Hot Topic The Pres, CEO & the Board

[branedotorg]

Not sure how you do business, but if someone has worked for me in the past and I believe their skill set is applicable at another organisation, I encourage them to apply. Once the interview process is conducted, by a panel, you select the most appropriate person.

I found it encouraging that the president nominated someone but our process appointed someone else. It demonstrates a strong system

 

[TheRedPill]

I would have thought healthy objective debate would have been encouraged on this board.

I would have thought that as a member and sponsor you are entitled to an alternate view.

Was this board all gung ho about malthouse? Letting go Eddie Betts? I'm pretty sure there was differing opinions - some validated some not.

As some would claim it was the autocratic approach by Jack Elliot that got us into this mess 20yrs ago, so are you seriously advocating a similar approach 20yrs later?

Challenging of status quo is seen as disloyal? ANTI CFC. Challenging conversations l, transparency and accountability is all we ask for.

Cookie is correct as is Arrow. All clubs and businesses make mistakes. I have an open mind, but I want to see accountability in all this club sets out to achieve.

Sent from my SM-N950F using Tapatalk

Of course. BigFooty’s purpose is to enable everyone to share their views. You could make a thousand posts on whatever topic you like and, within the rules, you are free to do so. You have the platform to put forward your opinion.

However, that doesn’t qualify anything you post as “healthy objective debate” - nor does it mean that simply because you have a platform to say it, that what you say is in any way right, informed or constructive - and lastly, it doesn’t mean that other people are restricted from criticising it. If you are entitled to put forward your opinion, then surely if others disagree with you they are entitled to put forward theirs?

Opinions can be right or wrong. You shouldn’t be shocked when people challenge or dismiss opinions that are ill-informed, uneducated or poorly constructed. They dilute the quality of thinking and discussion - not because they agree or disagree with a certain viewpoint, but because they are uninformed.

Anyway, to summarise. Lloyd is a great get. This is still no guarantee that everything aligns and we get a flag. But he is a great operator, an innovative thinker and he is highly respected around the league. Enough for me, and evidently enough for the Club.

 

[slashin_velvet]

Not sure how you do business, but if someone has worked for me in the past and I believe their skill set is applicable at another organisation, I encourage them to apply. Once the interview process is conducted, by a panel, you select the most appropriate person.

Why would you or anyone else here need to see the process for hiring and firing? What input could you have to that process? I am not encouraging blind faith at all, what I am encouraging is people to stop looking in the rear vision mirror of 20 years ago. Again, how does anyone here know if MLG did not follow protocol? Because the media suggested it?

With regard to the first point, I was talking about how we as supporters assess if the club has appointed the right candidates. But with regard to your hypothetical, MLG had not worked with Lethlean to the best of my knowledge. I'll address the "encouraged to apply" in the next bit.

We can infer that MLG has not followed process because he refused to directly answer the following question:
"Did you offer Simon Lethlean the job as Carlton Chief Executive"
If MLG didn't, he could have very simply answered "No, and it wasn't my position to offer the role to anyone". Instead he talked around the question.
He was then asked a further 3 times directly if Lethlean was offered the role, and still refused to answer. The questioner went to the extent of asking MLG to answer the questions with a straight answer.
He waffled about "encouraging people to apply", but the implication of not giving a straight answer is that he did not follow due process or club protocol and offered the role to a candidate who had not been interviewed by the appropriate personnel, only for the board to overturn his decision - Jenkins and Judd being two very opposed to the appointment.

There have been suggestions MLG acted similarly in the past with regard to the Hawks recruiting manager Wright and was left with egg on his face.

The recent board moves where a close associate has taken a board spot and a known challenger has been removed suggests our president is surrounding himself with "yes men" and is worthy of questioning.

Podcast is here:
http://www.carltonfc.com.au/news-and-media/podcasts-and-audio
Mark LoGuidice on SEN | July 18
Skip to the 10 minute mark.

 

[slashin_velvet]

I found it encouraging that the president nominated someone but our process appointed someone else. It demonstrates a strong system

I would agree, except for the fact that at least one of the board members who opposed it are no longer on the board and has been replaced by a close associate.

 

[Arr0w]

With regard to the first point, I was talking about how we as supporters assess if the club has appointed the right candidates. But with regard to your hypothetical, MLG had not worked with Lethlean to the best of my knowledge. I'll address the "encouraged to apply" in the next bit.

We can infer that MLG has not followed process because he refused to directly answer the following question:
"Did you offer Simon Lethlean the job as Carlton Chief Executive"
If MLG didn't, he could have very simply answered "No, and it wasn't my position to offer the role to anyone". Instead he talked around the question.
He was then asked a further 3 times directly if Lethlean was offered the role, and still refused to answer. The questioner went to the extent of asking MLG to answer the questions with a straight answer.
He waffled about "encouraging people to apply", but the implication of not giving a straight answer is that he did not follow due process or club protocol and offered the role to a candidate who had not been interviewed by the appropriate personnel, only for the board to overturn his decision - Jenkins and Judd being two very opposed to the appointment.

There have been suggestions MLG acted similarly in the past with regard to the Hawks recruiting manager Wright and was left with egg on his face.

The recent board moves where a close associate has taken a board spot and a known challenger has been removed suggests our president is surrounding himself with "yes men" and is worthy of questioning.

Podcast is here:
http://www.carltonfc.com.au/news-and-media/podcasts-and-audio
Mark LoGuidice on SEN | July 18
Skip to the 10 minute mark.

I am well aware of the "Wright" & "Lethlean" situations, but is sounding people out a concern? He knows the board needs to ratify it. As for surrounding himself with yes people, you stated previously that Jenkins & Judd opposed the so called Lethlean appointment, so how does that sound like yes people.

I would hope, that the people on the board vigorously debate aspects of the club, which is healthy, but once a decision has been made, I would prefer there is no white anteing. If the known challenger is moved on, that too is healthy, as no matter what decisions are made, they will always be a challenger, it is unstable

 

[slashin_velvet]

I am well aware of the "Wright" & "Lethlean" situations, but is sounding people out a concern? He knows the board needs to ratify it. As for surrounding himself with yes people, you stated previously that Jenkins & Judd opposed the so called Lethlean appointment, so how does that sound like yes people.

I would hope, that the people on the board vigorously debate aspects of the club, which is healthy, but once a decision has been made, I would prefer there is no white anteing. If the known challenger is moved on, that too is healthy, as no matter what decisions are made, they will always be a challenger, it is unstable

Jenkins was removed and replaced by a close associate of MLG - thats my whole point!

 

[Arr0w]

Jenkins was removed and replaced by a close associate of MLG - thats my whole point!

So despite what Jenkins came out with publicly, you are suggesting Kate was removed?

 

[slashin_velvet]

So despite what Jenkins came out with publicly, you are suggesting Kate was removed?

Removed may be the wrong word, and would be venturing into the world of assumptions and conspiracy, so I'll take that back. I dont know why she left that post - whether it was after encouragement, or her own determination.

I would question why the constitution was changed, and why the members weren't given the option of a vote or why submissions to nominate were not widely communicated. We found out about the departing members when the new appointments were advised - this is not a democratic process.

I worry people will assume i'm in the Tom Elliott camp - and I'm definitely not....I want no association with the Elliott's. I'm just skeptical about our current president.

 

[Aphrodite]

Jenkins was removed and replaced by a close associate of MLG - thats my whole point!

 

[Arr0w]

Removed may be the wrong word, and would be venturing into the world of assumptions and conspiracy, so I'll take that back. I dont know why she left that post - whether it was after encouragement, or her own determination.

I would question why the constitution was changed, and why the members weren't given the option of a vote or why submissions to nominate were not widely communicated. We found out about the departing members when the new appointments were advised - this is not a democratic process.

I worry people will assume i'm in the Tom Elliott camp - and I'm definitely not....I want no association with the Elliott's. I'm just skeptical about our current president.

I understand you have concerns, but surely we need to stop the conspiracy theories at some point

Two board members decide to move on, two come in.

http://www.carltonfc.com.au/news/2018-07-17/blues-announce-board-appointments

 

[Bluebag13]

I understand you have concerns, but surely we need to stop the conspiracy theories at some point

Two board members decide to move on, two come in.

http://www.carltonfc.com.au/news/2018-07-17/blues-announce-board-appointments

Occam’s razor


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[slashin_velvet]

I understand you have concerns, but surely we need to stop the conspiracy theories at some point

Two board members decide to move on, two come in.

http://www.carltonfc.com.au/news/2018-07-17/blues-announce-board-appointments

You can label it conspiracy, but Trigg also publically "resigned" and made public comments to that effect, when in reality he was pushed out.

You can swallow the company line all you like, but changing the company constitution, having people resign only to find they were pushed, having no member vote on board appointments, and a president who has shown to not follow due process is one too many red flags for mine.

 

[LanceRomance]

This appointment likely had the blessing of AFL house imo

Hopefully results in us getting a PP

 

[Neese]

Wow some pretty strong language from a former board mod.

What has the club done in the last 20 years, which you would point to as saying that should negate any critical analysis of decision making? We are in our current quagmire because of decision making made by an incompetent administration that did not know what they were doing.

We made an error with Andrew McKay in appointing a Green Football GM. We have done the exact same thing here. Time will tell if it's a good decision, but why would you not go for the known quantity?

Jury is largely out on this administration, granted. but the underhanded tactics to try and employ Lethlean without the board's permission, and the resignation of the main antagonist to that appointment since then, would tell me that the same old s**t is going on down at Carlton FC.

The lack of critique on decision making for the last two decades is why we are in this situation. There's no need to shoot down the opposing arguments to suit your narrative

Kate Jenkins left for career reasons. We were lucky to have her as long as we did. I follow her on Twitter and she is very busy but has always been an eloquent and positive speaker about Carlton.

 

[Arr0w]

You can label it conspiracy, but Trigg also publically "resigned" and made public comments to that effect, when in reality he was pushed out.

You can swallow the company line all you like, but changing the company constitution, having people resign only to find they were pushed, having no member vote on board appointments, and a president who has shown to not follow due process is one too many red flags for mine.

It was stated that Trigg, advised the club that he would base himself in Melbourne, within a year of his appointment, which he failed to do.

Would you have preferred the club to terminate him, for that breach? Or allow him dignity by resigning?

You know as well as I do that this is a common occurrence

 

[Neese]

Anyway let's give him a chance along with Liddle and our President (who I think is great) and look forward to improving all aspects of our club.

 

[Blue and Blue]

Removed may be the wrong word, and would be venturing into the world of assumptions and conspiracy, so I'll take that back. I dont know why she left that post - whether it was after encouragement, or her own determination.

Really I would stop right there..those two sentence prove the total absence of facts. You know its ok to not be enchanted with some things but my question is why?...wheres the evidence..and who blooming well cares if the President already knows someone that gets a gig. Not me. I am more interested in who plays this week.

 

[slashin_velvet]

It was stated that Trigg, advised the club that he would base himself in Melbourne, within a year of his appointment, which he failed to do.

Would you have preferred the club to terminate him, for that breach? Or allow him dignity by resigning?

You know as well as I do that this is a common occurrence

I understand the reasons and again, to be clear, not questioning that specific decision, but instead highlighting that the optics or public comments don't always mirror the reality of the situation.

We can talk Occam's razor and anti-conspiracy, which I genuinely side with. MLG unfortunately has too many red flags for me to just swallow the line from the club where he is involved. "Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice...well you can't get fooled again."

I wish Brad Lloyd all the success in the world. Hoping for a strong review of coaching, fitness and medical staff this offseason.

 

[Neese]

I don't give a s**t about optics (weasel word). We are not privvy to everything and neither should we be.

 

[Stamos]

Jenkins was removed and replaced by a close associate of MLG - thats my whole point!

There's been no suggestion that Jenkins was removed, and you're criticising the appointment of Campbell? Even though he was a major part of the process that appointed Bolton, and Liddle (over Lethlean, which doesn't fit your narrative).

We have applied proper processes for our last three major appointments, coach, CEO and Head of Football. Nobody knows wether they will bring us success, but we know that we are going about it the right way.

 

[HARKER]

I understand the reasons and again, to be clear, not questioning that specific decision, but instead highlighting that the optics or public comments don't always mirror the reality of the situation.
We can talk Occam's razor and anti-conspiracy, which I genuinely side with. MLG unfortunately has too many red flags for me to just swallow the line from the club where he is involved. "Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice...well you can't get fooled again."
I wish Brad Lloyd all the success in the world. Hoping for a strong review of coaching, fitness and medical staff this offseason.

He does have / has had reasons for concern, but you have to look at the more recent progress in the way we've gone about our business.
i.e. Coach appointment, CEO appointment and now the Football Manager appointment. Not one of which smacks of any particular favouritism nor for flawed logic and execution.

The fact we've gone through this year without placing extra heat on the coach is quite a mature sign from the club. It is.
It seems to me that the testosterone, arrogance and bully tactics have been tempered and more sound methods employed.

I've been as harsh a critic of MLG as any here, but nothing would please me more than to swallow humble pie, shake his hand and say, "Thank you Mark"
We're not there yet and let's keep our eyes open, but maybe, just maybe, a leopard can change its spots.

 

[slashin_velvet]

There's been no suggestion that Jenkins was removed, and you're criticising the appointment of Campbell? Even though he was a major part of the process that appointed Bolton, and Liddle (over Lethlean, which doesn't fit your narrative).

We have applied proper processes for our last three major appointments, coach, CEO and Head of Football. Nobody knows wether they will bring us success, but we know that we are going about it the right way.

How does the Liddle vs Lethlean thing not fit my narrative? Campbell wasn't on the board that knocked back Lethlean. We don't know his involvement in the Lethlean discussion. What we can clearly determine - due process was not followed by our president - which contradicts your subsequent statement.

The closeness of Campbell to MLG is clear - he is the only recruiter the club has used for every high level appointment since MLG came to the club. I think that association has the potential to reduce the amount of due diligence in our appointments. The fact that these board changes were done without member vote and without warning, AFTER our president had egg on his face about not following due process is a crazy warning sign. I'm surprised others can't see it.

I sincerely hope I'm mistaken. I would get no joy in the future saying "I told you so", as I would mean another period of failure.

 

[Soapy V]

I don't give a s**t about optics (weasel word). We are not privvy to everything and neither should we be.

 

[Aphrodite]

I don't give a s**t about optics (weasel word). We are not privvy to everything and neither should we be.

This all the way Neesey.

What don't people get about that!

 

[Neese]

How does the Liddle vs Lethlean thing not fit my narrative? Campbell wasn't on the board that knocked back Lethlean. We don't know his involvement in the Lethlean discussion. What we can clearly determine - due process was not followed by our president - which contradicts your subsequent statement.

The closeness of Campbell to MLG is clear - he is the only recruiter the club has used for every high level appointment since MLG came to the club. I think that association has the potential to reduce the amount of due diligence in our appointments. The fact that these board changes were done without member vote and without warning, AFTER our president had egg on his face about not following due process is a crazy warning sign. I'm surprised others can't see it.

I sincerely hope I'm mistaken. I would get no joy in the future saying "I told you so", as I would mean another period of failure.

I think you are actively seeking negatives to prove your opinion. Saying it multiple times does not make an opinion fact.