Opinion Stephen Silvagni

[Mikkey]

i hate those gutless responses with no name supplied. Weak .

How they can send replies anonymously just baffles me. Very rude.

 

[ChrisKaias]

Actually what is ridiculous is your naivety as far as this issue goes....

Liddle is paid according to a number of KPIs. For arguments sake - lets focus on just the 1 - increasing membership numbers.

eg : he over rules list manager on signing Eddie because he knows or thinks this will make his job easier to accomplish - and in satisfying his KPI continues to earn what he is earning and perhaps gains a bonus etc meanwhile SOS whose KPI is medium to longer term list management

what exactly do you think Liddle does with the gains he makes from exercising the privilege of the authority of a CEO over a subordinate- well he either banks the profits or uses them - either way he gains an external to the business benefit to himself...at the cost of the business or how a business should be run

blah blah blah..

I get what you say re 'awkward' - well awkward can be used to describe all sorts of interactions - it is like conflict of interest or competing internal interest if you like ( a sure sign of poor management btw) just a fact of every day life.

Liddle's conflict you describe is no different from any person in that role, the conflict (to the extent it is) is from the nature of the role itself. SOS's conflict is due to his personal circumstances, and not inherent in the role. We can fix one (but not the other) by changing the personnel.

 

[Stamos]

Liddle's conflict you describe is no different from any person in that role, the conflict (to the extent it is) is from the nature of the role itself. SOS's conflict is due to his personal circumstances, and not inherent in the role. We can fix one (but not the other) by changing the personnel.

Liddle’s conflict is that he didn’t like SOS, and now our Club is worse off due to his ego

 

[ChrisKaias]

Liddle’s conflict is that he didn’t like SOS, and now our Club is worse off due to his ego

OK well that's a helpful contribution.

Anyway I don't plan to discuss conflicts any further, it's not achieving anything. I just think it's pointless to pretend a pretty large conflict didn't exist, much as it would be pointless to pretend that was the main reason he's gone. But it's a factor that can't be just brushed away.

 

[SurreyBlue]

This is great stuff ODN - fantastic work.

Man that last paragraph makes me genuinely feel for Jack and Ben. Imagine them reading that? It's not even like they're shit players either. Jack is AFL standard and Ben was a pick in the 70s who looks okay.

Bingo. Kids have been put in the spotlight for no reason. I will go as far as saying, after reading that response from the club, it’s confirmed my thoughts that I don’t expect them to be playing with us for too much longer. Obviously some real gutless individuals running our club.

 

[cookie monster]

The leakiness of our Board is disappointing

It's not the board leaking..

 

[HARKER]

Email to club - Monday

I refer to the latest Tom Browne article stating that the board has ratified Cain Liddle's decision to remove Stephen Silvagni from his role at the club.

As a moderator on the largest Carlton football club discussion forum in the world, I can safely speak on behalf of most of our members when I express concern with this article and the notion of destabilising and disunity at the club, after a sustained period of patience and support from the supporter base.

Silvagni's position should be dependent on results, not apparent conflict of interests over his sons playing at the club, and not by any dismay at others within the club dabbling in recruitment, outside of their mandate.

I am a fierce defender of the club, but also aware we have brought in a lot of non-Carlton people in the past, who have their job security and not the club or its supporters as their primary focus.

I believe the club needs to get on the front foot to either dismiss or explain the claims in the article. The club has been fantastic in its transparency in recent years, and silence now would only confirm the worst fears.

I'd appreciate a response to the above, befitting a savvy and passionate supporter base, as opposed to a corporate form letter.

Feel free to call me if required. In fact, I'd welcome such a respectful effort.

Kind regards

Response 1 - Today

Thank you for reaching out.

I do apologise for the delay in responding to your email – SOS expressed a desire to delay any commentary surrounding his position until after the draft, which the Club fully respected.

As you may now be aware, the Club last night announced that SOS has departed his role as General Manager of List Management and Strategy. This was obviously not an easy decision, but one that was made with the best interests of the Club in mind. Ultimately, there was increasing complexity in having two sons on the playing list and having the most senior list management staff member unable to participate in discussions relating to list management and match committee was a difficult situation.

You can read the Club’s full statement here and if you have any further questions, you will also be able to have these addressed by the senior executive team at our Member Forum on Monday.

There is no doubt that SOS has done a fantastic job in putting together our list over the last five years and leaves an incredible legacy as both a player and an administrator.

If there’s anything else I can assist with then please don’t hesitate to reach out again via email, or you can contact us directly on 1300 227 586.

Thanks again,

Email 2

I appreciate your position and the fact you can't say anything further outside of the club release.

My concern is that the release came across weak and not very respectful towards SOS. Of course our membership is already at nearly 50k so any damage done won't reflect in our bottom line, and we don't know what we don’t know so any damage to our final membership figure is speculative.

I wonder if the club failed to read the room here. We are not a patient supporter base historically. It was not the President or the CEO that made us see the big picture.

It was SOS and his tactical nous and trust he engendered as a legend of the club. It was Bolton and his calm, all embracing demeanour.

Most can understand why Bolton went. Tactically, we weren't giving ourselves the best chance of winning and Teague is a breath of fresh air. Bolton lived and died by doing things his way.

SOS on the other hand seems to have departed partly because he was no longer allowed to do his job his way. The club can't ride the coattails of the fantastic job he did in rebuilding our list, then start meddling when they don't agree with his decisions now. Surest way of killing the goose that laid the golden egg.

Yes, I did read the conflict of interest part. It seemingly wasn't a problem 4 years ago when Jack was first drafted. The list managers role in match committee should be extremely minor compared to the coaches, fitness staff and head of the football department. There is quite a savvy and educated supporter base out there these days, who understand these things.

Yes, there is a conflict when deciding whether to delist Jack or Ben. The message the club has sent these two players is we are already considering how to manage their delisting or contract negotiations going forward. It seems outlandish to think you would rather part ways with someone who has been excellent in their role, because they have to sit out dealing with the future of 4.4% of our current list.

Can you see how that doesn't add up?

We were once destabilised as a club by the testimony of Stephen O'Reilly, a mere blip as a player in our history.

I'm absolutely incredulous that we have been destabilised again over a second year CEO's friendship with a player who won't even register in our history, Brandon Ellis.

Our trust is in Teague and our playing list that SOS built, not helped build ... built and retained. While off field we are pleased with the progress, it is fair to say that many supporters are no longer sure who to trust.

Kind regards

Response 2

Not a problem at all – we completely understand the passion of our members are always open to their thoughts and feedback.

Given that SOS’ contract was due to expire at the end of the year, the timing was now right for this decision to be made. At the time of his hiring, he was the right man for the job (as he has proven across his tenure), however the conflict of interest has unfortunately now become too difficult to manage. We’re dealing with an opinion-based industry which will ultimately lead to speculation – and the media will continue to speculate.

If you do feel that you have questions that still need to be answered, or you have any further feedback I do encourage you to participate in our Member Forum on Monday, where you will be able to forward these through to our senior executive team.

If there’s anything else I can assist with then please don’t hesitate to reach out again via email, or you can contact us directly on 1300 227 586.

Thanks again,

Good on you The Old Dark Navy's

We're here posturing for position and you went straight to the heart. Excellent stuff.

 

[GT619]

It's not the board leaking..

than who

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

i hate those gutless responses with no name supplied. Weak .

There was a name. I left it off. She is just an innocent communications person.

 

[HARKER]

than who

Mr. Silvagni of course.

It's no surprise and maybe even understandable and especially so if he wants a similar role in the industry.
Not saying that's the case, but I would understand the method employed.

 

[GT619]

Mr. Silvagni of course.

It's no surprise and maybe even understandable and especially so if he wants a similar role in the industry.
Not saying that's the case, but I would understand the method employed.

why would he do that to the club.

 

[Own The Future]

Email to club - Monday

I refer to the latest Tom Browne article stating that the board has ratified Cain Liddle's decision to remove Stephen Silvagni from his role at the club.

As a moderator on the largest Carlton football club discussion forum in the world, I can safely speak on behalf of most of our members when I express concern with this article and the notion of destabilising and disunity at the club, after a sustained period of patience and support from the supporter base.

Silvagni's position should be dependent on results, not apparent conflict of interests over his sons playing at the club, and not by any dismay at others within the club dabbling in recruitment, outside of their mandate.

I am a fierce defender of the club, but also aware we have brought in a lot of non-Carlton people in the past, who have their job security and not the club or its supporters as their primary focus.

I believe the club needs to get on the front foot to either dismiss or explain the claims in the article. The club has been fantastic in its transparency in recent years, and silence now would only confirm the worst fears.

I'd appreciate a response to the above, befitting a savvy and passionate supporter base, as opposed to a corporate form letter.

Feel free to call me if required. In fact, I'd welcome such a respectful effort.

Kind regards

Response 1 - Today

Thank you for reaching out.

I do apologise for the delay in responding to your email – SOS expressed a desire to delay any commentary surrounding his position until after the draft, which the Club fully respected.

As you may now be aware, the Club last night announced that SOS has departed his role as General Manager of List Management and Strategy. This was obviously not an easy decision, but one that was made with the best interests of the Club in mind. Ultimately, there was increasing complexity in having two sons on the playing list and having the most senior list management staff member unable to participate in discussions relating to list management and match committee was a difficult situation.

You can read the Club’s full statement here and if you have any further questions, you will also be able to have these addressed by the senior executive team at our Member Forum on Monday.

There is no doubt that SOS has done a fantastic job in putting together our list over the last five years and leaves an incredible legacy as both a player and an administrator.

If there’s anything else I can assist with then please don’t hesitate to reach out again via email, or you can contact us directly on 1300 227 586.

Thanks again,

Email 2

I appreciate your position and the fact you can't say anything further outside of the club release.

My concern is that the release came across weak and not very respectful towards SOS. Of course our membership is already at nearly 50k so any damage done won't reflect in our bottom line, and we don't know what we don’t know so any damage to our final membership figure is speculative.

I wonder if the club failed to read the room here. We are not a patient supporter base historically. It was not the President or the CEO that made us see the big picture.

It was SOS and his tactical nous and trust he engendered as a legend of the club. It was Bolton and his calm, all embracing demeanour.

Most can understand why Bolton went. Tactically, we weren't giving ourselves the best chance of winning and Teague is a breath of fresh air. Bolton lived and died by doing things his way.

SOS on the other hand seems to have departed partly because he was no longer allowed to do his job his way. The club can't ride the coattails of the fantastic job he did in rebuilding our list, then start meddling when they don't agree with his decisions now. Surest way of killing the goose that laid the golden egg.

Yes, I did read the conflict of interest part. It seemingly wasn't a problem 4 years ago when Jack was first drafted. The list managers role in match committee should be extremely minor compared to the coaches, fitness staff and head of the football department. There is quite a savvy and educated supporter base out there these days, who understand these things.

Yes, there is a conflict when deciding whether to delist Jack or Ben. The message the club has sent these two players is we are already considering how to manage their delisting or contract negotiations going forward. It seems outlandish to think you would rather part ways with someone who has been excellent in their role, because they have to sit out dealing with the future of 4.4% of our current list.

Can you see how that doesn't add up?

We were once destabilised as a club by the testimony of Stephen O'Reilly, a mere blip as a player in our history.

I'm absolutely incredulous that we have been destabilised again over a second year CEO's friendship with a player who won't even register in our history, Brandon Ellis.

Our trust is in Teague and our playing list that SOS built, not helped build ... built and retained. While off field we are pleased with the progress, it is fair to say that many supporters are no longer sure who to trust.

Kind regards

Response 2

Not a problem at all – we completely understand the passion of our members are always open to their thoughts and feedback.

Given that SOS’ contract was due to expire at the end of the year, the timing was now right for this decision to be made. At the time of his hiring, he was the right man for the job (as he has proven across his tenure), however the conflict of interest has unfortunately now become too difficult to manage. We’re dealing with an opinion-based industry which will ultimately lead to speculation – and the media will continue to speculate.

If you do feel that you have questions that still need to be answered, or you have any further feedback I do encourage you to participate in our Member Forum on Monday, where you will be able to forward these through to our senior executive team.

If there’s anything else I can assist with then please don’t hesitate to reach out again via email, or you can contact us directly on 1300 227 586.

Thanks again,

Fantastic emails. Well worded and gets across the passion of the supporter base. Not convinced this will be as destabilising as most appear to think - but I wholeheartedly agree it had been handled poorly.

 

[Own The Future]

would be good running around with harry and charlie though.

No doubt. I had flagged with a mate mid year that Papley was the type of player we needed. When it looked like we’d get him I was over the moon, then devastated when it didn’t happen. I’d love nothing more than getting him to the club.

 

[Stamos]

Mr. Silvagni of course.

It's no surprise and maybe even understandable and especially so if he wants a similar role in the industry.
Not saying that's the case, but I would understand the method employed.

It’s interesting though, because none of the leaking to the media, or the information from informed posters on here, have said that SOS is blameless, or only presented one side.

 

[BlueTongue]

Email to club - Monday
...

Response 2

Not a problem at all – we completely understand the passion of our members are always open to their thoughts and feedback.

Given that SOS’ contract was due to expire at the end of the year, the timing was now right for this decision to be made. At the time of his hiring, he was the right man for the job (as he has proven across his tenure), however the conflict of interest has unfortunately now become too difficult to manage. We’re dealing with an opinion-based industry which will ultimately lead to speculation – and the media will continue to speculate.

If you do feel that you have questions that still need to be answered, or you have any further feedback I do encourage you to participate in our Member Forum on Monday, where you will be able to forward these through to our senior executive team.

If there’s anything else I can assist with then please don’t hesitate to reach out again via email, or you can contact us directly on 1300 227 586.

Thanks again,

Thanks for making the effort to send these email in ODN. They reflect my concerns precisely.

I am even more PO now that the club has all but openly stated the Media's opinions now dictate the Club's decisions.
There is no clear evidence Liddle has helped membership growth, I suspect Teague & SOS have moreso in recent times.
I will be asking the Board stand down Cain Liddle and appoint Ian Prendergast who is a Carlton person.

 

[HARKER]

why would he do that to the club.

Put yourself in his position.
Does Silvagni strike you as an individual who would quietly walk away from a situation where he looks like the culprit in activities.
Maybe he's not leaking but it just makes sense if he is, given the narrative that's come to the fore so far.

Imagine an interview with Liddle now? How would that go down? What would he say? What could he say?
It's all a lot of hard work not being able to be honest and upfront. Terribly hard work.

 

[Accidental genius]

I don’t buy the conflict of interest bullshit. Jsos was dropped to the 2s at times just like any other player was so it’s not like sos made a fuss over as we probably would have something about it. He probably would have told jack to lift his game and work harder which he did and he has done great attributes and has room for improvement as well. Ben will probably continue in the 2s this season. He was a low pick and progressing ok. Excuse just doesnt make sense to me.

 

[bluemahogany]

Mr. Silvagni of course.

It's no surprise and maybe even understandable and especially so if he wants a similar role in the industry.
Not saying that's the case, but I would understand the method employed.

That Niall article didn't seem like a SOS leak to me, likely one of the Mathesons. As someone said above, no article has been exclusively pro-SOS.

 

[JustaBattler]

Liddle's conflict you describe is no different from any person in that role, the conflict (to the extent it is) is from the nature of the role itself. SOS's conflict is due to his personal circumstances, and not inherent in the role. We can fix one (but not the other) by changing the personnel.

If you sit back and think on it - the tension between any two opposing positions as far as organisational behaviour goes - ultimately resides in each acting in the interests of their own personal circumstance and interest - a legal argument is not the same as the real world issues that those responsible for governance have to contend with day to day.

 

[GT619]

Put yourself in his position.
Does Silvagni strike you as an individual who would quietly walk away from a situation where he looks like the culprit in activities.
Maybe he's not leaking but it just makes sense if he is, given the narrative that's come to the fore so far.

Imagine an interview with Liddle now? How would that go down? What would he say? What could he say?
It's all a lot of hard work not being able to be honest and upfront. Terribly hard work.

I watched the draft he looked quite tense that night and didn’t eye ball anyone and left after we drafted Ramsay

 

[BigBreakfast]

Nope effective today I am resigning my Membership. and sending my badge personally to Cain liddle.

Bye mate. Best wishes.

 

[doormat73]

OK well that's a helpful contribution.

Anyway I don't plan to discuss conflicts any further, it's not achieving anything. I just think it's pointless to pretend a pretty large conflict didn't exist, much as it would be pointless to pretend that was the main reason he's gone. But it's a factor that can't be just brushed away.

Chinese wall. Worked well for 4 years. Inclined to put up with the perception of so called COI to keep 3 Silvagnis & a list manager who has revolutionized the business.

However, COI is a red herring imho.

I find it hard to believe that Liddle could challenge SOS without first having guaranteed support from a faction. Indeed, it is conceivable this might be another putsch to seize control of the board. SOS is MLG's man. Forcing SOS out would inevitably require MLG to put himself on the line and resign. This seems to be what has happened. It will be interesting to see who rises.

 

[AndyLucimitis]

Bye mate. Best wishes.

Yep - What a prima donna that guy is.

Seriously, todays news , tomorrows chip wrapper.

True supporters would hold their nerve and back 'the club'

 

[Timewaster]

What a wank.

If the article's premise is that its a problem that we moved on Pagan and, more so, yesterday's man Malthouse, the rest of the piece is no worth reading.

Sacking hack MM was the happiest day in a terrible season

 

[Timewaster]

I'd have more confidence in this move if it wasn't partly steered by our "VC" Jean Pratt.

No other club would have a board space for the widow of a philandering corporate criminal. Our benefactor got the biggest price-fixing fine in Australian corporate history, and his memory stains the whole club.

I'd be happy to see us Pratt free asap, and we're not serious til we are.