Joe Russo wants on the board

[Ned_Flanders]

How convenient .

Do you reckon they have an agreement with Peggy ?

What are the odds ?

It's a long standing rule, goes back to when it was basically just pre as a social media outlet

I believe the idea is so that current board members don't get sucked into the vortex of weird that can be on the web. Look how much s**t rfco deals with. If you had board members here they'd be hassled daily on why Dimma isn't sacked and why we didn't rookie Jayden post

All you need is one mis worded post, and the media jumps on it

 

[Ned_Flanders]

This seems a silly rule, by the by

We know more about Joe than we know the blokes seeking re-election.

100% agree on the last bit, happens every election though (same occurred with Rex last time)

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Dowd speaks to The Age

http://m.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/tiger-candidate-there-wont-be-bloodshed-20151128-glail1.html

And another with policies that are "well do better"

This ones easy though, if you can't even be ****ed explaining to members why you should be voted for, why bother voting for you

Still undecided on Joe and Maury

 

[blaisee]

It's a long standing rule, goes back to when it was basically just pre as a social media outlet

I believe the idea is so that current board members don't get sucked into the vortex of weird that can be on the web. Look how much s**t rfco deals with. If you had board members here they'd be hassled daily on why Dimma isn't sacked and why we didn't rookie Jayden post

All you need is one mis worded post, and the media jumps on it

You didn't answer my question

 

[Ned_Flanders]

You didn't answer my question

I did - it has nothing to do with Peggy

The rule (off memory) was brought in during the Casey years or possibly before him

We went through this all with Rex

Initially he wanted to maintain links with social media, but he let us know when he was elected that there is a long standing board rule against board members engaging with social media and the net

nothing to do with this election at all

 

[blaisee]

I did - it has nothing to do with Peggy

The rule (off memory) was brought in during the Casey years or possibly before him

We went through this all with Rex

Initially he wanted to maintain links with social media, but he let us know when he was elected that there is a long standing board rule against board members engaging with social media and the net

nothing to do with this election at all

So again

The question is

Do you think the current board members have an agreement NOT to vote Peggy out ?

 

[Ned_Flanders]

So again

The question is

Do you think the current board members have an agreement NOT to vote Peggy out ?

Are you seriously an idiot?

Have you been missing any of the news over the last week?

Mal Speed can hardly think hes gunna take the board with Joes vote if all other members are united behin Peggy

Which is why Ive called for a spill on a number of occasions

If you think the communication ban is so Peggy can enforce a perception of unity you really are a nong

 

[blaisee]

Are you seriously an idiot?

Have you been missing any of the news over the last week?

Mal Speed can hardly think hes gunna take the board with Joes vote if all other members are united behin Peggy

Which is why Ive called for a spill on a number of occasions

If you think the communication ban is so Peggy can enforce a perception of unity you really are a nong

Why the insults ?

And why do you keep avoiding my question ?

 

[blaisee]

Since no body will answer the question as to whether the current board have an agreement with Peggy to never challenge her presidency , I will answer it.

Bloody oath they do . All the board have stacked the numbers in Peggy's Favour obviously .

Now what does that mean for joe?

Well I have never met him , but I would assume that the current board don't want joe in, why I don't know . This has resulted in a scare mongering campaign to make the members fearful of change . So I guess we all have a choice .

Do we back Peggy in and remove any level of accountability of her and the board performance . There is no accountability because there is not a clearly communicated objective , there is no 3 0 75 plan.

Or do we vote joe in, when he also hasn't communicated a clear plan either , all he has promised to do is not challenge Peggy . So either way Peggy is safe and there is no accountability .

This is modern democracy working at its best. Diluted to the max.

Why are the members treated like morons?

Why are we seen as too stupid to understand the facts and choose between two alternate options ?

Isn't that the whole purpose of a member elected board ?

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Why the insults ?

And why do you keep avoiding my question ?

Im not, youre just not getting the answer you want

Mal Speed is apparently mounting a challenge. That needs more than just his vote. He already has three (not including his own) if Joe gets him the presidency

This means there is no agreement, this means your theory is a nonsense

 

[TigerImposter]

Why did Peggy come out with a supporting statement of stability last week for the two members going for re-election?
Also other board members not up for re-election are also pumping the same line .
Then Caro comes out in their support also and like a fool contradicts them by suggesting non unity and instability
It's a joke

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Why did Peggy come out with a supporting statement of stability last week for the two members going for re-election?
Also other board members not up for re-election are also pumping the same line .
Then Caro comes out in their support also and like a fool contradicts them by suggesting non unity and instability
It's a joke

Dont disagree, which is why Im calling for a spill

if you are on the board and dont have confidence in your prez, challenge and make it public

this cloak and dagger s**t is an insult to every member they are supposed to represent

 

[Tetley Tigers]

I'm comfortable in saying that I have noted for the two new nominees. I think it is time for some fresh faces at Board level, although it is not the time to change President. I think that Peggy O'Neill is doing a very good job, she brings a measured approach, very strong corporate governance experience and doesn't appear to be a "linament sniffer". The Club does not need instability at the top right now. Suffice to say, both Dowd and Russo have strong commercial experience and aren't lawyers, which goes a long way in my book. Lawyers by their nature are adversarial and we need to bring a bit of diversity to the Football Club. They are no doubt passionate Tigers, but aren't we all.

What I am conscious of is the FIFA and Olympics disease. Sports administrators that hang around too long. Russo calls it out - we haven't won a final since 2001, haven't been near a Grand Final since 1982 and we can't get a big name player. We can't escape those facts and perhaps we need a new perspective on the Board to help land the "big fish".

I only have a small piece of advice for Dowd and Russo - don't * it up.

 

[UpTheGuts]

Im not, youre just not getting the answer you want

Mal Speed is apparently mounting a challenge. That needs more than just his vote. He already has three (not including his own) if Joe gets him the presidency

This means there is no agreement, this means your theory is a nonsense

Speed is the only one who has denied he is supporting Russo. He had Walsh as a supporter, who has now been sent packing (and his rather opinionated Twitter account, which was regularly critical of the team's performance in big games, closed).

If Joe supports Maurice, he has the numbers to topple Peggy

Unless Maurice is not returned

 

[UpTheGuts]

But I actually just think Russo isn't siding with anyone and is a Tiger who's impatient, not confident we are going as well as had been anticipated & who'd like that message conveyed/ represented at board level.

Which is a legitimate pitch.

Caro seems to see a shark in every wave when it comes to Tigerland. This isn't that big a deal, I reckon

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Speed is the only one who has denied he is supporting Russo. He had Walsh as a supporter, who has now been sent packing (and his rather opinionated Twitter account, which was regularly critical of the team's performance in big games, closed).

If Joe supports Maurice, he has the numbers to topple Peggy

Unless Maurice is not returned

the last sentence is the main thing that makes me think Mal and not Maury is driving this

if you want a tilt at the main job, you have to survive. Whats the point getting joe in if its at your expense?

If this was a push by Maury, I think he would have gone public and announced a push by necessity.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

But I actually just think Russo isn't siding with anyone and is a Tiger who's impatient, not confident we are going as well as had been anticipated & who'd like that message conveyed/ represented at board level.

Which is a legitimate pitch.

Caro seems to see a shark in every wave when it comes to Tigerland. This isn't that big a deal, I reckon

Still not 100% sold either way on this TBH

It took way too long for joe to say hes not out to overthrow the pres, and as much as I hate caro, she does distort but she rarely lies

TBH I'm just hoping we get more clarity before the voting deadline. I dont want to be voting in favour of a board challenge, but the reality is any of the three (undies is a non issue) could be in the Speed camp

 

[Ned_Flanders]

* just to clarify by board challenge I mean leadership of the board, not the pieces that make it up

 

[blaisee]

Im not, youre just not getting the answer you want

Mal Speed is apparently mounting a challenge. That needs more than just his vote. He already has three (not including his own) if Joe gets him the presidency

This means there is no agreement, this means your theory is a nonsense

This is the third time you have deliberately ignored my question . And since you have already insulted me as well I really couldn't give 2 f@&&& what you think

 

[Ned_Flanders]

This is the third time you have deliberately ignored my question . And since you have already insulted me as well I really couldn't give 2 f@&&& what you think

Again I'm not ignoring your question

Read what I'm saying

You say "is there an instruction for board members to be in lock step with Peg?"

We have w challenge coming from mal speed

That's one ignoring your directive, plus three others, plus Joe

Simply put, if Joe is essential to a board overthrow it means four board members are already opposing peg.

How ******* hard is that to understand?

There is no directive because the fact a challenge exists means it's impossible

 

[theflea]

His issue is unchanged

His support while strong with republican voters, is non existent with dems, and in fact he's seen as a potential motivator for the dem base to get off its arse

Even if he won the primary, he'd be killed in the main

The RNC know this, and have been White anting him for weeks

Notice the change in the debates? Off attack debates to policy, where they know he struggles

Yep but he is gaining a bit from swinging independents. The problem is there isn't much else on the R side anyway( maybe apart from Rubio) . But then again Clinton is just plain untrustworthy. So imo that's why Trump does resonate a bit, both houses are junk.

 

[theflea]

Since no body will answer the question as to whether the current board have an agreement with Peggy to never challenge her presidency , I will answer it.

Bloody oath they do . All the board have stacked the numbers in Peggy's Favour obviously .

Now what does that mean for joe?

Well I have never met him , but I would assume that the current board don't want joe in, why I don't know . This has resulted in a scare mongering campaign to make the members fearful of change . So I guess we all have a choice .

Do we back Peggy in and remove any level of accountability of her and the board performance . There is no accountability because there is not a clearly communicated objective , there is no 3 0 75 plan.

Or do we vote joe in, when he also hasn't communicated a clear plan either , all he has promised to do is not challenge Peggy . So either way Peggy is safe and there is no accountability .

This is modern democracy working at its best. Diluted to the max.

Why are the members treated like morons?

Why are we seen as too stupid to understand the facts and choose between two alternate options ?

Isn't that the whole purpose of a member elected board ?

If the board was locked at 4-4 then the Peggy compromise happened I don't think it would be under the premise of never challenging. You would never say never. That association would continue to the next time frame. I agree with the rest.

 

[theflea]

Why did Peggy come out with a supporting statement of stability last week for the two members going for re-election?
Also other board members not up for re-election are also pumping the same line .
Then Caro comes out in their support also and like a fool contradicts them by suggesting non unity and instability
It's a joke

If the others aren't allowed to comment, then none should be able to.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

If the others aren't allowed to comment, then none should be able to.

Tbh it's a rule too tough to manage

It was made in an era when mass media was your main issue, and social media just fed it

Personally I think they need to open it up, but not 100%. You don't need board members discussing in house s**t on twitter

 

[theflea]

Tbh it's a rule too tough to manage

It was made in an era when mass media was your main issue, and social media just fed it

Personally I think they need to open it up, but not 100%. You don't need board members discussing in house s**t on twitter

Yep so if the incumbents are up for election, then maybe a forum where they can discuss their platforms. This is not for anything else but elections. Just a thought.