AGM Tonight! One Night Only! Sold Out!

Remove this Banner Ad

This sums is up pretty nicely for me.

6 months of good doesn't excuse 8-odd years of average to poor.

And this 6 months of good have only occured because he was forced to finally start making a decision. The time for making tough decisions was 3 years ago, not let us slide along in steaming medicority for so long.

How he is still there..... could only happen in Adelaide.

The incompetence he has shown would have him out the door at any Victorian club, the Victorian media would ask the questions not like our disgraceful idiots in SA that call themselves journalists.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Those numbers are not huge (in terms of voters).

19thDan - a year campaign mate, especially via social media, and I reckon you'd be a good chance next year to really push.
Why would he bother. Dan has done the hard yards by setting up a website and answering numerous questions on this forum. He will do the same again next year and then at the 11th hour in will walk an ex-player, having done sweet fa, and walk straight into the role.
 
Why would he bother. Dan has done the hard yards by setting up a website and answering numerous questions on this forum. He will do the same again next year and then at the 11th hour in will walk an ex-player, having done sweet fa, and walk straight into the role.
He, and I, are well aware of that risk. We spoke about it last night.
Just trying to be encouraging. Accepting defeat will change less than trying to make a difference.
My understanding is Fages gave him a hint of how far off he was - but I'll let him talk to that if he feels comfortable. If it was accurate information it was by no means an insurmountable gap. Probably depend heavily on how Jamo goes this year - and more than that, how the club as a whole travels this year.
 
His days were numbered well before Roo come on board and could not have stopped that even if he wanted to.
If Roo hadn't joined the board when he did, Trigg would still be CEO, and Sando would still be coach, I've no doubt of that.
 
Why would he bother. Dan has done the hard yards by setting up a website and answering numerous questions on this forum. He will do the same again next year and then at the 11th hour in will walk an ex-player, having done sweet fa, and walk straight into the role.

I don't want to agree with this but I find I must. Seems to me Dan was the only candidate who actually promoted himself to the members. Jamo did come in at the 11th hour with a 'celebrity' splash courtesy of a page of publicity in the Advertiser. I wonder how many people, on reading the article, subconsciously came away with the thought that it was all with the approval of the AFC?

I thought his resume was thin compared with the other candidates. But the people have spoken........
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Bickley left for another job like Trigg - so should be a reduction of liability for leave payout - rather than expenditure.

Sando would be different as was a contract payout.

Still strange that the highest attended club makes a loss. It is not a good look for the AFL. Understand GWS with 9K members but AFC? We should not be making losses, even with an ex-coaches payout.

Would Bicks have had another year on a fixed term contract. We may not have had to pay it out in its entirety, but maybe we came to an agreement somewhere in the middle. I suppose it would depend on how much less he's earning at AA.
 
Well the best way not to discourage good candidates Mr Chapman is not to put ex players up against them .
Not only do they already have the profile they then get lots of free publicity and exposure in press and then Roo gets him on prime time morning radio etc etc,
Where all others got nothing anywhere , not even decent flyers from club with good insights of candidates.
Look Roo and Fagan look to be shaking the tree and getting things moving but we still have a boys club and won't be any evidence against that view until the supporter members actually elect someone to represent them and not so Smart is no longer is COO or any paid position in club requiring decision making .

One of the better ploys was to not make the candidates bio's available until it was actually time to vote. Voting is a process that when we do it, we want it over and done with ASAP. I'm not saying it's right, but that's how it is. Those bio's should have been on the AFC website as soon as they had filtered the candidates and determined who were the candidates. The board has used every manoeuvre available to them to control the 2 candidates elected by the members. Jammo at the top of every ballot paper was the icing on the cake. Sorry, that was an actual coincidence.
 
As usual some of the reasonings behind afc stuff doesn't quite make sense.

So they don't want to release the vote numbers because it might show that regular schmoes don't have a chance. Once they and others see how far off the pace they are, no one might stand. Whatever

But if they were so worried about democracy and member representation, why stitch up the process with club legends and ex players?

Talk about wanting your cake...
 
As usual some of the reasonings behind afc stuff doesn't quite make sense.

So they don't want to release the vote numbers because it might show that regular schmoes don't have a chance. Once they and others see how far off the pace they are, no one might stand. Whatever

But if they were so worried about democracy and member representation, why stitch up the process with club legends and ex players?

Talk about wanting your cake...
They obviously don't want to put off the public the next time they put up past players as candidates.

The whole thing is a farce.
 
Where does it stop? Do we not allow just ex-Adelaide players? Do we ban any ex AFL player? What about ex-AFL administrator? What about banning any famous person?

It is up to those other good candidates to overcome this obstacle. 19thDan did a brilliant job in his campaign and will be much better off for the run in the next election.



So whats the solution? Just have it be unknowns? So Roo shouldn't have been able to run either?



Its obvious you have a very clear agenda. You seem to be happy with Roo but not with Smart. Roo's appointment has been as much a 'boys club' as Smarts.

You need to think about whether you are against a so called 'boys club' or just personally against Smart.

There is now a completely different boys club at the AFC and its lead by Roo/****/Walsh.

I'll always return to this one simple fact. Ex-players have plenty of access and are well known to the club. If they possess the appropriate skill set and drive, then they should form a vital component of the direct elect program. It shouldn't be left up to the members to elect people with the football player and club experience.
 
Would Bicks have had another year on a fixed term contract. We may not have had to pay it out in its entirety, but maybe we came to an agreement somewhere in the middle. I suppose it would depend on how much less he's earning at AA.
Bicks was offered an assistant coach role in 2015 and turned it down.
 
Obviously the club had nothing to do with it. The tooth fairy put him up to it.
I'd like to see some proof of this allegation. Because it sounds like you are seriously speculating. Where is the evidence that Jamo had no interest in nominating and the club said he should.

Seemed like the club enouraged nominations from all qualified people to me.

Evidence please?
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top