach fitted in with the clubs need to rebuild and to embark on a youth policy to set themselves up for 2010. I UNDERSTAND DICKER HAD LITTLE INVOLVEMENT IN THE APPOINTMENT, YET YOUR POST APPEARS TO SUGGEST HE DID. PLEASE PROVIDE EVIDENCE.
BB: FROM A GOVERNANCE POINT OF VIEW OF COURSE HE DID – HE SET UP THE PROCESS AND AS PRESIDENT RATIFIED ITS DECISION – THAT IS WHAT A PRESIDENT DOES.

AND ARE YOU SUGGESTING IT ALL HAPPENED WITHOUT HIS AGREEMENT!

- It was dicker that eventually identified and appointed robson as the new CEO PARTIALLY CORRECT. APPOINTED BY THE BOARD.
BB: I BELIEVE DICKER SET UP AND OVERLOOKED THE PROCESS TO FIND THE NEW CEO AND TOOK THE RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD

- It was under dicker that mark evens (GM Football Operations) and pelchin (GM player personnel and strategy) were appointed. IRRELEVANT. BOARD RATIFIED APPOINTMENTS BY NEW COACH CLARKSON WHO DICKER HAD MARGINAL INPUT IN APPOINTING
BB: I SAID DICKER WAS RESPONSIBLE EITHER DIRECTLY OR THROUGH HIS APPOINTMENTS FOR MAJOR DECISIONS – THESE APPOINTMENTS WERE MADE AND ULTIMATELY RATIFIED BY DICKER (BTW I DON”T THINK PELCHIN OR EVENS ANSWER TO CLARKSON BUT REPORT TO THE CEO).

- It was dicker that worked to create closer bonds with tasmania PARTIALLY CORRECT. OTHERS SUCH AS PETER HUDSON DROVE THE PROCESS.
BB: DICKER AS PRESIDENT WAS THE DRIVER OF THE PROCESS HOLDING MANY MEETINGS IN TASMANIA AND WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SENIOR NEGOTIATIONS – HUDSON SIMPLY DID NOT HAVE THE POWER TO DRIVE SUCH COMPLEX AND EXTENSIVE NEGOTIATIONS.

- It was under dicker that it was seen necessary to move tyhe club and the deal at waverly was negotiated (and also the compensation deal) to move the club from glenferrie - these were both major major decisions that has and will benefit our club for many years. PARTIALLY CORRECT. PROCESS AND NEGOTIONS DRIVEN BY OTHERS SUCH AS GROWCOTT
BB: YES GROWCOTT AS LEADER OF THE FINANCE SUB COMMITTEE WAS INVOLVED BUT AS PRESIDENT DICKER WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL NEGOTIATIONS AND IT IS WELL KNOWN DICKER DROVE THE NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE AFL AND MIRVAC.

- And it was under dicker that kennett was identified as his successor - once all the hard decisions had been made and the foundations for success had been put in place on and off the field. OPINION. KENNETT WAS IDENTIFIED BY POWERFUL PEOPLE WHO DEEMED DICKER TO BE REQUIRING REPLACEMENT.
BB: DICKER OVERLOOKED THE PROCESS TO IDENTIFY HIS SUCCESSOR AND FOLLOWING HIS INTENTION TO LEAVE STAYED ON UNTILL SOMEONE WAS APPOINTED.

I would also say that without dicker and don scott we wouldn't even be a club in our own name. And as the above attests it was dicker that has been largely responsible either directly or through his appointments for every major decision the club has made over more than 10 years. OPINION BASED ON DISTORTIONS NOT FACTS.
BB: ARE YOU DENYING SCOTT AND DICKERS ROLE IN OPPOSING THE MERGER WITH MELBOURNE?

ANYWAY THE CLUB AND THE BOARD DOESN”T SHARE YOUR OPINION - WHEN DICKER RESIGNED THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY VOTED FOR DICKER TO RECEIVE LIFE MEMBERSHIP FOR HIS CONTRIBUTION TO THE CLUB.

AS KENNETT SAID AT THE TIME AT THE 2005 AGM:

I DON’T KNOW OF ANY VOLUNTARY MEMBER OF ANY FOOTBALL CLUB WHO HAS FUNDAMENTALLY GIVEN OF HIS ALL AND I DON’T JUST MEAN HIS TIME AND PASSION BUT HIS OTHER ASSETS AS WELL. TIME TO PLAYERS, TIME TO STAFF, IN SUCH A WAY AS IAN HAS.

And as far as any success we have in the future through the rebuilding process goes we can thank dicker who understood once it became obvious that the process put in place by schwab wasn't working, who together with dunstall identified a courageous strategy to totally revamp the club. OPINION UNSUPPORTED BY FACTS.
BB: ARE YOU ARE DENYING WE ENTERED A REBUILDING PROCESS FOLLOWING THE DEPARTURE OF SCHWAB IN 200?

THE FACTS ARE THERE ON RECORD AND CONFIRMED BY KENNETT - ALL THIS HAPPENED WHEN DICKER WAS PRESIDENT.

As far as Kennett goes he is largely reeking the success of the hard decisions that was made by dicker - interesting as steve bracks largely did the same when he replaced kennett as premier of victoria.OPINION UNSUPPORTED BY FACTS
BB: SEE ABOVE – ALL THE MAJOR DECISIONS THE CLUB HAS MADE WAS BEFORE KENNETT WAS APPOINTED – HE MAY HAVE EXTENDED SOME OF THEM AND I AM NOT SAYING HE ISN”T DOING A GOOD JOB BUT IT IS A FACT THAT DECISIONS LIKE REBUILDING ON AND OFF-FIELD, SELLING THE SOCIAL CLUB, MOVING TO WAVERLY & SETTING UP THE DEAL, ESTABLISHING TIES WITH TASMANIA ETC WERE DONE UNDER DICKER.

Just to indulge you...
You have hardly indulged me gump – my daughter indulges me – you are merely a distraction.

[Forrest Gump]

All this in a thread about one of Dicker's disasters, Peter Schwab...

I cant be bothered going back through the details of your post as you dont seem to know the difference between a fact and an opinion.

Dicker was such a great and respected leader by the current board they have named nothing in his honour... and never will.

The sad reality is that the club had to rebuild on and off field because, after saving the club from merger, the club went backwards at a great rate in the early 00's - and this was all under the micro management of Ian Dicker who then had full support of the board and made all of the key decisions. Once the rebuilding began, Dicker had lost much credibility, power and influence. Therefore for you to position him as the great reformer is ludicrous - but very amusing! You must work in a creative field, I presume.

[Kyle Craig]

mate you all have these long typing boxes when i post this i want the moderators to close this because what i'm gonna tell youse is 100% correct i looked it up on google so there is no need to argue what peter schwab is. I typed into them google web pages - what is peter schwab?

it came back with

peter schwab is a giant douche bag.

So thats an actual fact no lying, google.com told me so please close thread

[Brown Blood]

All this in a thread about one of Dicker's disasters, Peter Schwab...

I cant be bothered going back through the details of your post as you dont seem to know the difference between a fact and an opinion.

Dicker was such a great and respected leader by the current board they have named nothing in his honour... and never will.

The sad reality is that the club had to rebuild on and off field because, after saving the club from merger, the club went backwards at a great rate in the early 00's - and this was all under the micro management of Ian Dicker who then had full support of the board and made all of the key decisions. Once the rebuilding began, Dicker had lost much credibility, power and influence. Therefore for you to position him as the great reformer is ludicrous - but very amusing! You must work in a creative field, I presume.

Was this the early 00's that with a bit of luck and a non cheating umpire we could have played off in a GF.

Anyway as I have previously posted schwab was not a great coach but was not the worse we have had and was very unlucky because of outside influences in his last year - & I do accept he made some terrible PR errors.

As far as dicker goes if he had a failure it was he was too trusting - this can be an asset in a leader and helps build loyalty but can also bring you unstuck if you place too much faith in someone not worthy.

But I have not positioned him as the great reformer - I have merely tried to correct the record when some say it was kennett that put in place the process when clearly this is incorrect.

And so yes I do believe that given some of the problems the club faced around 2004 it was largely he and dunstall that set about the process of us rebuilding and of course there were others - but you still haven't named the chief architects that was responsible and it didn't just happen by good luck or osmosis!

BTW given the tone of your posts I picture you as some sad individual not knowing whether to be happy with our improvement or still trying to knife those largely responsible for it on the basis of your past gripes - must be tough!

[medusala]

But I have not positioned him as the great reformer - I have merely tried to correct the record when some say it was kennett that put in place the process when clearly this is incorrect.


If this is correct then how do you explain the very large profit turn around that occurred after Dicker left? The club lost over $1m before extraordinary items under Dicker.

Was none of this due to Kennett?

[Brown Blood]

If this is correct then how do you explain the very large profit turn around that occurred after Dicker left? The club lost over $1m before extraordinary items under Dicker.

Was none of this due to Kennett?

Of course some of it was due to kennett - but as I previously posted the major decisions (those that have really set up our club) were in place before he started & (of course) these take time to take effect.

Think about the effect of our improvement on-field and the effect of that on membership and crowd attendances (kennett has acknowledged that the appointment of clarkson over a year before he was appointed was an initiative by the board who agreed rebuilding the club was necessary & clarkson fitted the right mould).

Think about the effect of stopping the annual $350K bleeding of the social club and the cost of aging premises at glenferrie oval & the subsequent effect on the bottom line of the move to waverly ( and think about the asset which we are building there for zero cost).

Think about the extra dollars that have come into the club through the tasmanian sponsorship deal - yes kennett has helped that but dicker played a large role in sponsoring and driving the relationship.

And think about some of the quality of the appointments (ie robson & kennett & many others) and the subsequent effect of this on our ability to attract and recruit the right people to the club and the subsequent quality of decisions they are able to make.

[Fabulous]

BB Quote:

AS FAR AS LEIGHTEN LEAVING HE RESIGNED TO TAKE ON A MORE SENIOR POSITION WITH (I THINK) ERGON ENERGY - A MULTI MILLION $ ENERGY PROVIDER IN QLD.

He may have moved on by now but when he left us he got a job at Fox Studios in Sydney through his employment agency. Leighton was a Dicker appointment without board approval. They found out he was not up to it and advised him accordingly thus he moved on to the best available opportunity.

BB please do your research and you will find this is fact.

[Brown Blood]

BB Quote:

AS FAR AS LEIGHTEN LEAVING HE RESIGNED TO TAKE ON A MORE SENIOR POSITION WITH (I THINK) ERGON ENERGY - A MULTI MILLION $ ENERGY PROVIDER IN QLD.

He may have moved on by now but when he left us he got a job at Fox Studios in Sydney through his employment agency. Leighton was a Dicker appointment without board approval. They found out he was not up to it and advised him accordingly thus he moved on to the best available opportunity.

BB please do your research and you will find this is fact.

So what gump was saying is he moved because he couldn't work with dicker (although he was a dicker appointment as you say) and you are saying he was hopeless anyway and so was moved on :).

And the problem with my research was I thought he may have moved to Ergon and you are saying he went to Fox first (though he may now work there as I thought).

I would have thought it is largely irrelevant where he moved, what is relevant is he moved and was replaced with someone who seems to be doing a good or better job.

All this hardly changes the essence of my post - but thankyou for pointing out my error.

[medusala]

Of course some of it was due to kennett - but as I previously posted the major decisions (those that have really set up our club) were in place before he started & (of course) these take time to take effect.

The turnaround in finances wasnt largely due to those factors you mention. social club costs were still there in that period. The ladder position hadnt improved. We got a bit extra re selling games but that doesnt explain the very large turnaround. It was also PRE the current Tas deal.

As for quality of appointments Dicker appointed Schwab and Leighton, Kennett got Dillon.

[Brown Blood]

The turnaround in finances wasnt largely due to those factors you mention. social club costs were still there in that period. The ladder position hadnt improved. We got a bit extra re selling games but that doesnt explain the very large turnaround. It was also PRE the current Tas deal.



I won't go into much detail about the increase from 05-06 as it was only an extra couple of hundred thousand and kennett was only president for around 10 months - the big increase was 06-07 and the reason for the $3.3M increase from 06-07 was for a number of factors but most are related to the very points I stated.

Firstly we shouldn't forget a big chunk of the increase, $1.2M came from the afl as a result of the new TV rights deal (not really attributable to any president).

Now the first point I mentioned was our improvement on field and its affect on membership and crowd attendances. Last year membership and match day income was up $700K and related to increased membership, marketing and merchandise sales up $3.1M (and some of this would have come from the new sponsorship deal which I also mentioned) - note related expenses would go against these items.

My next point was stopping the bleeding of the social club & its sale and move to waverly - last year we booked a profit on the sale of the social club of $570K and dividend income of $413K (the club invested the proceeds from the sale of linda crescent into income performing assets some of which would account for the increased dividend income). In addition we are no longer paying the council rent for substandard premises at glenferrie oval we now pay basically nothing at waverly (and will endup owning a substantial asset). This leaves the club substantially better off and although we moved the year before the effect on the accounts was largely masked by the large amount of writeoffs and other costs associated with the move.

I have already mentioned the effect of the tasmanian sponsorship deal which kennett extended.

And lastly we have making the right appointments - you mention schwab and leighton - I'll raise you promoting dunstall, appointing clarkson and robson and others and then appointing kennett to succeed him.

[medusala]

I won't go into much detail about the increase from 05-06 as it was only an extra couple of hundred thousand and kennett was only president for around 10 months

It was far more than that. IIRC the prior year had around $1.2m of "fundraising" income which it didnt the next year. You have to strip that out.


Firstly we shouldn't forget a big chunk of the increase, $1.2M came from the afl as a result of the new TV rights deal (not really attributable to any president).

Which I believe got spent on additional football dept spending.

Now the first point I mentioned was our improvement on field and its affect on membership and crowd attendances.

Which wasnt really an issue in the year in question

You keep talking of events re the two years in question.

[Robber Baron]

All this in a thread about one of Dicker's disasters, Peter Schwab...

I cant be bothered going back through the details of your post as you dont seem to know the difference between a fact and an opinion.

Dicker was such a great and respected leader by the current board they have named nothing in his honour... and never will.

The sad reality is that the club had to rebuild on and off field because, after saving the club from merger, the club went backwards at a great rate in the early 00's - and this was all under the micro management of Ian Dicker who then had full support of the board and made all of the key decisions. Once the rebuilding began, Dicker had lost much credibility, power and influence. Therefore for you to position him as the great reformer is ludicrous - but very amusing! You must work in a creative field, I presume.

Ian Dickers is like a god for us and Jeff Kennet and the board love him and hes still working for us for free and doing stuff like making the museum and there probably gunna name it fir him and this new pokies venue in Caroline springs named after him as well or one in Tassie that were gunna make.

If we neve had Ian Dickers we would of been merged by Melboune. Hes done so much for us like hes gotten us waverly of $1 thats worh millions, he got Dunstall for us on the board and hes made us a power again, he got us Tassie that were the only club there and now Colingwood want to take it of us, he made us finacial with profits every year more then the other vic clubs, he got us JeffKennet now you tell me which of the other 16 clubs have gotten the premier on there club none of them, and hes gotten us the best young guns CEO in Ian Robbson thats looking like there gunna make him CEO after Demertuio and Clakrosn thats shown to be the best coach in the AFL. Ian Dickers has made us what we are today and you should be getting on your knees and thaking him for it. GO HAWKS

[Forrest Gump]

Was this the early 00's that with a bit of luck and a non cheating umpire we could have played off in a GF.
THIS IS AN EXCUSE FOR MEDIOCRITY

Anyway as I have previously posted schwab was not a great coach but was not the worse we have had and was very unlucky because of outside influences in his last year - & I do accept he made some terrible PR errors.
MORE EXCUSES. SCHWAB WAS TERRIBLE - AND DICKER WAS HIS BIGGEST SUPPORTER.

As far as dicker goes if he had a failure it was he was too trusting - this can be an asset in a leader and helps build loyalty but can also bring you unstuck if you place too much faith in someone not worthy.
ANOTHER EXCUSE. HE TRUSTED SCHWAB ON FIELD - AND NO-ONE OFF IT, HENCE HIS HANDS ON APPROACH THAT FRUSTRATED 4 CEO'S

But I have not positioned him as the great reformer - I have merely tried to correct the record when some say it was kennett that put in place the process when clearly this is incorrect.
AGREE THAT KENNETT CANT TAKE MUCH OF THE CREDIT, BUT DICKER CANT EITHER FOR REASONS DETAILED EARLIER.

And so yes I do believe that given some of the problems the club faced around 2004 it was largely he and dunstall that set about the process of us rebuilding and of course there were others - but you still haven't named the chief architects that was responsible and it didn't just happen by good luck or osmosis!
WHO CREATED THE PROBLEMS? DICKER AND SCHWAB? OR DO YOU HAVE AN EXCUSE FOR THIS AS WELL?

BTW given the tone of your posts I picture you as some sad individual not knowing whether to be happy with our improvement or still trying to knife those largely responsible for it on the basis of your past gripes - must be tough!
I AM NOT AN APOLOGIST AND EXCUSER LIKE YOU - I SET HIGHER STANDARDS FOR THIS CLUB.


Your apologistic approach and circular arguments are tiring me, BB.

[thatswhatimtalkinabout]

You have put up nought to quantify your argument at all - how could you be tired when you haven't presented any sort of credible case?

You sir are a slapper of the highest proportions.

Go and enjoy your life in your imaginary world putting spite and venom on anyone who dare achieve anything in life.

Put up a proper arguement that might have some facts rather than your opinions or just do everyone a favor and crawl back under that rock from whence you cams.

[Brown Blood]

Your apologistic approach and circular arguments are tiring me, BB.

You obviously have some deep seated hate for dicker gump - were you part of the "operation recovery" ticket that when it went to the vote at the end of 2004 only got around 5% support - whereas the dicker board (complete with harris) got 95% support.

It seems not only me but the (other) members of the club have a totally different view on dicker than you as well!

As far as your comments about circular arguments look in the mirror - I have already addressed a number of your points in earlier posts which you keep re-raising (and without the sarcasm and border line abuse that is the usual tone of most of your posts on this and other forums - most of which you have been banned from).

[medusala]

It seems not only me but the (other) members of the club have a totally different view on dicker than you as well!


Lets not get too excited. There is no doubt whatsoever that the club owes a massive amount of gratitude to Ian Dicker for his huge efforts both in time and $.

However, its also clear that the time had come for him to move on.

He left the club struggling badly, facing a loss of over $1m before extraordinary items, a membership that had fallen significantly and the prospect of selling more home games than even the poorest of clubs.

Far too many people on here with extreme rose coloured glasses.

[Forrest Gump]

You obviously have some deep seated hate for dicker gump - were you part of the "operation recovery" ticket that when it went to the vote at the end of 2004 only got around 5% support - whereas the dicker board (complete with harris) got 95% support.

It seems not only me but the (other) members of the club have a totally different view on dicker than you as well!

As far as your comments about circular arguments look in the mirror - I have already addressed a number of your points in earlier posts which you keep re-raising (and without the sarcasm and border line abuse that is the usual tone of most of your posts on this and other forums - most of which you have been banned from).

If you had addressed the points properly, they wouldnt remain issues that undermine your somewhat disjointed argument.

Your argument appears to attempt to credit Dicker with (as yet, largely unrealised) achievements at a time when he had minimal influence at the club - yet fails to recognise his responsibility for the significant failings of the club when he had considerable influence and power.

It was these very clear failings that required measures to be taken at all - with or without any direct or indirect contribution from Dicker. And it was these failings that ultimately had him overthrown as soon as an appropriate replacement could be found.

Until you can address this flaw in your argument, it seems pointless in me continuing to attempt to debate you.

[Brown Blood]

Lets not get too excited. There is no doubt whatsoever that the club owes a massive amount of gratitude to Ian Dicker for his huge efforts both in time and $.
What I stated about the dicker administration versus the rival ticket is correct - the operation recovery ticket was totally rejected by the clubs members.

However, its also clear that the time had come for him to move on.
Don't disagree - he had been there a long time, is not a young man and as kennett is recommending presidents shouldn't last for more than 2 terms anyway - though I don't agree with this.

He left the club struggling badly, facing a loss of over $1m before extraordinary items, a membership that had fallen significantly and the prospect of selling more home games than even the poorest of clubs.

This is where we differ a bit - as I have previously mentioned I believe most of the major decisions (those that have really set up our club) were in place before he kennett started - they have taken a year or so to really take effect and for the once off costs to disappear.

And this is not to say the kennett administration is also doing a good job - I think on the whole it is.

But I don't believe the club was struggling as badly as you say when he left - in 2005 we actually made a profit of $90K from ongoing activities, the foundations were in place for future success on and off field and the 2004 and 2005 results were effected by some one-off factors including the effect of some backended contracts and a way too high player salary list that was being adressed.

[Lord Chester]

Brown Blood, I have read your posts, which, in essence are substantially opinion, with both interest and amusement. I would suggest, as part of your on-going revision of HFC history, that you ought credit Bruce Growcott with the influence he rightly deserves regarding some of your points.

May I be bold enough to suggest, that, in your role as the self appointed successor to club historian Peter Haby, to please provide at least some semblance of fact with at least one credible source to support your opinions.

[Brown Blood]

Brown Blood, I have read your posts, which, in essence are substantially opinion, with both interest and amusement. I would suggest, as part of your on-going revision of HFC history, that you ought credit Bruce Growcott with the influence he rightly deserves regarding some of your points.

May I be bold enough to suggest, that, in your role as the self appointed successor to club historian Peter Haby, to please provide at least some semblance of fact with at least one credible source to support your opinions.
Ah Lord Chester - your first post.

It is interesting how you sound just like number 33 (I was wondering when he would pop up) - gump and 33 would always like to hunt in packs on MH or HHQ.

Now if you have read this thread you would see I did credit growcott as the leader of the finance sub committee - but I also pointed out that the negotiations concerning waverley were widespread and took place over a number of years (dating back to the closure of waverley park back in 1999 - and I won't talk about kennetts involvement in that).

These discussions thus involved a number of parties including the afl, the state and local government and mirvac - as a result dicker as president and member of all committees played a major role in driving and co-ordinating these discussions.

And if its quotes or a credible source you want - heres one:


Ian Dicker oversaw the plan to move to Waverley and the foray into Tasmania initially. Jeff and Ian Robson have then been able to take those plans and put them into place in the past 12 months or two years.

http://www.hawthornfc.com.au/Season2007/News/NewsArticle/tabid/4742/Default.aspx?newsId=39993

[Forrest Gump]

Ian Dickers is like a god for us and Jeff Kennet and the board love him and hes still working for us for free and doing stuff like making the museum and there probably gunna name it fir him and this new pokies venue in Caroline springs named after him as well or one in Tassie that were gunna make.

If we neve had Ian Dickers we would of been merged by Melboune. Hes done so much for us like hes gotten us waverly of $1 thats worh millions, he got Dunstall for us on the board and hes made us a power again, he got us Tassie that were the only club there and now Colingwood want to take it of us, he made us finacial with profits every year more then the other vic clubs, he got us JeffKennet now you tell me which of the other 16 clubs have gotten the premier on there club none of them, and hes gotten us the best young guns CEO in Ian Robbson thats looking like there gunna make him CEO after Demertuio and Clakrosn thats shown to be the best coach in the AFL. Ian Dickers has made us what we are today and you should be getting on your knees and thaking him for it. GO HAWKS


I cant decide who has put their case more eloquently and persuasively... Brown Blood or Robber Baron.

I look forward to seeing the Tasmanian social club and trust that it is as stylish, well patronised and profitable as the one at Waverley.

[medusala]

But I don't believe the club was struggling as badly as you say when he left - in 2005 we actually made a profit of $90K from ongoing activities, the foundations were in place for future success on and off field and the 2004 and 2005 results were effected by some one-off factors including the effect of some backended contracts and a way too high player salary list that was being adressed.


That profit was after one off fundraising (and most will tell you it was Dicker) of over $1m.

Dicker went to Tas out of desperation.

No rational person thinks Tas is anything other than a short term cash generating effort. There is absolutely no long term strategic reason to be in such a small and fragmented market.

[Brown Blood]

That profit was after one off fundraising (and most will tell you it was Dicker) of over $1m.



Actually -it wasn't just dicker though he certainly put in and was apparently generous at a number of auctions - harris also made a substantial contribution and the club was also bequeathed a large sum by an unknown benefactor.

http://phorums.com.au/archive/index.php/t-167460.html

[Lord Chester]

Ah Lord Chester - your first post.

It is interesting how you sound just like number 33 (I was wondering when he would pop up) - gump and 33 would always like to hunt in packs on MH or HHQ.

Now if you have read this thread you would see I did credit growcott as the leader of the finance sub committee - but I also pointed out that the negotiations concerning waverley were widespread and took place over a number of years (dating back to the closure of waverley park back in 1999 - and I won't talk about kennetts involvement in that).

These discussions thus involved a number of parties including the afl, the state and local government and mirvac - as a result dicker as president and member of all committees played a major role in driving and co-ordinating these discussions.

And if its quotes or a credible source you want - heres one:



http://www.hawthornfc.com.au/Season2007/News/NewsArticle/tabid/4742/Default.aspx?newsId=39993



Brown Blood, a credible source is an independent third party; not a paid employee of HFC quoted from the HFC website. Given that you fail to understand the difference between fact and fiction, I invite you to join me for a cup of coffee so I can explain the difference between the two in a way that you may understand. This will spare the many posters to this forum of reading any further obtuse speculation authored by you.

[Brown Blood]

Brown Blood, a credible source is an independent third party; not a paid employee of HFC quoted from the HFC website. Given that you fail to understand the difference between fact and fiction, I invite you to join me for a cup of coffee so I can explain the difference between the two in a way that you may understand. This will spare the many posters to this forum of reading any further obtuse speculation authored by you.

All this has a familiar ring about it to me lord chester.

Your suggestion now that I even need to come up with an independent third party when all we were originally discussing was whether growcott was involved in some of the discussions regarding waverley which I already accepted he or was in a number of posts or the role of dicker which I have also discussed is laughable and you are now simply arguing over semantics and trying to obscure the discussion.

Then to suggest we should meet for a coffee is not only ridiculous but also a bit scary.

I notice you haven't denied my suggestion that you post in a similar fashion to number 33 - what a pair you and gump must make - 2 twisted middle aged men pi55ed off they missed out on overthrowing dicker in a board room battle almost 4 years ago to control a football club so you lurk and troll internet fan forums with the sole reason of occasionally sticking in a knife or posting something negative about someone who has literally given thousands of hours service for no pay and millions of dollars of his own money to our football club over more than 10 years.

Pathetic.

[Lord Chester]

Brown Blood, you certainly are a peculiar character. I have misjudged you. You certainly are passionate; unfortunately misguided and clearly obsessed with posters named Forrest Gump and Number 33. I am as much Number 33 as I am Robber Baron!

Here are both my previous posts.

Brown Blood, I have read your posts, which, in essence are substantially opinion, with both interest and amusement. I would suggest, as part of your on-going revision of HFC history, that you ought credit Bruce Growcott with the influence he rightly deserves regarding some of your points. May I be bold enough to suggest, that, in your role as the self appointed successor to club historian Peter Haby, to please provide at least some semblance of fact with at least one credible source to support your opinions.


Brown Blood, a credible source is an independent third party; not a paid employee of HFC quoted from the HFC website. Given that you fail to understand the difference between fact and fiction, I invite you to join me for a cup of coffee so I can explain the difference between the two in a way that you may understand. This will spare the many posters to this forum of reading any further obtuse speculation authored by you.


My posts do not criticize Ian Dicker or any HFC official past or present as you sadly imply.

My first post attempts to highlight the influence of HFC’s longest serving director Bruce Growcott’s enduring influence over the past twelve years which you fail to appropriately credit. His influence has been considerable.

My second post attempted to persuade you that your opinion does not equate to fact. Your rejection of this principle is the point of this debate; a principle that you clearly do not understand.

Finally, your abuse of posters that criticise you is tedious. I would guess the moderators are equally tired of you as the rest of us are.

[Brown Blood]

Sure chester - we all believe you.

[Peerless Pete]

- It was dicker that tapped schwab on the shoulder so he resigned. INCORRECT. I UNDERSTAND SCHWAB WAS FORCED TO RESIGN BY THE BOARD AND DICKER DISAGREED. PLEASE PROVIDE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THIS SUPPOSED 'FACT'

- Following steve leightons resignation as CEO it was dicker who appointed dunstall interim CEO. PARTIALLY CORRECT. THIS WAS A BOARD APPOINTMENT, MADE NECESSARY AFTER ANOTHER CEO COULDNT WORK UNDER DICKER.

- It was dicker who appointed ed harris to the board. INCORRECT. PLEASE PROVIDE EVIDENCE. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT DICKER RESISTED HARRIS' APPOINTMENT.

- It was dunstall who ran the process to appoint a new coach and when the dicker led board appointed clarkson it was dunstall with dicker next to him at the announcement who said the new coach fitted in with the clubs need to rebuild and to embark on a youth policy to set themselves up for 2010. I UNDERSTAND DICKER HAD LITTLE INVOLVEMENT IN THE APPOINTMENT, YET YOUR POST APPEARS TO SUGGEST HE DID. PLEASE PROVIDE EVIDENCE.

- It was dicker that eventually identified and appointed robson as the new CEO PARTIALLY CORRECT. APPOINTED BY THE BOARD.

- It was under dicker that mark evens (GM Football Operations) and pelchin (GM player personnel and strategy) were appointed. IRRELEVANT. BOARD RATIFIED APPOINTMENTS BY NEW COACH CLARKSON WHO DICKER HAD MARGINAL INPUT IN APPOINTING

- It was dicker that worked to create closer bonds with tasmania PARTIALLY CORRECT. OTHERS SUCH AS PETER HUDSON DROVE THE PROCESS.

- It was under dicker that it was seen necessary to move tyhe club and the deal at waverly was negotiated (and also the compensation deal) to move the club from glenferrie - these were both major major decisions that has and will benefit our club for many years. PARTIALLY CORRECT. PROCESS AND NEGOTIONS DRIVEN BY OTHERS SUCH AS GROWCOTT

- And it was under dicker that kennett was identified as his successor - once all the hard decisions had been made and the foundations for success had been put in place on and off the field. OPINION. KENNETT WAS IDENTIFIED BY POWERFUL PEOPLE WHO DEEMED DICKER TO BE REQUIRING REPLACEMENT.


I would also say that without dicker and don scott we wouldn't even be a club in our own name. And as the above attests it was dicker that has been largely responsible either directly or through his appointments for every major decision the club has made over more than 10 years. OPINION BASED ON DISTORTIONS NOT FACTS.

And as far as any success we have in the future through the rebuilding process goes we can thank dicker who understood once it became obvious that the process put in place by schwab wasn't working, who together with dunstall identified a courageous strategy to totally revamp the club. OPINION UNSUPPORTED BY FACTS.

As far as Kennett goes he is largely reeking the success of the hard decisions that was made by dicker - interesting as steve bracks largely did the same when he replaced kennett as premier of victoria.OPINION UNSUPPORTED BY FACTS



Forrest keeps saying "opinion unsupported by fact", but then refutes some of Brown Blood's statements with incredibly detailed and irrefutable evidence such as "I understand that", or "My Understanding is".

Forrest, any chance you providing anything even remotely resembling evidence that isn't simply your opinion. Because it seems you don't want anyone else posting here unless they provide certified written documentation. Seems a bit unfair, don't you think?

Four years on, a different forum, but some things don't change.

[Forrest Gump]

Forrest keeps saying "opinion unsupported by fact", but then refutes some of Brown Blood's statements with incredibly detailed and irrefutable evidence such as "I understand that", or "My Understanding is".

Forrest, any chance you providing anything even remotely resembling evidence that isn't simply your opinion. Because it seems you don't want anyone else posting here unless they provide certified written documentation. Seems a bit unfair, don't you think?

Four years on, a different forum, but some things don't change.

Hello Peerless

I do not recall you but thank you for remembering me.

I deliberately used words such as "I understand" because I do not have evidence available to put up on this forum - but unlike BB, I am not claiming my opinions to be facts. Surely I do not need to provide evidence to demonstrate that BBs opinions are opinions - common sense should dictate that.

If you want specifics however, for example I can assure you that donald mcdonald had departed the club prior to clarkson and dunstall commencing a 2005 plan.

[MHDKA]

:) , reading Lord Chester's posts reminds me of that old saying: If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it's a duck!

I used to post on HHQ and now do on Mighty Hawk and he reminds me of someone who was very close to Forrest Gump, but of couse it could be a coincidence he just made his first post on this thread and brought up the same name Forrest Gump did! :rolleyes:

And as far as Forrest Gump goes I find it bizarre the only fact he has produced when put on the spot by Pete is not relevant to the discussion. Like others I am amazed how posters like him crawl out only to take pot shots every 6 months or so at a club official or another poster and when taken to task rely on what is obviously legal jargon (he must be a barrister) to justify it.

Some people get their rocks off in strange ways.